text
Trump:
It should be called football. This is football, there is no question about it.
We have to come up with another name for the NFL stuff.
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
124 points (99.2% liked)
Slop.
748 readers
472 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
the injuries make it worth it. i don't wanna watch a sport where everyone is whining about a pretend hamstring. i wanna see BLOOD
You should watch rugby as well, it's quite brutal.
the problem with rugby is it's bri'ish
So is football/soccer. And the best rugby national teams are South Africa and New Zealand, who enjoy beating England.
ok nvm that MIGHT be cool as fuck
Youtube "rugby fights" and there's good selection of disagreements.
But it's the French Division2 is where its at. Here's a 5 minute video of ONE game, LaRochelle versus Pau, French Rugby Match gets (more) violent
i finally got around to seeing this. that's sick i gotta look into rugby
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Rugby is a beautiful thing to watch. Just two metric tons of men trying to bring each other to the ground with as much violence as possible. I have no clue why it isn't popular in the states.
I couldn't play, but I had plenty of friends who did. I would watch and support them in high school. School rugby is something else with the atmosphere and rivalries. I guess kind of like college football in the states?
I'd imagine they're similar, but it probably varies between countries. I know rugby is a posh sport in some places, but American football isn't really viewed as a sport for the wealthy in the states, as hockey takes the mantle for that.
Yeh boo for the players for wanting to not get CTE and debilitating injuries I guess
Gridiron players wearing protective gear and having blood rules is a good thing
I haven't looked into yank football, but if it's similar to the introduction of gloves to boxing, it's overall detrimental.
Boxing gloves reduces visible damage, but vastly increases CTE and straight up fatal blows. Gloves spread the surface area, but adds weight doesn't lessen the force of the punch which rattles the the brain inside the skull.
There were 400 fatalities in the ring in the 50 years after introduction of gloves and 0 in the 50 years before, and that's not mentioning CTE.
Different types of injuries/trauma, types of impact, so I don't think comparing boxing to gridiron is strictly apples to apples
https://qbi.uq.edu.au/concussion/do-helmets-protect-against-concussion
Suggests that foam padded hard helmets protect against traumstic brain injury by dispersing the energy of the impact, but are less effective in preventing concussion caused by translocation (the sudden head movement which causes internal displacement of the brain). No support to say the soft helmets have an appreciable impact in AFL against either TBI or CTE.
That's not to say that helmets have a net negative impact, unless the argument is that decreased FOV means you have less ability to avoid the imapct in the first plave
Would it not increase the instances of translocation? You're less likely to run at full speed at someone else if neither party were wearing armour.
Yep, that's what other commenters have replied
https://hexbear.net/comment/6727690
The increased risky play taken by players more than invalidates the benefits of the gear itself. I was getting hung up about the gear in a vacuum since I don't follow codes where it's already a settled topic
Idk how you'd put the genie back in the bottle in gridiron though if players, coaches and audiences are used to the current high impact play, then you'd have to reel that back in before players may feel comfortable doffing the gear
Protective padding significantly increases the risk of CTE and long-term injuries
Citation please
Edit: sorry thst reply is a bit too short/dismissive
I don't follow any sporting codes that wear protective padding, so my outsider understanding is that it is designed and shown to prevent that kind of injury
It's surprising to me that the opposite is true, so I'd like to read some more
Sorry my reply could have included more detail. I don’t have list of citations at hand, but this discussion has been ongoing for decades now. The main argument is that padding allows for tackles that would not normally be attempted due to short-term pain and injury risk to both players. The accumulation of these high impact tackles made possible by padding results in long-term CTE and serious injuries that risk retirement. If you’ve ever played rugby the type of tackles you see in American football are terrifying. For another comparison in soccer, only shin pads are typically worn and most contact injuries hurt like hell and are gone two minutes later because you bumped kneecaps together.
Okay yup that makes a lot of sense
i think the argument is that the hard helmets and shouderpads have ingrained deliberately harder hits and leading with the head in NFL when compared to say Union or AFL. League is questionable.
the NFL have seemingly very strongly come down on head-to-head contact and leading with the head in recent years as the CTE situation has been uncovered further, but i'm not sure that there's been significant advancements in the protective gear
Ty for explanation
If you want to see athleticism in a football code, watch Australian Rules Football.