Ed Cunningham on ESPN

[chrichar]

We have sports where the objective is literally to beat the hell out of another opponent. Until those sports are banned, I don't want to hear anything about football being to rough.

[Swiv3D]

We have sports where the objective is literally to beat the hell out of another opponent. Until those sports are banned, I don't want to hear anything about football being to rough.

tonight's ufc event was freakin awesome too

[DomiNUs]

 

 

 

 

 

Why does this guy even call football games? Does he like the sport? Is a paid shill by the liberal lawyers who wear panties on the weekend?

He just made a 10 minute speech about how football is too physical these days, how they SHOULD never add another playoff game because there's too much football already, there's too many injuries because players have gotten too fast too big..etc whine etc whine.

This same pu&&y calls Nebraska games and literally whinces when there is a big crushing hit and made it seem as though there were some malicious intent on behalf of a football player making a tackle. Man, he is a puss. It makes me mad he even has that job.

If you've read a single report about the impact concussions have on the brain and what it does to an individual long term, you'd be singing a different tune.

 

No offense, but adding the word 'liberal lawyers' (like they have anything to do with it?) and calling him a pu&&y makes you look pretty ignorant about the topic. You clearly don't understand the topic and come off looking not so great.

You missed the point. Your argument is essentially that football is too violent and damaging to the brain, and that it perhaps needs to be re-examined as a sport. It's a conversation worth having, but the OPs point is that it doesn't make sense for a guy who feels that way to be calling a football game. It would be rather like having Sunday services led by a "pastor" who does nothing more than rant about the evils of organized religion.

If Ed Cunningham thinks football is a brutal sport and too violent and dangerous, he shouldn't be calling games on TV. If you can't understand that, it's you who doesn't look "so great."

My point was by using 'liberal lawyers' and calling him a pu&&y was immature.

 

Like there's some agenda attacking football from the left. OP looks ignorant when using those terms.

Not football specifically but the political left tends to be much softer and more bleeding heart that the right, for better or worse. Our participation-ribbons-to everyone, don't-criticize-anyone culture is brought to you by liberals.

 

I have no doubt in my mind that Ed Cunningham probably gets walked all over by everyone he encounters and pays over MSRP for his cars. Coincidentally or not, I suspect he's a Democrat.

 

I could argue about masculinity in relation to political roles, but I won't go there.

 

Point is, studies are proving that football is dangerous. I love the sport and want to see it protected anyway possible, if that means not adding additional games then so be it. Because going forward, studies are only going to show that football is more dangerous to the brain than the previous study.

 

 

This is a great point you make. If each study done only shows that football is more dangerous than previously thought, eventually football will be more hazardous than war. At what point does it stop then? Because if a game is changed enough, it's not the same game. It has to stop somewhere to protect the integrity of the game. One look at the game and the average person knows that it's dangerous, and that's partly what makes it worth watching.

 

Should we do everything we can to protect the players? From an equipment standpoint, yes. From changing the game standpoint, no. If players don't want to accept the risks associated with it, then don't play the game.

 

There is a political side to this as well, and Ed Cunningham plays one side of it, which annoys a lot of fans.

[adc7236]

There are risks in everything we do, you either accept them or walk the other way.

Valid point.

 

 

 

 

Why does this guy even call football games? Does he like the sport? Is a paid shill by the liberal lawyers who wear panties on the weekend?

He just made a 10 minute speech about how football is too physical these days, how they SHOULD never add another playoff game because there's too much football already, there's too many injuries because players have gotten too fast too big..etc whine etc whine.

This same pu&&y calls Nebraska games and literally whinces when there is a big crushing hit and made it seem as though there were some malicious intent on behalf of a football player making a tackle. Man, he is a puss. It makes me mad he even has that job.

If you've read a single report about the impact concussions have on the brain and what it does to an individual long term, you'd be singing a different tune.

 

No offense, but adding the word 'liberal lawyers' (like they have anything to do with it?) and calling him a pu&&y makes you look pretty ignorant about the topic. You clearly don't understand the topic and come off looking not so great.

You missed the point. Your argument is essentially that football is too violent and damaging to the brain, and that it perhaps needs to be re-examined as a sport. It's a conversation worth having, but the OPs point is that it doesn't make sense for a guy who feels that way to be calling a football game. It would be rather like having Sunday services led by a "pastor" who does nothing more than rant about the evils of organized religion.

 

If Ed Cunningham thinks football is a brutal sport and too violent and dangerous, he shouldn't be calling games on TV. If you can't understand that, it's you who doesn't look "so great."

 

My point was by using 'liberal lawyers' and calling him a pu&&y was immature.

 

Like there's some agenda attacking football from the left. OP looks ignorant when using those ter

Valid point.

 

Folks, there appears to be a fissure between the "don't change football" crowd & the "it's a danger to our youth" crowd. Listen, if you take the hard line that football should not be made safer, you are going to LOSE, and you might lose the whole game itself. Alternatively, if you use your senses and discuss democratically the changes that could be made, there is a shot we keep this great game from going extinct. Neck strength training, heads up football, & less contact throughout a season are a few thoughts. Don't be hard headed or you will be the cause for the extinction of the game of football. Ed Cunningham is generally a blowhard but just because he is concerned about player safety doesn't make him a liberal. Take off your tin foil hat, RED.

The key is to make it safer without ruining the game.

 

Indeed, this is the key. The worry is that changes will go too far and the game will only be a shell of itself. Many believe it has already happened.

[PTPer]

There's some interesting research being done in material engineering to find ways to reduce the severity of impacts on a helmet. Most of it is being funded by DARPA for use in military helmets, but could be easily adapted to football and hockey helmets. Rule changes can only do so much to reduce head trauma in an impact sport, but some rule changes are necessary. Better still is research into improving helmets.

 

Now the reason why concussions and head impacts are so bad is because a hard enough impact will cause rapid acceleration of the head in one direction, followed by rapid deceleration, and sometimes a re-acceleration in the other direction. This literally compresses the brain against the skull, resulting in bruising or worse directly to the brain.

 

A helmet that is able to redirect or disperse the kinetic force in a way that lowers the acceleration applied to the brain could drastically reduce the severity of concussions and greatly reduce the damage caused by non-concussion causing hits.

And what is the skull sitting on top of and connected to the body by? Anyone...anyone? The NECK! If players trained all the muscles in their neck (including rotational) they could reduce the acceleration of the head when hit. But no, the cavemen coaches just want you bigger & faster so you can effectively hurt someone during the 2 quarters before you're ejected or concussed.

[PTPer]

We have sports where the objective is literally to beat the hell out of another opponent. Until those sports are banned, I don't want to hear anything about football being to rough.

That's exactly why I'm on my crusade to make the game safer. I could give 2 sh#ts if MMA, Rugby or Soccer went away. But if they ban football, America is done for me. No reason to stay, I'll go enjoy some down under in the down under.

[adc7236]

 

There's some interesting research being done in material engineering to find ways to reduce the severity of impacts on a helmet. Most of it is being funded by DARPA for use in military helmets, but could be easily adapted to football and hockey helmets. Rule changes can only do so much to reduce head trauma in an impact sport, but some rule changes are necessary. Better still is research into improving helmets.

 

Now the reason why concussions and head impacts are so bad is because a hard enough impact will cause rapid acceleration of the head in one direction, followed by rapid deceleration, and sometimes a re-acceleration in the other direction. This literally compresses the brain against the skull, resulting in bruising or worse directly to the brain.

 

A helmet that is able to redirect or disperse the kinetic force in a way that lowers the acceleration applied to the brain could drastically reduce the severity of concussions and greatly reduce the damage caused by non-concussion causing hits.

And what is the skull sitting on top of and connected to the body by? Anyone...anyone? The NECK! If players trained all the muscles in their neck (including rotational) they could reduce the acceleration of the head when hit. But no, the cavemen coaches just want you bigger & faster so you can effectively hurt someone during the 2 quarters before you're ejected or concussed.

 

I don't want to derail the thread, but only add a small point that the bolded brings to mind. I really can't stand the trend in football that has transpired over the years with the ESPN highlight full force body slam tackle mentality. Way too many misses/wiffs. What ever happened to a good ole' two arm wrap up tackle?

Solid fundamentals seem to be on the decline. Okay, done now. Back to the topic at hand.

[I am I]

I coach my sons team. We get certified in heads up tackling and in many many other approaches to keep the game safe.

Football has really changed safety-wise in last 10-15 yrs at the youth level...for the better. The emphasis has switched from "blowing people up" "knocking the snot out of them" etc to just making good form tackles and getting the ball carrier stopped. Using more rugby style two arm form tackles is really popular. In the 2 yrs since I've been coaching there has only been 1 kid on our team or the opponents team that has been concussed and that's because landed on his head after jumping. In 19 games and countless practices 1 concussion. We teach a very safe way to play the game. Constantly reminding kids not to use their head to make plays.

 

Bill Cunningham sounds like a whiney pu&&y. He just does. It's irritating he takes so much time of a TV program to talk about something that's not a huge issue, it's blown way way out of proportion compared to the number of kids who play and suffer not a single concussion. Just another reason not to tune ESPN. A bunch of pussies.

[Stumpy1]

We have sports where the objective is literally to beat the hell out of another opponent. Until those sports are banned, I don't want to hear anything about football being to rough.

This right here!!!

[adc7236]

I coach my sons team. We get certified in heads up tackling and in many many other approaches to keep the game safe.

Football has really changed safety-wise in last 10-15 yrs at the youth level...for the better. The emphasis has switched from "blowing people up" "knocking the snot out of them" etc to just making good form tackles and getting the ball carrier stopped. Using more rugby style two arm form tackles is really popular. In the 2 yrs since I've been coaching there has only been 1 kid on our team or the opponents team that has been concussed and that's because landed on his head after jumping. In 19 games and countless practices 1 concussion. We teach a very safe way to play the game. Constantly reminding kids not to use their head to make plays.

 

Bill Cunningham sounds like a whiney pu&&y. He just does. It's irritating he takes so much time of a TV program to talk about something that's not a huge issue, it's blown way way out of proportion compared to the number of kids who play and suffer not a single concussion. Just another reason not to tune ESPN. A bunch of pussies.

I can't remember the exact game awhile back that I first heard him drone on and on and on about players leading with helmets and safety, but it was absolutely exhausting listening to him. Additionally, it was inappropriate in the context of what his actual job duties should entail. Announce the football game and keep your opinions to a minimum Mr. Cunningham.

[Comish]

For the other side of this discussion............the OWH has an article today about the decision Mile Riley's brother had to make concerning letting his son play football.

The guy is a medical professional and after years of his own research, he decided it was ok to play.

[PTPer]

 

 

 

There's some interesting research being done in material engineering to find ways to reduce the severity of impacts on a helmet. Most of it is being funded by DARPA for use in military helmets, but could be easily adapted to football and hockey helmets. Rule changes can only do so much to reduce head trauma in an impact sport, but some rule changes are necessary. Better still is research into improving helmets.

 

Now the reason why concussions and head impacts are so bad is because a hard enough impact will cause rapid acceleration of the head in one direction, followed by rapid deceleration, and sometimes a re-acceleration in the other direction. This literally compresses the brain against the skull, resulting in bruising or worse directly to the brain.

 

A helmet that is able to redirect or disperse the kinetic force in a way that lowers the acceleration applied to the brain could drastically reduce the severity of concussions and greatly reduce the damage caused by non-concussion causing hits.

And what is the skull sitting on top of and connected to the body by? Anyone...anyone? The NECK! If players trained all the muscles in their neck (including rotational) they could reduce the acceleration of the head when hit. But no, the cavemen coaches just want you bigger & faster so you can effectively hurt someone during the 2 quarters before you're ejected or concussed.

I don't want to derail the thread, but only add a small point that the bolded brings to mind. I really can't stand the trend in football that has transpired over the years with the ESPN highlight full force body slam tackle mentality. Way too many misses/wiffs. What ever happened to a good ole' two arm wrap up tackle?

Solid fundamentals seem to be on the decline. Okay, done now. Back to the topic at hand.

You're right on point, in fact.

It's the cave men coaches that use terms like "pu$$ies" & "concussions are blown way out of proportion" & don't forget "my team has only had 1 concussion in the last 5 years"

--- bull$#!+---

 

Not only do they have no idea, they wouldn't admit if they did see more than 1. See, in their heads, hurting the other team's players = winning. They will stop at nothing to win. Even at the expense of little Johnny's abilty to win a future spelling bee. How about taking 5 minutes per practice and strengthen your players' necks instead of playing kill the man to see who you can trust in the trenches? Now watch, they will deny it, just like the NFL did until they got caught. Better change your ignorance about blows to the head or you will be the root cause of football's demise.

[Guy Chamberlin]

It's unavoidably clear that years of playing football is shaving years off the lives of former players, and a lot of those final years are marked with dementia and depression.

 

The problem was blown UNDER proportion for years. It's at a more accurate proportion now. Some of the most badass football players the game has ever seen are among the most concerned.

 

20 years ago, long before the concussion issues or much publicity at all, I saw a small newspaper article that mentioned the average lifespan of an NFL lineman was 15 years below the national average.

 

But I agree: you can't have UFC and MMA on the rise while you try to tear football down.

[GBRedneck]

I just read a thread full of panty waste.

[adc7236]

I just read a thread full of panty waste.

There were posters talking about different points of an issue to include player safety, football purist who say play the game as it was intended, play the game as your own risk, how the game has or will evolve and how Bill/Ed Cuningham announces football games. What is "panty waste"?