Fenian_Bastard said:
93Devil said:
Hustle said:
henryhecht said:
this story is about football players - and the kind of mentality it takes to play a violent game - and why that mentality leads to violence off the field
What on earth is this about? You complained about Whitlock using a broad brush and then this? And what does this have to do with anything?
And how many Presidents played football in either high school or college?
You can play the game violently, but playing the game does not make you violent.
Oh, I think there are more than a few studies, and a whole potful of anecdotal evidence, that what is required to play football at the highest levels is a powerful inducement to become a violent person.
C'mon, FB, you're completely dismissive of Whitlock's arguments, yet you're quite willing to entertain one that blames the sport of football?
Both theories paint with an overly broad brush, but I'd say the one which points its finger at the influence of a corruptive culture that glamorizes self-destructive values hits closer to the truth than the one which blames a game.
The Marvin Harrisons, Warrick Dunns, Mannings, and Barber brothers of the football world don't find these problems; the Pacmans, Tanks, Lewises, and Vicks do. Whether you'll acknowledge it or not, there are some fairly obvious distinctions, in terms of the type of friends and cultural influences they surround themselves with, that tends to separate the players who find off-field trouble from those who don't. And the distinguishing factor ain't football.
Which, of course, is not to say that hip hop is inherently bad, or that all players who immerse themselves in its culture are prone to off-court trouble. Obviously that's not the case. But you can't deny that a pattern exists without being intentionally obtuse about this issue.