Goodell wants to eliminate kickoff in 2013 ???

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Why don't the owners eliminate Goodell.

Why would they? Goodell doesn't do anything the owners don't tell him to do, he's a puppet and the owners pull the strings. As long as he keeps doing their bidding and fattening their pockets he will be the commissioner. Unfortunately it may very well come at the expense of the integrity, of this sport we all love so dearly love.

First of all, I don't put much credence in this report. That having been said, Goodell is a pawn of the owners, and the owners are concerned, first and foremost, with their investment. The injury factor, particularly concussions, is becoming a very big deal and the cost of litigation down the road is something that could drive owners to agree to some pretty big changes in the game if it will reduce their liability concerns. To that end, it would not be all that big of a surprise to see this modification be made despite the traditional of the kickoff. Nothing is sacred when it challenges the empire of the billionaires who own the league.

My comment wasn't prompted by the report, I was just responding to the question of why the owners don't get rid of goodell. But that's my point, pawn or puppet whatever you want to call it, goodell doesn't do anything that the owners don't want him to do. Your definitely right in the fact that it all comes down to the money. With all these lawsuits being filed by past players the league needs to protect itself and the main way for them to do that is to take steps to show that they are making the game safer. Such as eliminating kickoffs and helmet to helmet hits etc.

My question is, why don't they just have players sign a waiver when they enter the league stating that they understand the risk and that they won't sue? Seems like that would clear up any risk of future lawsuits.

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:
Why don't the owners eliminate Goodell.

Why would they? Goodell doesn't do anything the owners don't tell him to do, he's a puppet and the owners pull the strings. As long as he keeps doing their bidding and fattening their pockets he will be the commissioner. Unfortunately it may very well come at the expense of the integrity, of this sport we all love so dearly love.

Forgive me, but this sounds a bit like the tail wagging the dog. I'll have to officially annotate that your response falls under the ideological column rather than the logical column. I do not wish to feed the ideological beast so I will leave it at this, illiminating kickoffs would not be a popular move that would lead to more viewership nor can our personal desire for the disregard of player saftey put us in any position to question the integrity of other puppets. I am one to believe that our personal greed is proportional amongst all classes and all values, but we just have less to work with.

That being said, taking kickoffs away would be a disaster and I do not support it, but I wont be as crass and charge it to a tired populist arguement.

Sorry but I have no idea what you are trying to say lol. I didn't go to college, might have to break this down Barney style for me.

I'll translate. He said "I disagree." That's it.

Also, don't feel bad, I have a PhD and his post barely makes any sense.

He's trying to say that he doesn't think the owners control Goodell. If they did, he wouldn't ban kickoffs. The owners like kickoffs because they enjoy the money that big hits bring in, but also because fans enjoy kickoffs despite claiming to care about player safety. If Goodell is talking about banning kickoffs, he's not making anyone happy, so according to Shorteus he's not in the owners' pockets.

His post was a friggin' mess though.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

Goodell is merely a puppet imposing the will of the Great Old Ones.

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:
Why don't the owners eliminate Goodell.

Why would they? Goodell doesn't do anything the owners don't tell him to do, he's a puppet and the owners pull the strings. As long as he keeps doing their bidding and fattening their pockets he will be the commissioner. Unfortunately it may very well come at the expense of the integrity, of this sport we all love so dearly love.

Forgive me, but this sounds a bit like the tail wagging the dog. I'll have to officially annotate that your response falls under the ideological column rather than the logical column. I do not wish to feed the ideological beast so I will leave it at this, illiminating kickoffs would not be a popular move that would lead to more viewership nor can our personal desire for the disregard of player saftey put us in any position to question the integrity of other puppets. I am one to believe that our personal greed is proportional amongst all classes and all values, but we just have less to work with.

That being said, taking kickoffs away would be a disaster and I do not support it, but I wont be as crass and charge it to a tired populist arguement.

Sorry but I have no idea what you are trying to say lol. I didn't go to college, might have to break this down Barney style for me.

I'll translate. He said "I disagree." That's it.

Also, don't feel bad, I have a PhD and his post barely makes any sense.

He's trying to say that he doesn't think the owners control Goodell. If they did, he wouldn't ban kickoffs. The owners like kickoffs because they enjoy the money that big hits bring in, but also because fans enjoy kickoffs despite claiming to care about player safety. If Goodell is talking about banning kickoffs, he's not making anyone happy, so according to Shorteus he's not in the owners' pockets.

His post was a friggin' mess though.

What was your thesis? Glad you were able to plug your intelligence with my post, I could whip mine out and lay it on the table and we could resolve the issue that way if you want?

Obviously Goodel works for the owners, and obviously they will keep him because the NFL is growing finacially, I never said anything to the contrary. You must have taken my opposition to the op as a means to fill in your own meaining as some twisted support for him and his pals. What I was saying is that its tiresome to continously see people plug class warefar with every NFL issue. Do I think eliminating kickoffs is a bad idea? Hell yes, but in addition I think it would be an inflection to the popularity trend of the NFL. Although player saftey has plenty of finacial clout, the cost wouldn't come close to the impact that reduced viewership could have. Enhancing viewership by pushing a gladiator type mentality probably increases NFL revenue at the expense of player law suites.

The second aspect I was trying to touch on is us, we are upset that they would remove kickoffs because it is an integral part of the history of the game and because there is a lot of action involved with it. Is it not our greed that we want that part of the game to stay even at the expense of player saftey? Is it ok to chastise one group for finacial greed while exhibiting blood greed? The NFL should want to keep kickoffs because its finacially prudent just as we should want to keep kickoffs because it makes the game more interesting. Both disregard player saftey for second party interest.

wish he had done that for the SB.

Originally posted by PrisonOfGlass:

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

Goodell is merely a puppet imposing the will of the Great Old Ones.

Who isn't?

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:
Why don't the owners eliminate Goodell.

Why would they? Goodell doesn't do anything the owners don't tell him to do, he's a puppet and the owners pull the strings. As long as he keeps doing their bidding and fattening their pockets he will be the commissioner. Unfortunately it may very well come at the expense of the integrity, of this sport we all love so dearly love.

Forgive me, but this sounds a bit like the tail wagging the dog. I'll have to officially annotate that your response falls under the ideological column rather than the logical column. I do not wish to feed the ideological beast so I will leave it at this, illiminating kickoffs would not be a popular move that would lead to more viewership nor can our personal desire for the disregard of player saftey put us in any position to question the integrity of other puppets. I am one to believe that our personal greed is proportional amongst all classes and all values, but we just have less to work with.

That being said, taking kickoffs away would be a disaster and I do not support it, but I wont be as crass and charge it to a tired populist arguement.

Sorry but I have no idea what you are trying to say lol. I didn't go to college, might have to break this down Barney style for me.

I'll translate. He said "I disagree." That's it.

Also, don't feel bad, I have a PhD and his post barely makes any sense.

He's trying to say that he doesn't think the owners control Goodell. If they did, he wouldn't ban kickoffs. The owners like kickoffs because they enjoy the money that big hits bring in, but also because fans enjoy kickoffs despite claiming to care about player safety. If Goodell is talking about banning kickoffs, he's not making anyone happy, so according to Shorteus he's not in the owners' pockets.

His post was a friggin' mess though.

What was your thesis? Glad you were able to plug your intelligence with my post, I could whip mine out and lay it on the table and we could resolve the issue that way if you want?

Obviously Goodel works for the owners, and obviously they will keep him because the NFL is growing finacially, I never said anything to the contrary. You must have taken my opposition to the op as a means to fill in your own meaining as some twisted support for him and his pals. What I was saying is that its tiresome to continously see people plug class warefar with every NFL issue. Do I think eliminating kickoffs is a bad idea? Hell yes, but in addition I think it would be an inflection to the popularity trend of the NFL. Although player saftey has plenty of finacial clout, the cost wouldn't come close to the impact that reduced viewership could have. Enhancing viewership by pushing a gladiator type mentality probably increases NFL revenue at the expense of player law suites.

The second aspect I was trying to touch on is us, we are upset that they would remove kickoffs because it is an integral part of the history of the game and because there is a lot of action involved with it. Is it not our greed that we want that part of the game to stay even at the expense of player saftey? Is it ok to chastise one group for finacial greed while exhibiting blood greed? The NFL should want to keep kickoffs because its finacially prudent just as we should want to keep kickoffs because it makes the game more interesting. Both disregard player saftey for second party interest.

Well i'm still not 100% sure what you are opposing about my original post.

I said the owners control goodell and will keep him around as long as he keeps making them money, you agree.

I said taking out the kickoff would compromise the integrity of the game. You agree on that too.

Those where the only two points I made in my original post and you agree with both of them. So whats the argument lol?

Also, what are you talking about class warfare? Nobody said anything close to that besides you...

Originally posted by ChazBoner:
wish he had done that for the SB.

Originally posted by Shorteous:
What was your thesis? Glad you were able to plug your intelligence with my post, I could whip mine out and lay it on the table and we could resolve the issue that way if you want?

Obviously Goodel works for the owners, and obviously they will keep him because the NFL is growing finacially, I never said anything to the contrary. You must have taken my opposition to the op as a means to fill in your own meaining as some twisted support for him and his pals. What I was saying is that its tiresome to continously see people plug class warefar with every NFL issue. Do I think eliminating kickoffs is a bad idea? Hell yes, but in addition I think it would be an inflection to the popularity trend of the NFL. Although player saftey has plenty of finacial clout, the cost wouldn't come close to the impact that reduced viewership could have. Enhancing viewership by pushing a gladiator type mentality probably increases NFL revenue at the expense of player law suites.

The second aspect I was trying to touch on is us, we are upset that they would remove kickoffs because it is an integral part of the history of the game and because there is a lot of action involved with it. Is it not our greed that we want that part of the game to stay even at the expense of player saftey? Is it ok to chastise one group for finacial greed while exhibiting blood greed? The NFL should want to keep kickoffs because its finacially prudent just as we should want to keep kickoffs because it makes the game more interesting. Both disregard player saftey for second party interest.

I don't have any "twisted support for [the OP] and his pals."

He couldn't interpret what you were trying to say because your post was a mess, as is this one. As for this post, once translating it again and as KegBert has already noted, you're not actually disagreeing with what he's saying or my interpretation of what you said.


Edit: And re: this

What was your thesis? Glad you were able to plug your intelligence with my post, I could whip mine out and lay it on the table and we could resolve the issue that way if you want?

I have absolutely no interest in having a credentials war with you. KegBert replied to your post saying he didn't go to college, leading me to suspect that he might have thought that his inability to understand your post was due to some educational deficiency on his part. It wasn't. That's it. Cut it out.

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by ChazBoner:
wish he had done that for the SB.

I wish he had done that for the championship game the year before...

Originally posted by RishikeshA:
Why don't the owners eliminate Goodell.

He is their well paid puppet.

this is excellent news considering Peterson/Mathieu, Austin and Harvin.

I would absolutely support getting rid of the kickoff.

Maybe a lot of you never played football? In my experience I witnessed more players get needlessly hurt on the kickoff than on any other play.

I'm open to a new idea.