REASONABLE VIOLENCE

Even the NFL can't figure out what to do to control the violence in football. Every Sunday, more than ever before, there is a concussion and a gurney on the field carting off another player with a severe life-altering injury. Two weeks ago it was DeSean Jackson. This week it was Colts wide receiver Austin Collie. Throw in a casual concussion to starting right guard, Max Jean-Giles that nobody even saw.

Despite the severity of the injury, the Eagles safety, Kurt Coleman was assessed a penalty on the play, resulting in a touchdown for the Colts and nearly a loss of the game for the Eagles. Fans thought that Coleman was going to be levied the same fines as other recent violent offenders. Eagles linebacker Ernie Sims was fined $50,000 for his recent hit in the Titans game. A hit by Packer's safety Nick Collins on Dallas receiver Roy Williams cost him the same amount. This was nothing compared to the fines on a Steeler linebacker who was fined $100,000 for several flagrant hits.

Problem is that officials, the league office, and even the players don't agree on what defines a flagrant hit. Roy Williams, the Dallas player who was the victim of the hit by Collins said, "Commission Goodell, don't fine the guy. It wasn't that bad of a deal, he shouldn't get fined. It was a football play, a football player making a football play. No injury, no harm." So Williams criteria for a violation is based on the extent of the injury. Problem is, that can't be assessed at the time of the play, unless the appearance of the gurney alone constitutes a reason for a $50,000 fine to somebody.

So if several guys are included in a hit, as is often the case in football, who do you fine? Both safeties, Kurt Coleman and Quintin Mikell hit Collins at the same time. As a result, the Eagles Coleman was not fined. The reason stated was: "Because the helmet-to-helmet contact was a result of Collie being driven toward Coleman by Mikell's legal hit, there will be no fine for this action." The play did receive a penalty for unnecessary roughness and almost cost the Eagles the game. So the referees were wrong on this one or were they right? The gurney did appear on the field, but it was deemed inadvertant.

Seems the real problem is that you can't legislate intent or level of violence. Football is a violent game, and can only be made reasonable by the choices of the players involved. A player knows when another player is going "head hunting". The culture in football that breeds and rewards challenging people at this level are trying to change the way the game is played. It has always been a rough and tumble game, but you don't want it to become a game where the end justifies the means and surviving hits that will maim people for life is the sign of a real man.

Whenever we are ready to make it change, just turn off your TV set for several Sundays and watch what happens. Bet the league office will move quickly to suspend players for games or the season and really mean it. Since football is as popular as ever, and people love the big hits, it turns out that we are the violent ones and the players are only imitating real life.