Football supports the idea of not changing the rules.

Football is one of the most
fascinating sports and for this reason there has always been a huge number of
admires around the world. It’s a game that keeps you attracted until the last
minute and people love everything about it, the teamwork, the dedication, the
passion and not only. Because of this importance it has been object to many
discussions for applying new rules, which would reduce the aggression, and the
risk for football players to get injured. The main questions are, should these
new rules be involved, and would the game still be the same as before with the
new rules? In “What Price Football,” Don Banks argues that we should change the
rules as fast as we can without wasting time while in the essay “Football Does
a Body Good (Nannyism Doesn’t),” Daniel Flynn supports the idea of not changing
the rules.

Football is a game that is played
for fun, for people’s entertainment so there is no point in continuing to risk
players getting traumatic injuries. Even though fans and players want to go on
with the same rules, we have to think more about safety. The game has been
already adjusted in significant ways so “we have to let the game change, and we
have to embrace the change” (605) Banks writes. Some of the rules that he
thinks should be changed are the helmet in the open field, and the hazardous
kickoff. There are voices that this would make the game less interesting, but
even if it’s true we should start worrying more about the lives of the players
and for the dangerous consequences that may come after, such as dementia,
depression, or suicides. Even though football is the most popular game in the
U.S. and the profits are huge it’s not for sure that it will always be like that.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

If in upcoming years it will continue with the same level of violence and
riskiness, there is no guarantee that the interest for this game will be the
same. Young players, knowing that they would be in risk, won’t continue playing
in college or even youth leagues, so the changes would mean nothing more than
benefits for the future of the game. We all know that it’s impossible for
football players to be completely out of danger, but at least we can do
something to improve the game in this aspect.

Nevertheless, according to Daniel
Flynn some dramatic opinions by journalists are damaging the game’s reputation.

Everything they say about football is wrong. Football players don’t commit
suicide at elevated levels, they don’t die younger than their peers, in fact
statistics suggest that they live a healthier life and have lower rates of
cancer and heart disease then them. The number of football deaths has fallen
significantly by the time as equipment or rule updates have made it a safer
game, but like in any other sport such as skiing, bicycling or swimming they
may be cases of death. Even though statistically death numbers in football are
lower than other sports those dramatic opinions are keeping people away from it
as parents now forbid their children from playing and school districts are
already considering removing football from their programs because its seen as
too dangerous. But people who really are into football know that this game is
good for you. “When I played in high school, I spent five to six days a week working
out in the weight room, sprinting on the track and tackling on the field, but
football never bruised my brain, it bruised my ego” (623), Flynn writes.

Nowadays you rarely see people doing that because they are more focused on
playing video games, texting in social medias or doing other unhealthy stuff.

Football
is good for everyone, and it also brings us together, so the best option is not
to interfere and this way we can be ensured that football remains America’s
game.

            Having considered the two essays I
think that someway, adding rules by making the game stricter is badly affecting
it and its starting to create a kind of barrier between the game and the true
fans who love the game the way it was before. 
But is it worth the players to risk the future and their lives in the
field just so that the game doesn’t get boring and that the interest of the
fans stays the same? In my opinion, the answer is no. Everyone knows that
change is one of the most difficult things that we face, because we get used to
some things, but sometimes it’s inevitable. So, the same way that it happens in
life it has to happen even in the game, changes have to happen, we can’t
continue to risk players getting permanent injuries just because people want to
be entertained. A study published by the American
Academy of Neurology states that repeated concussions can cause brain
damage. “Players that suffered at least one concussion were found to be more
likely to experience neurological symptoms than those who did not suffer a
concussion. These symptoms include problems with memory and concentration,
confusion, speech or hearing difficulties, numbness or tingling in extremities,
and headaches,” (NFL concussions). And I can’t believe that there are people
who think more about how the game would be with some additional safety rules
than they think about what can happen with the players inside or outside the
field, because so far there are many examples of players that after retiring,
have been suffering from different diseases because of football injuries.

            Even though many people including
me, like the game the way it has always been, with no strict rules, we have to
think deeper than that and realize its necessary to make the changes for a
better future of the game we love.

BACK TO TOP
x

Hi!
I'm Rhonda!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out