After reading the article London Calling, I have many thoughts about the possibility of the NFL moving to London. I have three main thoughts: NFL would be hurting players in order to make more money, there are too many scheduling issues, and it wouldn't insure that the move to London would be profitable.
In the article, Bill Barnwell, explains the negative implications of traveling to another country. One of his main points is the fact that by moving to London, we would be taking a negative tole on the players' bodies. He explains that the flight to London, is lengthy and players would have to adjust to a different time zone. The fact that players would have to fly out to London, and then immediately fly back to the states would cause players to be extremely jet lagged. I agree with Barnwell's claims. I couldn't imagine flying to another country for just a few days, and then returning home immediately. There is no way, that I would not be jet lagged. Crossing over the ocean and into different time zones, would most likely mess up the sleep schedules for athletes. There is discussion of making a satellite location to where the London team could practice at in the states. My question is, why have a satellite program if you have facilities in the US? It makes me wonder, if London is the best location.
Barnewell also brings up the issues of scheduling. Toward the end of his article, he discusses how the NFL would have to make specific changes to a teams scheduling in London. There would be an issue of right after having a team go to London, they would have a by-game. This would be really unfair to the teams that have to travel to London early in their season because they would have to play consecutive games for the rest of the season. The fact that it could also be unfair for the London team because they would try to schedule away games in bulk and then home games in bulk, in order to decrease travel expenses. I agree that these changes would affect the athletes directly. I could also see how fans could be affected by that. The inconsistency of when there would be home games and away games could make some fans unhappy.
Lastly Barnwell also brings up the issue that we can't be positive that through globalizing the NFL, if it would be profitable. He claims in his article that even though stadiums get filled when NFL teams travel to London once in a while, we can't be sure that Europeans would be willing to spend excess amounts of money to watch a team. In the article he quotes a fan saying that, "it was a no brainer to travel...". Barnwell doubts that europeans would be likely to spend hundreds of euros more than once a season in order to travel and watch the NFL play in London. He also brings up the point that most europeans are fans of the NFL and not a specific team. This also plays into, that once we bring a team over to London, it is unpredictable what the fan basis would be. I definitely agree with him. Here in America, we learned that we idolize our specific regional/state teams, and if London's fans don't connect with the American players, what would happen? Also, would the NFL open up the team to europeans or would it strictly be Americans on the London football team?
Overall, I think that by Globalizing the NFL would take a negative toll on the players and the organization itself. I believe that because American Society takes a very unique role around sports, it is impossible for us to judge if it would be successful in London. I believe that the negative implications far outweigh the good of this situation. Ultimately, sports are changing and it is unpredictable to know what will happen; however, we as americans, must not forget about where sport has originated from. Do we want to ignore the sport itself in order to make more money?
References:
London Calling: Bill Barnwell
Thursday, January 30, 2014
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Sociogenesis of Lacrosse
While I never participated in an organized or competitive lacrosse team, I always have had a passion for watching and playing with my family or friends. Lacrosse always interested me, I was never really familiar with the background behind the sport or the rules. Through research I have found answers to a few questions that I had regarding the sport.
Lacrosse was a sport that was predominantly popular with Native Americans. Much like Coakley talked about sporting events in Ancient Rome and Greece, lacrosse was played at traditional Native American games. These games were major events and would last for a few days. Lacrosse had both religious and recreational purposes. More importantly it was used in order to prepare young native americans for war. While there is no specific date of when Lacrosse began, the first non Native American's began playing it in the mid-ninteenth century.
After colonization began in America, we learn that Lacrosse as a sport also spread. It was predominantly played near the Great Lakes and would find its way to at a time being the national sport of Canada.
The name and rules of lacrosse were not given until the early french settlers came to North America. It was at that time where the sport changed from being an event at a traditional Native American festival to a sport that would soon spread. As the sport progressed and became more organized, the equipment changed. They would rid of the traditional wooden balls and now more modernly use plastic balls.
Presently, while Lacrosse's is becoming more and more predominant at the youth, high school, collegiate, and professional level, it is important to understand where the sport began and how it has changed. It makes me think, that if traditional Native Americans used lacrosse as a tool in order to prepare for battle or religious purposes, what purpose does it serve in the United States? Is it now just a means for entertainment. If so, does that carry any implications or show any disrespect to any native americans that are still present in North America?
References:
Coakley
http://filacrosse.com/origin/
http://www.uslacrosse.org/about-the-sport/history.aspx
Presently, while Lacrosse's is becoming more and more predominant at the youth, high school, collegiate, and professional level, it is important to understand where the sport began and how it has changed. It makes me think, that if traditional Native Americans used lacrosse as a tool in order to prepare for battle or religious purposes, what purpose does it serve in the United States? Is it now just a means for entertainment. If so, does that carry any implications or show any disrespect to any native americans that are still present in North America?
References:
Coakley
http://filacrosse.com/origin/
http://www.uslacrosse.org/about-the-sport/history.aspx
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Sport in the Ancient World
After reading and understanding more about how sport was in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, it is clear that there has been a development of sport. Through the article by Guttman, Coakley, and various youtube videos, I have learned what types of sports were played in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, the characteristics of these sports, the functions/role of sports in these respective societies, and who the participants in the sports were.
To start, track and field events were very predominant in Ancient Greece. The discus, triple jump, javelin, and sprints are just a few track and field events that were popular then and are still popular now. In Ancient Greece we also learned about how tie breakers were handled, in which they would end up in wrestling matches. While there were very few contact sports in Ancient Greece, we learned that in Ancient Rome, almost all of the sporting events were contact oriented sports. Ancient Rome was definitely more deadly and physical than Ancient Greece. They would engage in fights of Gladiators with weapons and spectators would crave to see these gladiators spill the other opponents blood.
The structure of the sports were laid out very differently. In Ancient Rome, Gladiators fought in an Arena which was open to most of the public. It would allow citizens of Rome able to see the bloody fights that ensue. In comparison, Ancient Greece was set up similar to an ancient olympic games. The sports would be very organized and participants and spectators knew what the expectations were, such as false starts (flogging), misbehaving (beatings), etc. While in Ancient Rome, there were very few rules besides win or die, Ancient Greece was far more formal in the fact that there were specific rules.
The function of sports was very different. In Ancient Greece there was a huge reliance that sports were religious based. According to an article by the Olympic.org, the olympic games were closely linked to the religious festivals of the cult of Zeus. The whole reason for sports was to show respect towards Zeus, and in doing so would allow Zeus' sister to be the only female spectator. The games would serve as entertainment but mostly for religious motives. In Ancient Rome, we see the games as more of an entertainment event. An opportunity for spectators to fall in love with a gladiator and to hate another. The gladiators were also seen as objects of desire from the public. While there was little religious motive for the games in Ancient Rome, it's clear that the sports were organized as a means of entertainment.
In Ancient Rome, we see that the participants of the gladiator fighting sport were gladiators. These gladiators were most likely barbarians or slaves. They were given a very strict diet and forced to maintain a very athletic body. These participants were seen as dispensable because of how there was little need for keeping them around since death was always an outcome. In Ancient Greece, the participants were men and no women were allowed during the main events; however, in the article by Guttman, we learn that women were allowed to compete at a separate game. The participants could be from any ages and would be sorted out so no one had an unfair advantage no matter what age. The winners of their respective sports were seen as desirable as showing the most respect to Zeus and would earn a excess amount of money. Competing in these sports was seen as a profession just as it can be seen today.
Clearly there are some complete differences of ancient sports in comparison to modern sport. We learned about then types of sports that were played, the characteristics, the function/role, and who participated in the sports. I believe that while there are some major differences such as how religious some events were and how death was an almost for sure outcome, there are also some similarities. In modern sports we enforce a strict structure and organization. We also push athletes to maintain the "ideal" body. The biggest similarity I identified was that if you win, you are valued and are important. While there were differences, I found it very interesting that there were some similarities that haven't changed.
References:
Ancient Greece: Youtube videos provided
Ancient Rome: Youtube video provided
Coakley Sports in Society
Guttman
http://www.olympic.org/ancient-olympic-games
To start, track and field events were very predominant in Ancient Greece. The discus, triple jump, javelin, and sprints are just a few track and field events that were popular then and are still popular now. In Ancient Greece we also learned about how tie breakers were handled, in which they would end up in wrestling matches. While there were very few contact sports in Ancient Greece, we learned that in Ancient Rome, almost all of the sporting events were contact oriented sports. Ancient Rome was definitely more deadly and physical than Ancient Greece. They would engage in fights of Gladiators with weapons and spectators would crave to see these gladiators spill the other opponents blood.
The structure of the sports were laid out very differently. In Ancient Rome, Gladiators fought in an Arena which was open to most of the public. It would allow citizens of Rome able to see the bloody fights that ensue. In comparison, Ancient Greece was set up similar to an ancient olympic games. The sports would be very organized and participants and spectators knew what the expectations were, such as false starts (flogging), misbehaving (beatings), etc. While in Ancient Rome, there were very few rules besides win or die, Ancient Greece was far more formal in the fact that there were specific rules.
The function of sports was very different. In Ancient Greece there was a huge reliance that sports were religious based. According to an article by the Olympic.org, the olympic games were closely linked to the religious festivals of the cult of Zeus. The whole reason for sports was to show respect towards Zeus, and in doing so would allow Zeus' sister to be the only female spectator. The games would serve as entertainment but mostly for religious motives. In Ancient Rome, we see the games as more of an entertainment event. An opportunity for spectators to fall in love with a gladiator and to hate another. The gladiators were also seen as objects of desire from the public. While there was little religious motive for the games in Ancient Rome, it's clear that the sports were organized as a means of entertainment.
In Ancient Rome, we see that the participants of the gladiator fighting sport were gladiators. These gladiators were most likely barbarians or slaves. They were given a very strict diet and forced to maintain a very athletic body. These participants were seen as dispensable because of how there was little need for keeping them around since death was always an outcome. In Ancient Greece, the participants were men and no women were allowed during the main events; however, in the article by Guttman, we learn that women were allowed to compete at a separate game. The participants could be from any ages and would be sorted out so no one had an unfair advantage no matter what age. The winners of their respective sports were seen as desirable as showing the most respect to Zeus and would earn a excess amount of money. Competing in these sports was seen as a profession just as it can be seen today.
Clearly there are some complete differences of ancient sports in comparison to modern sport. We learned about then types of sports that were played, the characteristics, the function/role, and who participated in the sports. I believe that while there are some major differences such as how religious some events were and how death was an almost for sure outcome, there are also some similarities. In modern sports we enforce a strict structure and organization. We also push athletes to maintain the "ideal" body. The biggest similarity I identified was that if you win, you are valued and are important. While there were differences, I found it very interesting that there were some similarities that haven't changed.
References:
Ancient Greece: Youtube videos provided
Ancient Rome: Youtube video provided
Coakley Sports in Society
Guttman
http://www.olympic.org/ancient-olympic-games
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Sport, Society & Me
Sports plays a huge role in my life. From when I was little, I was always doing something sports related; whether that was going to the Nuggets game with my family, participating in martial arts tournaments, volleyball games, or watching my family members play their respective sports. Even to this day, I actively play volleyball and am a competitive volleyball coach. I also just was offered a position at a local sports performance gym to do private volleyball lessons this summer. Needless to say, sports revolves around my life on a daily basis. I think I developed this connection to sports because it is how I grew up. Because of being introduced to sports at such a young age, it is familiar to me, it is an outlet, and it is enjoyable. It is almost a tool for me. I truly believe it is because I was introduced to sports at such a young age.
Scholars may argue that sports play a negative role in society; however, I believe that it plays a positive role. While there are negative effects to having a society that has a focus around sports, I believe that the positives outweigh the negatives. In the US, I believe that sports teaches us fundamental values of commitment, discipline, and staying healthy. I remember when I was little, I wanted to quit doing martial arts after a year of doing it. My parents explained to me, that by me pushing through and never giving up shows a lot of commitment. To this day, I feel like my commitment to school, work, and coaching evolved from being taught at a young age to be committed. Because of the values that I believe sports teaches, I find it very important to our society. While I understand that there are people who might not be athletically talented, unable to play due to physical restraints, or those who have had bad experiences of playing sports, I believe that yet again the pros outweigh the cons. For those people who are unable to play sports, there are always different sports, while you might not be fast enough to play soccer, you could always do golf. If you are short and can't play basketball, you could run cross country. There is a misconception as far as there is a sport for everyone out there. You just have to do the research and test sports out.
In society, I believe that athletes are held to a high standard. To explain, I believe that successful athletes are praised for doing good things and athletes who do bad things (drugs and breaking the law) are seen as bad people and are judged in the media spotlight for those actions. This high standard shows everyone who are positive and negative role models. One example that shows how the media holds athletes to a high standard is baseball player, Alex Rodriguez. "A-rod" was suspended for a numerous amount of games for his involvement in physical enhancement drugs. The media spotlighted this case and shows that if you participate in bad behavior, you will be caught and have negative repercussions. The article by Eitzen explains how there are numerous negative and positives with sports in society. While I understand the points being made, I believe that when Eitzen makes claims about the paradoxes of sports, he fails to mention how some of these paradoxes are highlighted through the media in a negative way. A prime example is this case of Alex Rodriguez.
I believe that sports plays a positive role in society and should continue playing a positive role. While I understand that there are some negative consequences such as the paradoxes listed by Eitzen, I still believe that sports teaches basic fundamentals that are important to our society.
References:
http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/2014/01/alex_rodriguez_deserved_suspension_hall_of_famer_says.html
D. Stanley Eitzen: Fair and Foul Ch. 1
Monday, January 20, 2014
The Sport Ethic
The Sports Ethic by Hughes and Coakley is an article that discusses positive deviance within sports. Sports Ethic is defined as, "when athletes...emphasize the sacrifice for The Game, seeking distinction, taking risks, and challenging limits". In this article Hughes and Coakley discuss how athletes are deviating from norms in a positive way. Hughes and Coakley argue in the article how through sports ethic, athletes within a sport feel the need to show their commitment to a value system that we stress; however, it is not due to the disregard or rejection of cultural/social norms.
In the article Hughes and Coakley refer to four dimensions of sport ethic: being an athlete involves making sacrifices for the game, striving for distinction, accepting risks and playing through pain, and refusing to accept limits in the pursuit of possibilities. In the article Hughes and Coakley explain that athletes are pushed to conform to these boundaries by coaches; however, it is still considered something that is completely voluntary.
They also explain the two conditions that can lead to athletes over conforming to the sport ethic. They explain that athletes who have low self-esteem and those who will sacrifice anything for their achievement are prone to the over conformity. In the article I believe the most important line is: "attempting to change the behavior of such person by helping them learn to conform to social rules and live up to social expectations would only increase their [positive] defiance". With that quote in mind, it makes sense that these individuals that are prone to over conform are also the ones being told to change. Personally I don't understand why there is an issue of over conforming. If someone over conforms to the sports ethic, it only affects the person who is doing the over conforming. According to an article posted by sportsinjuries.org high school athletes alone account for an estimated 2 million injuries a year. With this statistic in mind, I can understand why there might be a concern; however, it shouldn't be an issue to anyone but the athlete and these 2 million injuries could easily be as little as a sprained ankle. Thus, I don't quite understand why there is a concern for the over conformity.
I personally have experienced all four the dimensions of sports ethics. I was taught the sports ethic by my parents and coaches. While they didn't call it the sports ethic, they had certain expectations of me that are very similar to the sports ethic. When I was in martial arts, I had to continue to fight a sparring match with a broken foot; which demonstrates the accepting risks and playing through pain. I also refused to accept the limitations I had when I had knee surgery and continued to play varsity soccer and club volleyball. In addition to those two examples, I have also sacrificed time in school to travel with sports teams, which shows sacrifice. Seeking distinction is difficult for me to relate too. If there is one experience that I believe is closely related to seeking distinction is doing sports that are not as popular as football, basketball, and baseball.
Through this article I have learned what the Sports Ethic is, what the four dimensions are, and also who is prone to over conforming to the sport ethic. As someone who is surrounded by sports on a daily basis, I found this article interesting and helpful in understanding why competitive athletes are the way that they are and what rules some of them live by.
References:
Hughes and Coakley: Sports Ethic
http://www.stopsportsinjuries.org/media/statistics.aspx
In the article Hughes and Coakley refer to four dimensions of sport ethic: being an athlete involves making sacrifices for the game, striving for distinction, accepting risks and playing through pain, and refusing to accept limits in the pursuit of possibilities. In the article Hughes and Coakley explain that athletes are pushed to conform to these boundaries by coaches; however, it is still considered something that is completely voluntary.
They also explain the two conditions that can lead to athletes over conforming to the sport ethic. They explain that athletes who have low self-esteem and those who will sacrifice anything for their achievement are prone to the over conformity. In the article I believe the most important line is: "attempting to change the behavior of such person by helping them learn to conform to social rules and live up to social expectations would only increase their [positive] defiance". With that quote in mind, it makes sense that these individuals that are prone to over conform are also the ones being told to change. Personally I don't understand why there is an issue of over conforming. If someone over conforms to the sports ethic, it only affects the person who is doing the over conforming. According to an article posted by sportsinjuries.org high school athletes alone account for an estimated 2 million injuries a year. With this statistic in mind, I can understand why there might be a concern; however, it shouldn't be an issue to anyone but the athlete and these 2 million injuries could easily be as little as a sprained ankle. Thus, I don't quite understand why there is a concern for the over conformity.
I personally have experienced all four the dimensions of sports ethics. I was taught the sports ethic by my parents and coaches. While they didn't call it the sports ethic, they had certain expectations of me that are very similar to the sports ethic. When I was in martial arts, I had to continue to fight a sparring match with a broken foot; which demonstrates the accepting risks and playing through pain. I also refused to accept the limitations I had when I had knee surgery and continued to play varsity soccer and club volleyball. In addition to those two examples, I have also sacrificed time in school to travel with sports teams, which shows sacrifice. Seeking distinction is difficult for me to relate too. If there is one experience that I believe is closely related to seeking distinction is doing sports that are not as popular as football, basketball, and baseball.
Through this article I have learned what the Sports Ethic is, what the four dimensions are, and also who is prone to over conforming to the sport ethic. As someone who is surrounded by sports on a daily basis, I found this article interesting and helpful in understanding why competitive athletes are the way that they are and what rules some of them live by.
References:
Hughes and Coakley: Sports Ethic
http://www.stopsportsinjuries.org/media/statistics.aspx
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
Sport(s) in the USA
For those of you who have never set foot into the United States or seen any USA sport on television prepare to be amazed about our American Culture around sports. Here in the US, football, and baseball are probably the three most predominant sports. According to CBS Sports: "Football and baseball are the two most popular sports in America. These two sports have some shared characteristics. Two shared characteristics are that men engage in these activities, and these two sports are highly commercialized and can be seen on television. What is amazing about these two sports, are the fan bases behind them. In America, we support our local/state teams. If you are from Denver, there is a giant chance that you support the Denver Broncos and the Colorado Rockies.These are our "home" teams.
Let's take a closer look at the Denver Broncos. On a typical Sunday night in Colorado, most Coloradans are dressed in Bronco apparel and are sporting orange and/or blue. Americans choose to wear sports apparel to not only show support towards a team, but to show their spirit and pride towards a local group of athletes. Lately I have noticed that on social media many people participate in bad mouthing other teams. For example, if the Denver Broncos lost to the New England Patriots there would be some profane name calling and bad mouthing Patriot fans from Broncos fans. This activity has almost been normalized. I see adolescents and adults participating in this across Facebook and Twitter. According to Jay Coakley in Sports in Society, he explains that by looking through a sociological lens, we can see how sports have a culture: "Overtime every team creates a and maintains a particular culture or way of life" (Coakley 4). Being supporters/fans, are in a way part of the team spiritual. In doing so we are part of that teams culture. The American society then has a culture that says it is okay to be rude to the winning team if you lose. While this shows our support for our local teams, this normalizes bad sportsmanship through our sports culture.
Aside from showing support for a team, let's look closer at the athletes on the team. In America we measure success based on how much money you are paid, how popular you are, and sometimes if you are attractive. We see that most professional athletes are paid large amounts of money; however, the popular professional athletes get even more money. In America we believe that popular athletes equates to athletes who are athletically talented. Very rarely is there a lot of attention on a professional athlete who struggles within his/her sport. Ultimately Americans equate success with popularity.
While you may feel that sports in the USA is different from what you are used to, this is how it is America. We are die hard fans who will support popular male professional baseball and football players. I hope after reading this post, you feel more informed about Sports in the USA! Until next time!
References:
Coakley, Jay. Sports in Society. 10th Ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2009. Print.
Coakley, Jay. Sports in Society. 10th Ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2009. Print.
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/21511690/poll-finds-baseball-as-secondmost-popular-american-sport
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)