- Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
- Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
- Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
- Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
Friday, December 8, 2017
Is Violence bad for the Future of Football?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the violence highlighted in the game on monday is very bad for the NFL and the sport as a whole. Because if the players on both teams are just going after each other and not playing the game it is bad for everyone not just only the players but the NFL as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI think they continue to play this game despite the serious injuries because they love the game and also it is there job And the the don't play they don't get paid. So they need to play the game to get paid. It is like if you don't go to work you don't get paid.
I think games between the Steelers and the Bengals do not need to continue to happen because if they are just going to go after each other and injury the other teams players then there is not point.
I think the hit on Vontaze Burflict was not justified because he could have easily blocked him by instead went head first into his chest and knocked him out. Just because the two teams have history doesn't mean someone can do that today. I could have been a lot worse for Burfict.
No. What happened in that game is definitely not a good thing. It gives football a bad name and makes the players look foolish. Everybody loves seeing a big hit as long as its legal and both players are okay. But once a player gets hurt or uses an illegal hit nobody likes to see that and it makes people dislike the sport.
ReplyDeleteBecause people love to play the sport and its not like these injuries happen to everybody. Football also makes the players a lot of money and its what they love to do, so this danger isn't gonna change that.
Of course the games have to happen, but the punishments for foolish plays need to be stricter. Clearly 1 game isn't enough if players keep doing this. If the punishment is more severe hits like this will happen much less often.
I understand why Juju did and I honestly think I would do the same. It wasn't even that bad of a hit in fact some people saw it as legal. Burfict has a long career of dangerous and illegal hits so he had this coming.
No that was not good for football because there were multiple life changing injuries that took place. This will turn children and even adults away from playing football and hurt the popularity of the game.
ReplyDeleteI think there are different reasons for each player's. For many people, it is their only chance to make a living because they did not get a good education. For others, I think they are willing to play through the risk of injury because they love to play so much.
No those games do not need to continue because eventually people will realize that those games could injure somebody and change their life, like Shazier. I think there needs to be stricter punishment for players that contribute to games like that.
No I do not think it was justified because nothing can justify injuring somebody intentionally. No matter what happened in the past, players can’t begin to target each other because it will only lead to more violence and injuries.
I believe that the incidents that took place in the game are bad for football, even though it draws in views and controversy, it damages the label and name of the NFL.
ReplyDeleteI think that people who have been playing and who have always loved the game continue to play because they enjoy and are talented at the sport. The risk of injury is present in every sport.
I think that the actions that took place in the game shouldn't be the reason for the increase in views, and that there are other things that can be done to increase views and popularity.
I don't think that the hit was justified, even though I do believe he deserves to be hit in a way that he does to many other players in the league so that he may not hit like he has in the past.
1. The violence in the Bengals Steelers game is not good for the future of the NFL because violence should not be a part of any good sports matchup. However, the violence may attract more people towards the sport as a whole.
ReplyDelete2. People will continue to participate in the sport of football even with all the injuries happening because they love the sport. Many people who love football will/have to take the risk of getting injured in order to do something they love.
3. These violent games must come to an end because someone can get seriously hurt which has been happening a lot more, especially this season. I think there should be a bigger consequences to performing violent hits like the ones during the Bengals Steelers game.
4. I do not this it was justified because no one should purposely injure someone else, especially at the professional level. One team/player should have been the bigger man in this situation.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDelete- Although it brings lots of attention to the NFL and the steelers/bengals as a whole, hitting like that happened on this past Monday is not good for the sport of Football. Every precaution is trying to be made to help save these players from getting hurt, but the fact of the matter is you cannot prevent everything.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
- Football is an electrifying game. There are so many aspects of the game that are so intriguing. The physicality, toughness and talent it takes to be good at this sport is unlike any other, that is why people still play.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
- I do not think that it decreases the popularity of the sport in a sense of people cheering for their team, I do think it discourages people from starting to play the sport.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
- There is always an excuse and a story when something like this happened. But, it is never justified. You should not try to go and hurt someone after they do something to you. Playing and watching football falls under entertainment and going out of your way to hurt someone in the process of this is unjustified.
1. The violence in Bengals v Steelers is not a good for the NFL moving forward. Violence in sports is never good, especially in the most physically pounding and painful sport in the nation. It may attract more people, but it's a negative overall.
ReplyDelete2. People will continue to participate in the sport of football even with all the injuries happening because they love the sport. For some people, the love of the game overrules the risks. There are many risks, but lots people will be willing to take the opportunities with the risks.
3. Violent games like this one need to stop in order to prevent the risk of more injuries. They have been happening more and more in recent years, which is bad for the NFL and they should be more harder on punishments when it comes to these.
4. The hit on Vontaze Burfict was not justified because nothing can justify injuring somebody intentionally. I understand what Burfict has done in the past (Antonio Brown a couple playoffs ago), but in the present, knowing JuJu Smith-Schuster is rookie and wasn't on the team during Burfict's reign of terror, it makes it less justified. If it was Antonio Brown did it, it would more justified than JuJu doing it.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteThe primetime matchup of steelers bengals was an absolutely terrible look for the NFL. For the last couple years the NFL has continuously failed at addressing the concussion problem an a game like this only highlights there inability to do so.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
The players play for a variety of reasons but the obvious would be the money as if they play their cards right they could be set for life. Players also play for the love of the game, like Tom Savage who literally had a seizure on the field yet tried to come back.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
I wouldn't say that this is a major contributor but it certainly does not help. The biggest problem to me is the oversaturation with the thursday games.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
No I do not believe the hit was justified, an eye for the eye leaves everyone blind. Even though Vontaze is a dirty player that doesn't mean juju was justified in blind siding him.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDelete- No, it is not. I think for years, the NFL has been dealing with the issues of injury, particularly to the head. I think that this game has contributed to the controversy. However, there has to be a serious tragedy for change to occur. So, Monday night added flame to fire, but no change will happen unless a tragedy happens.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
- Many players work hard to get in the position to make money. They feel invincible and they don't want to give up everything they worked towards.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
- No. That game should have been stopped right as Ryan Shazier was hit. Why would we continue to watch games while players are ruining their lives and we are watching it for entertainment. Rules must be set. Maybe take away helmets so that players learn to form tackle.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
- No, the hit on Vontaze Burfict was definitely not justified. Two rights do not make a wrong and he should not threaten somebody else's livelihood for the sake of a sports rivalry.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteI think that collisions and violence have always been apart of the NFL, and rivalries bring out the best in those things. Football and violence have always been associated with eachother, so I don't think people should see an issue with something that has always been apart of the sport.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
Football is more than just a game, and the same can be said about a lot of other sports. People have a lot of passion for the game, and have probably been playing since they were young, so they have a lot of attachment to the game.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
I think that violence would cater to a select group of viewers, but I don't know how big that group is. I think there is a lot of things that the NFL can do to change their popularity, and violence could definetely be one of those things.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
Personally, I think the hit was completely fine. I don't understand what everyone is so up in arms about; hits like that have been apart of football since the beginning. However, assuming the hit was dirty, there is definetely a problem with that because a player should not purposely try to injure another in any situation.
The violence in the game played by the Steelers and the Bengals, I believe, is very bad for football and the future of football. No one wants to get hurt or targeted and that game had a lot of just that. It was too violent.
ReplyDeleteEven with the rise of spinal and head injuries players continue to play the sport. I think this is because they love the sport, and they are making a lot of money to play. This sport makes them happy and gives them a way to provide for their families.
While the interest in football may have gone down a little, having a game like that is not the way to bring viewers back. Even though it is publicity, it is bad publicity. It is another excuse as for why football has to change to protect the players.
I don't think it was justified. No hit that violent is ever justified. Even though there may be some history that is no excuse to hurt someone.
No. In a sport like football where aggression can turn into dangerous brain injuries extremely quickly, it is never good for a sport. It only shows younger viewers that it is okay to play the game in a dangerous way, and leads to making the sport more dangerous than it already is.
ReplyDeletePlayers continue to participate in football because they enjoy the sport and feel that the risk is worth it. Sports come with their own injury risks, and while football may have some of the worse injury risks out there, some people think it is still worth it.
No. People bashing their heads into each other only shows a lack of integrity, which if anything, would push fans away rather than draw them back in.
No. A dirty hit is never justified, even if the player deserves it. Beef should be settled during the plays and through out performing your opponent, not by injuring them and risking their health and careers.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteNo, because the game highlighted the high risk of injury associated with the sport and the leagues inability to prevent big hits from happening. This also hurts the future of the game because parents wouldn't want their children to play a sport where they could get seriously injured. Losing youth interest can be really dangerous for the NFL because the quantity and quality of the athletes coming into the league may decrease.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
I think they will continue to play football because they love the sport and they still get payed a lot of money to play. As long as people love the game more than they hate the injuries and there is money in playing there will be people who will play anyways.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
No, I think that games like the Steelers vs the Bengals only decrease the popularity of football and help its decline. The tough hits will only deter fans instead of attracting more attention the the sport.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
I do not belief that a hit like that is ever justified, and the idea that it could be shows how the NFL is on a slippery slope. Hits like that will only escalate the rivalry and cause more hurt in the future.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteI think that the violence between the Bengals and Steelers is definitely bad for the NFL. Recently, the NFL has been very big on reducing dangerous plays, and this game set them back to where they were a few years ago. It's very unfortunate that no matter what the NFL does, it seems that the violent aspect is almost impossible to control. From an entertainment perspective, I think it is good for the NFL because these rivalries are what viewers want to watch, so it's more enticing for fans.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
These football players still continue to play because it's their profession. Despite the sport being as dangerous as it is, these players are getting paid millions of dollars, so they are able to support their family. They are sacrificing their well being in order to provide, which makes sense. These players also love to play the sport despite the injuries, which is also what keeps them going.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
No, they do not need to continue in order to raise popularity. Everyone loves a good rivalry football game, but not to this extent. It's clearly taking it too far when two players have to be carted off and taken into the hospital from illegal hits. These types of games is what is going to continue to drive the NFL's ratings down.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
Personally, I'm a firm believer in "two wrongs don't make a right," so I do not think that this hit was justified, but that being said, I also see the reason for what was done. Burfict knocked out Antonio Brown on a cheap shot, and forced him to miss the next playoff game, and they lost. Still, what JUJU did was unacceptable and shouldn't be tolerated. The NFL should look at this situation and make punishments more than one game, so retaliation wouldn't even be worth it.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteIt is bad for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole. It outlines the general attitude that players are perceived to play with, which may dissuade many people from choosing to play the sport. However, occurrences such as the altercations during the Bengals vs Steelers game are rare in the NFL, and outside of many serious NFL fans, not too many people are paying attention to the issue.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
People still continue to take part in contact football because it is enjoyable. There is a negative attitude towards contact sports nowadays, but they are often a fun alternative to doing nothing after school. Also, there is a lot of pride associated with playing football at a school, because it is seen as an American pastime, similar to baseball. At Staples, for example, most of our athletic attention is generally directed towards the success of our football team, even though many of our other teams are massively successful. Football is a way to build a little bit of local fame and it also has a neat, family like aspect in the locker room.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
They definitely do not need to continue for the NFL’s success to continue. Extremely physical and altercation based games bring negative press to the league, which it is currently trying to avoid. While these types of games often do bring a lot of attention to the league, they do so in a negative light and highlight the high injury rate in the game.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
I do think that the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified. This is only because I know of Burfict’s history with the Steelers and him causing significant injuries to star players on the Steelers stemming from dirty or unnecessary hits. I am also a firm believer in an eye for an eye, so the Steelers do deserve some retribution. However, I do not condone violence against Burfict that would potentially decrease his earning potential, because NFL careers are often short lived to begin with. To conclude, Juju Smith-Schuster's decision was rash, but Burfict probably deserved some type of retribution.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t say it was good for the sport and the future of the NFL just because it was a little out of hand. Yet, I wouldn’t say its bad as it does send a message for how football really is like in terms of the hard hitting and physicality.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
I think that they continue to play because of how unique the sport it is and how it combines athleticism and strength with so many other attributes. The game itself is very appealing due to the physicality and mental toughness it requires.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
I think that they can certainly help the popularity as it has spiked more of an interest in the NFL as a whole but the continued suspensions of good players just is not good for the sport. The more players who are role models get suspended the more it hurts the sport as it simply makes players look like convicts and like a ad guy.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
I would say it is sort of justified. It was a brutal hit that Burfict has no way of seeing JuJu, but, it is not justified. I would say it is justified because as a player, against team you don’t like, you tend to try to get more hits of the kids that have done things I like Burfict. On the field you should return the favor, but, to the extent of the rules. As it is more important to send a message within the rules instead of doing something illegal that can hurt yourself and the team's success.
1) Cheap hits absolutely isn't good for the future of this sport. The game is already under attack for being too dangerous, this is the last thing it needs. That being said, there have been many worse hits than JuJu's, but I feel that this in addition to Shazier is why there is so much controversy.
ReplyDelete2) Many players continue to play because they feel that the benefits from playing the game outweighs the risk of injury. Many fall in love with the game, and can't stay away from it.
3) Fans certainly love the big hit. But at the same time, we want everyone to be safe. It isn't enjoyable to see gruesome injuries. With new energetic players including JuJu, I believe the ratings will go up again if everyone plays the game the right way.
4) An illegal hit on Burfict would not be justified at all, yet I still don't think this was an entirely illegal hit. We've seen hits like these for years, and players are coached up to always keep their head on a swivel. I think if the taunting hadn't followed, he may not have been suspended. He lead with his shoulder, but this is an example of the NFL trying to make the game as safe as possible, as it absolutely killed JuJu to not be out there this past Sunday.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteI do not think that the violence is good because it poorly reflects on the NFL. However, it could be exciting for the audience and bring in more viewers because despite the hits being dangerous, it is entertaining to some people.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
People still play football because some truly love the sport and the physical contact that comes along with it. Also, being a football player does have a lot of prestige and benefits that come along with it.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
No because this is exciting because it happened a lot in one game, but if it happened in multiple games, there would be a point where it isn't even enjoyable to watch people get hurt, rather than playing the game of football.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history
I do not think that this hit was justified because hits like these lead to injuries that are greater than getting back at a player. Revenge is one thing, but if they got too many concussions or injured severely where they couldn't play football, that'd just be messed up. Hits like these have a chance at taking away football from these people and that is why it is unjustified.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteObviously, the violence highlighted in Monday night's game is not good for the future of the NFL because all parents who's kids play football worry about concussions and with hits as shown in this, concussions are inevitable. On an even more serious note, Ryan Shazier injured his spine, causing him to not feel his legs which is extremely scary. Youth football kids are quitting and their parents are being more strict than ever because of the injuries that could be life changing. Some people think the pros outweigh the cons while more people don't.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
NFL players don't play worrying about injuries. They play for the love of the game. Although players have the thoughts of these injuries, ultimately, they play for the love of the game. CTE is now scaring some players who will have to value if it is worth it to continue playing for the rest of their career. NFL players have all the money in the world so if the injuries are not worth it, they will quit.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
I don't think people stop watching because of the injuries. I think people stop watching when the game is unenjoyable and besides for the horrific injuries, it was a very entertaining game to watch. NFL popularity will have to do with the success of the popular teams.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
Vontaze burfict has a history of being the dirtiest player in the league, but he has faced his fair share of fines so Juju's hit on him was illegal because it was a blindside. To make matters worse, he stared Burfict down. Burfict might have deserved the hit for what he did to AB last year, but it was ultimately illegal and thats all that matters to the NFL.
Is the violence highlighted in Monday night's Bengals Steelers matchup good for the future of the NFL and the sport as a whole?
ReplyDeleteI think that one of the main attractions of the NFL is the brutality of the tackles being made so the violence doesn't really do a whole lot. People love seeing huge hits and sometimes players get caught with hits that are going to hurt.
Considering the rise in concussions and spinal injuries in the NFL, why do you think players still continue to participate in football?
Because thats how they get paid. These players play their whole lives to play in the NFl and for them to throw it all away would be devastating to their lives.
Do violent games such as the Steelers Bengals matchup need to continue to combat the decrease in NFL popularity as of late?
No I think the reason why the NFL is loosing viewers is because of all the stoppage time for commercials and other things that just take way too long. No way am i going to start watching football to see the same thing boxing or the UFC brings.
Do you believe the hit on Vontaze Burfict was justified considering the past history between Burfict and the Steerlers?
I bet it feels nice as a steeler but no something like that cannot be justified.
1.No the more violence than the more injuries. More parents are not letting their kids play football because of the head injuries. CTE is a major problem in the NFL and will effect the amount of people that play.
ReplyDelete2. Players love the game of football and are willing to risk their bodies to play. A lot of these players also come from poor backrounds and this is a way to make good money.
3. I think the more violent games the more injruies their will be. This has been an awful year of superstars getting injured like carson wentz, aaron rogers, odell, david johnson. The more injuries that take place will negatively effect ratings.
4. I thought the hit itself was okay but he shouldn't of stood over him and taunted him.