TENINCH Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 Whaaaat? He's lucky he only got 2 games and now they are reducing it to 1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 6 minutes ago, TENINCH said: Whaaaat? He's lucky he only got 2 games and now they are reducing it to 1? There is more precedent for h2h hits, likely capped by past suspensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Smithers Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 5 hours ago, incognito_man said: well, you are completely wrong. Google "NFL concussion poll" or similar. Significant majority of population agrees with me. Most fans don't like the violence. That is not what you said. You said most people want the NFL to limit the violence, not that most people want the NFL want less concussions and less hits to the head. Those who are not the one in the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 10 hours ago, Ketchup said: 15 hours ago, marky mark said: I'm ok with this simply because of the no prior history. Benefit of the doubt kind of thing. Still glad he got the one game though. He just can't be that reckless again. I'm in the same boat. Glad he got a suspension period, with it being his first problem hit like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 4 hours ago, Kip Smithers said: That is not what you said. You said most people want the NFL to limit the violence, not that most people want the NFL want less concussions and less hits to the head. Those who are not the one in the same. In the scope of this discussion they are exactly the same. It extends beyond concussions as well. Most fans want less violence generally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Smithers Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, incognito_man said: In the scope of this discussion they are exactly the same. It extends beyond concussions as well. Most fans want less violence generally. How are they the same? You have no proof to suggest that Fans want less violence. None. Nothing suggests that because it's incredibly stupid to want less violence in a sport that is inherently and has built it's success upon the violence. It's like saying you want less violence in UFC. The two don't go together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 17 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said: How are they the same? You have no proof to suggest that Fans want less violence. None. Nothing suggests that because it's incredibly stupid to want less violence in a sport that is inherently and has built it's success upon the violence. It's like saying you want less violence in UFC. The two don't go together. The main objective of football is to win a game by scoring points. You don't score points by being more violent than the other team. That is a terrible analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Smithers Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 12 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said: The main objective of football is to win a game by scoring points. You don't score points by being more violent than the other team. That is a terrible analogy. Please point to where I said being more violent leads to win. Winning has nothing to do with what I said. And funnily enough in the UFC, the same applies, being more violent doesn't lead to victory. So yeah, not a terrible analogy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 2 hours ago, Kip Smithers said: Please point to where I said being more violent leads to win. Winning has nothing to do with what I said. And funnily enough in the UFC, the same applies, being more violent doesn't lead to victory. So yeah, not a terrible analogy.. You compared the violence in the nfl to violence in the ufc, am I missing something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 3 hours ago, Kip Smithers said: How are they the same? You have no proof to suggest that Fans want less violence. None. Nothing suggests that because it's incredibly stupid to want less violence in a sport that is inherently and has built it's success upon the violence. It's like saying you want less violence in UFC. The two don't go together. I read all sorts of fans of teams saying they were nearly ill from watching the replays from that. I would say it's safe those guys don't want more of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Smithers Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 1 hour ago, JBURGE25 said: You compared the violence in the nfl to violence in the ufc, am I missing something Not directly. Both are violent sports and that in no way can be removed or substantially reduced. That's the point. Saying people want the NFL to be less violent is almost an oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Smithers Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 51 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said: I read all sorts of fans of teams saying they were nearly ill from watching the replays from that. I would say it's safe those guys don't want more of that? That hit or rather where he was hit it what people want out. If that hit him square in the numbers nobody would object or say "let's get rid of those hits in football". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 3 hours ago, Kip Smithers said: That hit or rather where he was hit it what people want out. If that hit him square in the numbers nobody would object or say "let's get rid of those hits in football". What are you even arguing at this point? You're a walking contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Smithers Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 52 minutes ago, incognito_man said: What are you even arguing at this point? You're a walking contradiction. Lol ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Small Town Values Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 On 04/10/2017 at 7:53 AM, Kip Smithers said: Excuses and explanations are not the same thing. You just seem to have a naive approach to this. You seem to want a sport that is inherently dangerous and violent, to be less violent. It's 100% excuses. Why is it naive? Football isn't the only collision sport in existence. It is however the one with the softest disciplinary system. (Even CFB has a targeting rule). Suspended (2) games, reduced to (1)... What a joke. The NFL is even soft on PEDS. Sports that fall under WADA can ban athletes for up to two years. Repeat offender Cushing receives ten games, SOFT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.