On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 15:22:15 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 13:59:19 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 13:47:08 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 12:30:50 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/21/2018 11:57 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/21/18 11:35 AM, wrote:
On 21 Jan 2018 14:45:06 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote:



Why didn’t President ******** simply sign an Exec Order mandating
broadcast
of the game?Â*

He could have just stroked a check to pay those AFN people necessary
to get that out on the air. I doubt it would take more than a few
dozen people for a day or two (who are not already called essential
and working anyway). He paid more than that to cut the grass at Mar a
Lago this week


I knew two pro football players pretty well. One was a year ahead of me
at my high school and the other I met as an adult. The latter was a
neighbor of a close friend. One was a halfback and the other was a
linebacker, and both were stars. In any case, both were glad to get out
of the game with their brains intact and their bodies in reasonably
decent shape. The funny thing is the high school fella was a terrific
basketball player, too, and he might have had a longer and safer career
in the NBA.

Another great player I did get to see play in college was Gale Sayers.
He had a great but short career in the NFL, got out, had several
successful careers in sports and business but I read recently he is
suffering from dementia, probably as a result of the head injuries he
suffered playing pro football.

I wonder how much longer the NFL will be allowed, what with the
seriousness and extent of the brain injuries.


The NFL has come a long way with both protective gear, severe penalties
for unnecessary hits or roughness and mandatory concussion protocols.

The days of "Mean Joe Greene" and players like him are over.


I think they should remove all the protective gear - rugby style. You don't hear much about
concussion problems with rugby players.

Then it would be soccer and nobody would watch. They used to admit the
NFL was all about the "big hits".

Not quite. Apparently you've not watched a lot of rugby. Much different than soccer and much more
action than our football.

We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:44:03 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 15:22:15 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 13:59:19 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 13:47:08 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 12:30:50 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/21/2018 11:57 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/21/18 11:35 AM, wrote:
On 21 Jan 2018 14:45:06 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote:



Why didn’t President ******** simply sign an Exec Order mandating
broadcast
of the game?*

He could have just stroked a check to pay those AFN people necessary
to get that out on the air. I doubt it would take more than a few
dozen people for a day or two (who are not already called essential
and working anyway). He paid more than that to cut the grass at Mar a
Lago this week


I knew two pro football players pretty well. One was a year ahead of me
at my high school and the other I met as an adult. The latter was a
neighbor of a close friend. One was a halfback and the other was a
linebacker, and both were stars. In any case, both were glad to get out
of the game with their brains intact and their bodies in reasonably
decent shape. The funny thing is the high school fella was a terrific
basketball player, too, and he might have had a longer and safer career
in the NBA.

Another great player I did get to see play in college was Gale Sayers.
He had a great but short career in the NFL, got out, had several
successful careers in sports and business but I read recently he is
suffering from dementia, probably as a result of the head injuries he
suffered playing pro football.

I wonder how much longer the NFL will be allowed, what with the
seriousness and extent of the brain injuries.


The NFL has come a long way with both protective gear, severe penalties
for unnecessary hits or roughness and mandatory concussion protocols.

The days of "Mean Joe Greene" and players like him are over.


I think they should remove all the protective gear - rugby style. You don't hear much about
concussion problems with rugby players.

Then it would be soccer and nobody would watch. They used to admit the
NFL was all about the "big hits".

Not quite. Apparently you've not watched a lot of rugby. Much different than soccer and much more
action than our football.

We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

We must be talking different sports. If soccer players hit like rugby players, they'd all be 'red
carded' off the field. Other than the requirement to move the ball downfield, I can't see many
similarities between soccer and rugby. Between rugby and football, yeah. You said it in your last
sentence.

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:30:29 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:44:03 -0500, wrote:


We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

We must be talking different sports. If soccer players hit like rugby players, they'd all be 'red
carded' off the field. Other than the requirement to move the ball downfield, I can't see many
similarities between soccer and rugby. Between rugby and football, yeah. You said it in your last
sentence.

Most of the violence in football is within a few yards of the line of
scrimmage. That is why they have different rules there. You have a
half dozen 300 pound guys on each side, lined up face to face snarling
at each other and on the snap they crash into each other as hard as
they can, on every play. They are not even allowed to grab each other,
they have to just knock the other guy out of the way. What could
possibly go wrong? Compared to that a scrum is just a big group hug.

On 1/22/18 12:31 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:30:29 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:44:03 -0500, wrote:


We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

We must be talking different sports. If soccer players hit like rugby players, they'd all be 'red
carded' off the field. Other than the requirement to move the ball downfield, I can't see many
similarities between soccer and rugby. Between rugby and football, yeah. You said it in your last
sentence.

Most of the violence in football is within a few yards of the line of
scrimmage. That is why they have different rules there. You have a
half dozen 300 pound guys on each side, lined up face to face snarling
at each other and on the snap they crash into each other as hard as
they can, on every play. They are not even allowed to grab each other,
they have to just knock the other guy out of the way. What could
possibly go wrong? Compared to that a scrum is just a big group hug.



I went to a rugby match last fall and saw the game was not much
different than when I was in college, back before electricity was
discovered. It's a rough and tumble game, for sure, but I didn't see any
Neanderthals lined up to kill or maim each other, nor anyone taking
anyone down as it is done in football. No extra violence. Pro football
is going to be sued out of existence, and the sooner the better.

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:37:07 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 1/22/18 12:31 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:30:29 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:44:03 -0500, wrote:


We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

We must be talking different sports. If soccer players hit like rugby players, they'd all be 'red
carded' off the field. Other than the requirement to move the ball downfield, I can't see many
similarities between soccer and rugby. Between rugby and football, yeah. You said it in your last
sentence.

Most of the violence in football is within a few yards of the line of
scrimmage. That is why they have different rules there. You have a
half dozen 300 pound guys on each side, lined up face to face snarling
at each other and on the snap they crash into each other as hard as
they can, on every play. They are not even allowed to grab each other,
they have to just knock the other guy out of the way. What could
possibly go wrong? Compared to that a scrum is just a big group hug.



I went to a rugby match last fall and saw the game was not much
different than when I was in college, back before electricity was
discovered. It's a rough and tumble game, for sure, but I didn't see any
Neanderthals lined up to kill or maim each other, nor anyone taking
anyone down as it is done in football. No extra violence. Pro football
is going to be sued out of existence, and the sooner the better.

You saw no tackles, eh? Must have been a girls rugby match. Either that or your bull****ting again.

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:31:17 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:30:29 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:44:03 -0500, wrote:


We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

We must be talking different sports. If soccer players hit like rugby players, they'd all be 'red
carded' off the field. Other than the requirement to move the ball downfield, I can't see many
similarities between soccer and rugby. Between rugby and football, yeah. You said it in your last
sentence.

Most of the violence in football is within a few yards of the line of
scrimmage. That is why they have different rules there. You have a
half dozen 300 pound guys on each side, lined up face to face snarling
at each other and on the snap they crash into each other as hard as
they can, on every play. They are not even allowed to grab each other,
they have to just knock the other guy out of the way. What could
possibly go wrong? Compared to that a scrum is just a big group hug.

Might be a group hug, but that's only to folks looking in from the outside:

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/ins...s-of-the-scrum

"A scrum (short for scrummage) is a way of restarting play in rugby, where there has been a minor
infringement. In rugby union the scrum is made up of eight players from each team binding together
in 3 rows. The heads of the front row of the scrum will interlock their heads with the opposing
team’s front row. The ball is then thrown into the space between the two teams and the front rows of
both teams will compete for the ball by hooking the ball and sending it backwards with their feet,
whilst pushing the opposing team backwards.

When one considers the size and strength of the modern professional rugby player, it is no wonder
that so many players sustain spinal injuries whilst in the scrum, whether as a result of continuous
trauma over an extended period of time, or one high impact. This can be particularly dangerous where
the scrum collapses, due to the sheer force applied by each side."

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:43:54 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:31:17 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:30:29 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 22:44:03 -0500, wrote:


We watched some rugby in New Zealand "Go All Blacks" and I agree it is
not exactly like soccer but more like it than NFL football. The
biggest single difference is no line of scrimmage.

We must be talking different sports. If soccer players hit like rugby players, they'd all be 'red
carded' off the field. Other than the requirement to move the ball downfield, I can't see many
similarities between soccer and rugby. Between rugby and football, yeah. You said it in your last
sentence.

Most of the violence in football is within a few yards of the line of
scrimmage. That is why they have different rules there. You have a
half dozen 300 pound guys on each side, lined up face to face snarling
at each other and on the snap they crash into each other as hard as
they can, on every play. They are not even allowed to grab each other,
they have to just knock the other guy out of the way. What could
possibly go wrong? Compared to that a scrum is just a big group hug.

Might be a group hug, but that's only to folks looking in from the outside:

https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/ins...s-of-the-scrum

"A scrum (short for scrummage) is a way of restarting play in rugby, where there has been a minor
infringement. In rugby union the scrum is made up of eight players from each team binding together
in 3 rows. The heads of the front row of the scrum will interlock their heads with the opposing
team’s front row. The ball is then thrown into the space between the two teams and the front rows of
both teams will compete for the ball by hooking the ball and sending it backwards with their feet,
whilst pushing the opposing team backwards.

When one considers the size and strength of the modern professional rugby player, it is no wonder
that so many players sustain spinal injuries whilst in the scrum, whether as a result of continuous
trauma over an extended period of time, or one high impact. This can be particularly dangerous where
the scrum collapses, due to the sheer force applied by each side."

Different sport, different type of injury. Tennis players get lateral
epicondylitis and ice skaters get their knee broken with a bat.
Life is tough, wear a cup ;-)