Letters to the Editor
-
Thoughts
The Peter King parody was great. How about "11 things I thought about in the shower, but then forgot before I could get to my computer"?
Also, Chuck Klosterman touches on the postmodern media day thing over on espn.com.
-
sorry to say...
But not only does Chuck Klosterman touch on the postmodern stuff in his "blog", he also talks about bald quarterbacks and quarterbacks with lots of syllables!
-
The French take over...
First Klosterman name-checks Derrida in his media-day column on 'The Deuce'. Then King, in his clearly superior rambling style, dipthong hanging out and all, goes all Baudrillard on us with his 'there is no there there' shtick.
How many buttons on your shirt are unbuttoned, King? (see recent Salon intereview of Levy)
For my money, Dan(te) Pastorini was one of the great bomb-launchers of the 70/80s NFL. That Oilers team was fun to watch. Stupid Steelers always got the call...
-
Counting Syllables
I don't want to nitpick, but Sean Salisbury's name only has four syllables if you count his first name (and arguably, still only has three, if you go with the British pronounciation.) Salisbury the town is pronounced 'sols-bree'. I'd be willing to accept that Sean pronounces it "sols-bur-ree", but again that only gets us to three.
I want to go further in seconding King's suggestions: 11 players with no pads beyond what they allow in rugby (about the equivalent to what you wrap your laptop in around the head and shoulders) and say, three or four substitutions a game, with a baseball-like once-you're-out-you're-out-for-good rule.
It wouldn't be rugby because it would have the forward pass and blocking, but it would be exciting. It would also require pretty amazing athletes to play both sides of the ball. It would also restore respect for kickers because they would have to be able to play offense and defense.
You'd get the odd person over 280, but most of the big boys would be in the 245-270 range.
That would be a great game to watch. Throwbacks are all the rage. Why stop with the uniforms?
-
"Peter" King Kaufman
What no coffeenerd tales or high school field hockey meditations? Seattle, coffee. Was it too easy?
-
What would this help?
So, if these really big guys weren't in the NFL anymore, would they just stop existing? Would their size no longer contribute to early deaths? Or would they die young anyway, but not get to play football beforehand?
Who would that help, except possibly the reputation of the NFL?
Just curious. Maybe I'm missing something.
-
So much to comment on...
One additional solution to the size problem: make 'em play on a Canadian field. The really big guys (at all positions) tend to wash out of the CFL because the size of the field demands more in the way of mobility, even amongst linement. (Yes, there are 350-pounders in the CFL, but on the whole players are smaller up north.)
On the not-so-Super question of four-syllable QBs (oy — is it really necessary that we wait two weeks for this over-hyped exhibition?), when he played in the CFL Sean Salisbury's name was pronounced as a four-syllable number, albeit the second was barely aspirated. On the other hand, I was always taught that Taliafer(r)o was pronounced "tull-i-ver", which would argue against including Mike T in King's list.
Speaking of four-syllable quarterbacks, the jury's still out on whether Vince Ferragamo failed in the CFL because he was too big and slow, or because he just couldn't count past eleven. (Hey, King: Canadian football has had twelve men since the 1870s. Can we sue Texas A&M?)
-
more thoughts on weighty issues and media day...
i am not a labor lawyer, but i am told by someone who is that reducing the number of available jobs is considered a fundamental and serious attack on a collective bargaining agreement and can't be done unilaterally. this is one reason why the players union objected to the dissolution of the montreal expos. so i don't believe the two-way player idea, which is very interesting, could ever work in the NFL because the players union would oppose it on financial grounds, even though it would in theory be good for its members in a medical sense. ironic, but not unprecedented.
regarding four-syllable quarterbacks, my recollection is that at least the more recent of the two Taliaferos pronounced his name TAHL-uh-ver, which used to puzzle me as a kid. i also believe Salisbury sounds like SALS-berry (or burry), and Gagliano is pronounced gohl-YAH-no. i'm not certain, but you'd better check it out before you finalize your list.
edwardo
-
Obligatory nitpick
It's "Marques Tuiasosopo" not "Marcus".
-
Once Again I Must Point Out: Rugby Owns You All!!
King has made an excellent argument. In Rugby, even the forwards (the larger dudes who have to pack down and form scrums) have to be able to run, pass, tackle, ruck for a solid 80 mins. Thats 80 continuous minutes I might add, not the "wander to the sidelines, get a gatorade, and make the "NO 1!" finger sign to the lurking TV camera' kind of minutes we see in the NFL. Of course, there is a degree of specialisation, but forwards and backs who don't perform all the basics of rugby to a very high level cannot expect to excel at the highest level. They also tend not to drop dead of a coronary soon after retiring from the game. It is a source of amazement in this part of the world that you have offensive and defensive players who do nothing but that. And a guy who does nothing but kick. Now, don't get me wrong: I have nothing but the greatest of respect for the NFL and its players. But the game is doing them no favours forcing them balloon out to terrifying sizes. I think two-way players NFL would be more exciting to watch, faster paced, even more skillful, and with healthier players living longer so the can continue to torment us fronting car advertisments till a ripe old age.
-
simple solution to weight problem
The NFL already has a good thing going with the salary cap; the obvious extension to this is a weight cap. If you limited the amount of mass on the field to, oh, about 230 lbs x 11 players = 2530 lbs, I think this would solve a lot of problems. You could still have the occasional fat lineman, but you would have to offset that with slimmer linebackers and tight ends. Would this open up the running game and result in more scoring? Absolutely! Problems solved.