Wishful Thinking

Sunday, October 01, 2006

WHY FOOTBALL ROCKS: A Response to Evan Rogers's Calumnies of the Second Greatest American Sport

In a post dated September 20th, Evan let loose a torrent of vitriol for the sport of football. His chief complaints where that 1) manipulation of the game clock too often upends the suspense of the second half; 2) complaints against officiating are too predominant; 3) the kicking conventions make no sense in a game based on seizing territory; 4) come-from-behind wins are rare. Commenting on Evan's post, Joel added the fifth criticism that football is "a coach's game" that negates whatever teamwork you think you're seeing on the field. Allow me to dispel these harmful allegations from the best vantage point imaginable--the first row of the end zone.

Which is, in case it isn't obvious where this is going, where I sat with Courtney and Nicole, a UF friend of ours whom you might recall from the wedding's after-party, at yesterday's game between UF and Alabama.
It's from this vantage point that I can debunk all of Evan's criticisms, because at the end of the day, a football game is an experience you have to have first-hand. None of this TV nonsense will do. I'll come back to this, but first let me address the accusations made by Evan & Joel.

1) When you're on the field, the elapsed time of clock management doesn't register--except for in the last minute or so of some games when the leading team often intentionally downs the ball in order to run out the clock. On the field, the effect is actually quite the opposite: you see the players scrambling to get the play in order, and a sense of panic sets in as the playclock approaches zero. On TV, the suspense of that device may seem ill-motivated, especially since the pace of TV viewing is hastened by advertisement montages, but on the ground the clock situtation is more fretful--not so much a deliberate wasting of time (as in my strategies to maintain a lead in the waning moments of a game of NBA Jam '94), but a rush for the offense to get a sense of the defense's plans before deciding what to do with one of their precious possessions.

2) Evan's post came after a week when two games (LSU-Auburn and Oregon-Oklahoma) had controversial calls that affected the outcomes of the contests. Frankly, both of those calls deserved to be contested by all parties because both of them could have gone either way, but the media coverage of those 'scandals' was an exception to the rule. Mostly that kind of bitching just takes place in sports bars.

3) I could hedge here and say that other sports have wacky conventions, too, but that would be poor argumentation. Instead, I'll take the high ground here and just say that it makes more sense when you see it, like here, as kicker Chris Hetland spots up for an extra point:
Moreover, on punts and kick-offs, the effect is that it creates a whole field of chaotic openings through which the receiver can run. The chaos of those returns rarely occurs during the course of an average drive.

4) In each of Florida's three SEC games, the Gators have overcome a deficit to win. So while generally the stronger teams do win out--as they do in most sports--there's still room for all the drama and tension one comes to expect from a sporting event.

5) Yes, this is a coach's game. All team sports are. The only games where that maxim isn't in effect are golf, bowling, and a bunch of other shit that's never televised. Moreover, sports is never a place to think through an allegory for class or other fields of power relations because, frankly, the athletes are treated way too well to be analogues for the working poor, the sexually oppressed, or what have you.

Now, on to my own thesis: that the value of the game is experiential. Functionally, a D-I football game shares a lot of characteristics with other events that people in our circle might more readily assent to--Phish concerts, to name one example. The energy in such a place is simply huge. There's no way of adequately putting it into words. The energy of the band, here shown marching up to the student section before closing off the half-time show,
radiates throughout the stadium, and the energy of the fans is intense. You could take legitimate potshots at the kind of folks who tend to create that energy, and you could even take legitimate potshots at the role that kind of energy has played in history--say, in Nazi rallies--but it's an energy that's addictive and it completely changes the experience of the game. Here's Dallas Baker (#81) and company celebrating his touchdown reception that gave us the lead for the rest of the game:
Can you really tell me that that kind of enery doesn't radiate?

I know that may seem like an unfair argument for football since so many of the Hendrix gang haven't had that kind of experience, but believe me: it's true. I was incredibly reluctant to even go to a game, but when someone offered me a spare ticket to the Arkansas game in my first fall at UF, I figured I couldn't pass by the opportunity to socialize. Only then did I come to enjoy the game.

So you guys should try to come down here and visit on a game weekend. Give me some notice, and I ought to be able to rustle up a couple of tickets for you.

PS: The Gators won 28-13. "Take that, you fucking George Wallaces," say Al and Alberta:

3 Comments:

At 12:02 PM, Blogger Joel said...

I want to say three things in my defense;

1) Strippers are "well-treated" by a certain metric, but that ought not to preclude arguments about the field of power relations at play in the sex trade.

2) Football players may be well-paid, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are well-treated. The lifespan of the average football player is 22 years shorter than that of the average American. The incidence of heart disease and diabetes is 13 times higher among linemen. Orthopedic surgery is at least twice as common among football players.

3) Your argument that all team sports are ultimately orchestrated and/or micromanaged by coaches might be right. The structure of the football coaching hierarchy, and the organization of play seems to favor a more micromanagerial coaching style. Play stops every 10 seconds or so, at which point the coaches call the next move, or the QB calls the next move from a limited menu presented by coaches, some of whom sit in a special booth to watch the whole action. The organization of play in basketball or hockey makes that sort of management impossible. And in baseball, coaching decisions mostly amount to base coaches who signal a runner to run or stop. Coaches also sometimes give hitting advice, but that's pretty rare. The signals that baseball coaches are always giving are actually mostly nonsense, or they were at least for the team I used to work for.

and one thing about the argument that as an experiential event, football rocks.

1) The argument about the amount of energy generated by the football experience is not an argument for why football rocks, considering that other superior sporting contests provide similarly energetic experiences. For example, when I watched the national championship Tarheel team beat Duke in the Dean Dome in 2005, the place was absolutely crackling with energy. Unless you can somehow argue that the football energy is better than the basketball energy, football still sucks. Furthermore, anytime a bunch of drunk whites gather in a stadium to cheer on the blacks, there's going to be a bunch of energy, whether its football or Amos 'n' Andy. Facts is facts.

 
At 9:47 AM, Blogger Evan said...

This may be more of a hit piece against college football, but here it is, from the Forde Yard Dash:

"Heading into the sixth full week of games, a mere 30 teams have been ranked in the Associated Press Top 25 -- the fewest number at this point since the poll expanded from 20 to 25 in 1989.

Only four ranked teams have lost to unranked opponents, compared with 16 victories by the unranked over the ranked through five weeks last year. The only two Top 25 losses that would register as truly surprising are NC State over Boston College on Sept. 23 and BYU over TCU in Fort Worth last Thursday."

Riveting.

So here's a reason baseball is kind of exciting, not that I'm using baseball as the only foil to football. There are plenty. My point is that even the Royals win sometimes. Sure, they only won 62 games this year, but that's still a hell of a lot more upsets than happen in football games. Just sayin...

 
At 8:30 PM, Blogger wekkley said...

Let me just say, for the record, that I was trying to communicate a sense of farce by applying an argument, a consciously BS one, to the rigorously untheorized field of football. Which is to say I'm trying to make fun of myself for being an academic at a football game.

I think we all know what's really going on here: wekk's team is winning, and he's on board; when the football team starts blowing it, and that could be pretty soon, wekk's likely to check out of football.

Anyway, give me a shout over the email and I'll tell you my new findings on our friend, the K-Unit (hint: it's good news for people who like good news).

 

Post a Comment

<< Home