Landlord Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I've slowly been reading through the book 'Why Football Matters' by Mark Edmunson (great read, by the way). In it, and also in a lecture on the character building of sport, he has a very insightful commentary on the two types of warriors, or the two mindsets towards sport - Hector and Achilles. The cliff notes version is that Plato observes that human beings have an innate desire for *thymos* (a thirst for glory), but that it needs to be subordinated to reason, and he then contrasts the two warriors towards the point. Hector is a fierce fighter who can trade blows with any hero on an unexceptional day. Yet despite his ferocity, Hector is also humane. He is a respective son, a husband who treats his wife (and women in general) as equal, and a tender father. Hector's appeal is that he can turn it off when he wants/needs, and can be the manslayer during day only to become the humane father at home. In sport, he'd be analogous with the athlete who is gentle and considerate off the field, who never smack talks, complains calls, and the kind of athlete that any dad would love to have his daughter marry. The problem with Hector is that he loses to Achilles. Achilles knows nothing other than the thirst for glory and the thrill of savagery. He turns rivers red with his wrath, he murders and disgraces Hector in front of his family, he taunts those begging for mercy, and he has no faculty of reason that would ever make him hesitate. He bests Hector because he has no idea what fear is, only wrath, and Hector is familiar with fear. So. Who do you want? I guess it should seem an obvious choice to say Hector, but I can't help but think that for a lot of people that is bullsh#t. In a perfect world everyone would, hopefully, choose Hector. But we don't live in a vacuum, and it seems that Achilles pays off in the day and age of TV and money dominating every element of sport. I guess the question in my head that pierces at the heart of the matter is, "Would you want Hector if you knew he couldn't win?" Whether or not we think it's possible to win with Hector is a different question, but also a worthwhile one. Achilles is the literal definition of "Win at all costs." It's very tempting to want Achilles on your side, because it doesn't cost *you* anything, even if it costs him everything (Michael Jordan is a great example of Achilles - since leaving basketball, he's found his life completely dissatisfying and empty). Is it worth it? We've all heard tons of commentary about how Osborne didn't win championships until he recruited the less choir boy players. Is it an indictment on us as fans to desire it at the expense of others' personhood? I realize this is a bit disjointed in thought but hopefully the idea can spark conversations more than my poor questions can. 2 Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Are you asking about this as it pertains to Husker football? Quote Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Achilles also had a weak spot. He's pretty famous for it. 3 Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 But Achilles defeated Hector. I'll take Paris, the guy who killed Achilles. 1 Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Achilles also had a weak spot. He's pretty famous for it. He was killed the only time he ever allowed himself to be vulernable, the only time he acted contrary to who he was, so to speak, which reinforces the Achilles' mindset that maintaining your humanity will cause you to lose. Quote Link to comment
jsneb83 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Would Hector make changes to his scheme and come up with a different gameplan to defeat Achilles the next time they met? Or would he say, "I don't need to change anything, my sword just needs to execute better"? But to answer your question, I would rather win the right way. I would rather win a couple championship and having them mean something, than winning multiple championships and getting some (or all) of them vacated (or even just the knowledge of shady things that happened during that time). 6 Quote Link to comment
zeWilbur Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Would Hector make changes to his scheme and come up with a different gameplan to defeat Achilles the next time they met? Or would he say, "I don't need to change anything, my sword just needs to execute better"? But to answer your question, I would rather win the right way. I would rather win a couple championship and having them mean something, than winning multiple championships and getting some (or all) of them vacated (or even just the knowledge of shady things that happened during that time). But the point is that you won't win championships with Hector. You can have very good teams but will fall short when you run into Achilles, regardless of scheme. Is that still good enough? Quote Link to comment
jsneb83 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Would Hector make changes to his scheme and come up with a different gameplan to defeat Achilles the next time they met? Or would he say, "I don't need to change anything, my sword just needs to execute better"? But to answer your question, I would rather win the right way. I would rather win a couple championship and having them mean something, than winning multiple championships and getting some (or all) of them vacated (or even just the knowledge of shady things that happened during that time). But the point is that you won't win championships with Hector. You can have very good teams but will fall short when you run into Achilles, regardless of scheme. Is that still good enough? Then I take C Quote Link to comment
Count 'Bility Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 You play to win the game. If youre gonna play just to play, then you can stay home and "just play" video games. Achilles. 1 Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I would rather be an 8-win team with a nice guy representing the program the right way than a 12-win, national champion team full of cheating and scandal. It doesn't have to be that way though. There's also Tom Osborne. 1 Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 You play to win the game. If youre gonna play just to play, then you can stay home and "just play" video games. Achilles. Not the action but the victory Quote Link to comment
zeWilbur Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I would rather be an 8-win team with a nice guy representing the program the right way than a 12-win, national champion team full of cheating and scandal. It doesn't have to be that way though. There's also Tom Osborne. It might not have to be that way but Tom Osborne may not be the card to play on this one. Quote Link to comment
True2tRA Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Would Hector make changes to his scheme and come up with a different gameplan to defeat Achilles the next time they met? Or would he say, "I don't need to change anything, my sword just needs to execute better"? But to answer your question, I would rather win the right way. I would rather win a couple championship and having them mean something, than winning multiple championships and getting some (or all) of them vacated (or even just the knowledge of shady things that happened during that time). Brilliant. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.