Replies

OK... I said I would spare everyone the comparisons... but I changed my mind. Some of my observations on the allegory from one of our email exchanges (my lib friend played for Arkansas in the 70’s, hence the SWC/Big 12 refences)...

Just as the rules committee would not call plays for a team, neither should the legislature dictate how a business operates.

The rules committee does not determine that one team has more talent than the other and enacts rules that only apply to the stronger team so the game is more fair.

Teams don’t lobby the rules committee to give them five downs and the other team three.

Teams are not required to recruit to match a defined racial mix. Players are not kept as starters if they don’t perform. The quarterback is not required to throw equally to each receiver. The team is not required to run an even mix of run and pass plays so that every player gets an equal chance to play.

Players play with pain and overcome all manner of setbacks.

The goal posts don’t move.

Sometimes the ball bounces funny... that does not call for a “do-over”

The referees are not free to change the rules.

There are players with more God given talent that excel and there are players that work harder than others who also excel. Not every player gets to play quarterback. Some don’t get to play at all. Players who were starters in 8th grade, sat on the bench in high school and didn’t play beyond high school have to find something else they are good at... and may end up designing a football stadium. (me, btw)

The rules of football are designed to provide boundaries in which the game is played but they do not micro manage play. Each rule is designed to answer a specific need.

The rules committee, the commissioner and the referees do not “play”. Adding another 250 referees on the field might get you better calls, but mostly they would just be in the way.

The fat, balding guys on the rules committee may be able to play the game, but not nearly as well as the players on the field. They should not even try.

Coaches are given a great deal of freedom within the rules to do things that are inventive... i.e. trick plays, the run and shoot, no huddle, the 3-4, the nickel. The old days of the ends next to the tackles and a full back and two running backs in the backfield have given way to all sorts of alignments and positions. In 93, Oklahoma came out in a set against A&M where the tackles were spread out wide. A&M got destroyed. They didn’t know what to do. Was that fair? I didn’t like watching it, but I have to admit that it was fair and we simply got out coached.

Everyone has the opportunity to start for a division one team... if they work hard and have the talent. If they don’t do both, they either play for a division II team or even lower... or they play in the band or sit in the stands.

You might bitch about them in the bar after the game, but when the team takes the field, you cheer for them with all your might. You NEVER hope that they lose... even if you do want a new head coach.

When a running back like L.T. comes along, you don’t add extra weight to his pads so he will be more equal to the other team’s running back. In fact, your second string running back will be better for the competition.

Players that have more impact - through a strong work ethic or raw talent or good luck - get paid more because they are worth more to a successful team. If the team is successful and draws fans to the stands and viewers to the set, the team makes more money and can afford to pay the third string guy more than if they were not successful. The stadium vendors and the tv crews and the parking lot attendants and the sportswear company and the training staff and everyone else involved in the game makes more, too.

When the game is over, you can still raise a beer with a fan from the other team... even t.u.