The NFL already settled a legal dispute with Colin Kaepernick but out of the blue, they offered him a chance to audition for teams that might need a quarterback. The catch was some legal speak and the NFL a chance to avoid future harm from the blacklisting of a talented quarterback.
Kaepernick had all the talent in the world and he had a lot of success on the field, but he took it upon himself to speak up about a social issue he felt strongly about it so he took a knee during the national anthem. The NFL thanked him for making a statement and gave him the boot.
It is hard to believe that there isn't a team in the NFL that can't use a quarterback like Kaepernick, but he hasn't played since 2016.
The last couple of years have had a lot of excuses come from the NFL teams that needed quarterbacks, but didn't bother to give Kaepernick a chance.
Public relations is important in the NFL, and nothing is frowned upon like not totting the company line. The game is slowly becoming a joke where they can't afford a public relations hit and the fallout from angry fans, so they silenced him in the way that was so criminal they gave him hush money.
The latest publicity stunt by the NFL made for good fonder on the airwaves but it also showed how much the NFL really doesn't care about admitting they were wrong for blacklisting Kaepernick.
Yes, Kaepernick could have signed the NFL waiver, but he decided against it because he seemed to believe the NFL teams were serious about signing him.
If you look at the NFL and their record on race, well, it isn't especially stunning, but the NFL has the ability to do a lot of horrible things and still have fans.
Kaepernick might not get another chance, and the NFL will never suffer for getting rid of a talented quarterback because they really don't care about social issues because social issues get in the way of profits.
Thursday, November 21, 2019
Saturday, November 16, 2019
The Hate You Give
The literary world is a fantasy land filled with egotistical writers and elitist thoughts. It appears these enlighten minds are bulling a young woman to the point that she got rid of her Twitter and Facebook account because of all the hateful comments she was receiving.
The days of reading classics in college and pushing yourself are now over because of the cultural psychology of the pampered babies that rule the world of college academics think you should read simple books written by simple authors. A young adult novel shouldn't be required reading on any college list because a college student should be reading more advanced novels.
The educational system is going backward and this is the latest example. Poor Sarah Dessen can't take a little criticism, even when it is taken out of context. Apparently, she feels that a college student should dumb themselves down to read her books because it involves a cliche of a girl suffering. Students should be reading her books in high school or grade school and not in college.
But thanks to the liberal bully movement, Dessen can unleash the Moral PC Police that hasn't got past the kindergarten way of participation awards and hasn't found the ability to do any critical thinking because they went psycho over the simple quote.
Our educational system pushes the idea of free speech, but as soon as someone's feelings get hurt, well, people freak out and babble incoherently. As adults, which most college students claim to be, they should already be socially aware and be able to accept opposing thoughts.
The sad part of this story is that the best selling author can use a platform to whine and unleash so much hate and feel justified in it because her feelings were hurt. It just boils down to the fact she wants to sell more books, or she would make it free for these college students that are being denied the greatest literary mind of the 21st Century.
"Authors are real people," Sarah Dessen is quoted saying. Real people know that her response to the quote seems strange considering it was a committee of people that voted on the books and that in a democracy people get involved because they feel passionate about things they believe in and want to see things get done.
What will be on next year's reading list? I suggest "Llama, Llama and the Bully Goat" for the list. If you are going to make college freshmen read children's books, well, why not make it a picture book too.
Sunday, October 20, 2019
Free to Speak Your Mind
The NFL is a dictatorship where owners picked a stooge that enforces rules that make no
sense. A player or coach calls out the officials for blowing the call and they get fined by the stooge in a three-piece suit. Clay Mathews is the latest player to get fined for telling the truth and that truth is that the officials make too many bad calls in games and there is no way to change the bad call.
The officiating in the NFL has always been on the borderline of amateurish and useless. This year the media seems to be gun-ho on promoting news stories that highlight the horrible officiating. The stories are years in the making.
It was just last year that the NFL decided it was going to enforce the roughing the quarterback rule that it didn't enforce in past years because too many quarterbacks were getting hurt. That went over so well that after a few games last year that they stopped calling it and it got to the point that at the end of the season it seemed like nothing was being called when it came to roughing the quarterback.
This year's gaffe is the desire to replay pass interference. The idea seems like the right thing to do because it is an important part of the game. The receiver pushes off and makes a great catch or a defender interferes and the official doesn't make the call, well, good news for everyone because the play can be replayed and the error corrected. Too bad that isn't the case, not even close. This year's games are full of examples of textbook pass interference that don't get overturned.
The hope with replaying pass interference is to avoid the blunder from last year's NFC's championship game that had a play that looked like pass interference but it was never called, so the NFL did what it is always done and that is it changed the rules to avoid the public relations nightmare that comes from hiring bumbling officials that can't keep up with the speed of the game.
The game is so fast and there are so many no calls or games where the refs only seem to make calls when a team is close to scoring. The Cowboys got walked down the field last weekend with the aid of the officials, but when the defensive player tackled Jason Witten before the ball was thrown on the two-point conversion attempt, well, the hankies didn't fly.
Whatever you do, please, don't question the poor officiating because the NFL won't do anything to change it. The fact is they don't care if their product is questionable and becoming a waste of time because they continue to hire officials fresh from the local senior center in town. Sure, it is age discrimination to say the officials are too old to be on the field, but the players move so fast that it is wrong to put officials on the field that can't run. These older officials should be in the booth offering assistance from up above to avoid some of these bad calls being made by old officials not being in a position to make the correct call.
It is unrealistic to get rid of all the bad calls, but at this pace, the game will look more like a professional wrestling match than an NFL game.
But don't speak ill of the NFL because it is going to cost you a little bit of money. The truth is never free when it comes to the NFL.
sense. A player or coach calls out the officials for blowing the call and they get fined by the stooge in a three-piece suit. Clay Mathews is the latest player to get fined for telling the truth and that truth is that the officials make too many bad calls in games and there is no way to change the bad call.
The officiating in the NFL has always been on the borderline of amateurish and useless. This year the media seems to be gun-ho on promoting news stories that highlight the horrible officiating. The stories are years in the making.
It was just last year that the NFL decided it was going to enforce the roughing the quarterback rule that it didn't enforce in past years because too many quarterbacks were getting hurt. That went over so well that after a few games last year that they stopped calling it and it got to the point that at the end of the season it seemed like nothing was being called when it came to roughing the quarterback.
This year's gaffe is the desire to replay pass interference. The idea seems like the right thing to do because it is an important part of the game. The receiver pushes off and makes a great catch or a defender interferes and the official doesn't make the call, well, good news for everyone because the play can be replayed and the error corrected. Too bad that isn't the case, not even close. This year's games are full of examples of textbook pass interference that don't get overturned.
The hope with replaying pass interference is to avoid the blunder from last year's NFC's championship game that had a play that looked like pass interference but it was never called, so the NFL did what it is always done and that is it changed the rules to avoid the public relations nightmare that comes from hiring bumbling officials that can't keep up with the speed of the game.
The game is so fast and there are so many no calls or games where the refs only seem to make calls when a team is close to scoring. The Cowboys got walked down the field last weekend with the aid of the officials, but when the defensive player tackled Jason Witten before the ball was thrown on the two-point conversion attempt, well, the hankies didn't fly.
Whatever you do, please, don't question the poor officiating because the NFL won't do anything to change it. The fact is they don't care if their product is questionable and becoming a waste of time because they continue to hire officials fresh from the local senior center in town. Sure, it is age discrimination to say the officials are too old to be on the field, but the players move so fast that it is wrong to put officials on the field that can't run. These older officials should be in the booth offering assistance from up above to avoid some of these bad calls being made by old officials not being in a position to make the correct call.
It is unrealistic to get rid of all the bad calls, but at this pace, the game will look more like a professional wrestling match than an NFL game.
But don't speak ill of the NFL because it is going to cost you a little bit of money. The truth is never free when it comes to the NFL.
Sunday, August 25, 2019
Booing Colts Fans
Andrew Luck surprised everyone when he retired. He had enough. If you never played football and if you never played at the professional level, well, you don't know what it takes to win and the pressures that come with. You will not wake in the morning and struggle to move. You will never know the pains of dealing with the crowd that boo and cheer you.
Andrew Luck, he got booed by fans that thought the star quarterback owes them something. The sore losers have the right to their opinion, but the fact is these fans were never good enough to make it to the professional level and they appear to feel they are owed something from their 29-year-old quarterback.
Why does Andrew Luck owe the fans anyway? He doesn't train his body to play for them. He plays football for himself. Yes, football is a team sport, but an elite athlete makes any team better and Luck was that kind of athlete. The fans know their chances of winning are greatly reduced because of the sudden decision, but that is the reality of life, and that is something the Colts' fans that booed Luck don't get. A star quarterback is human and gets sick of playing a kids game.
Luck did the right thing and walked away. Colts fans may disagree with him, but they aren't the ones getting hit by angry defenders. They won't be picking themselves off the ground after taking vicious hits. They won't be icing their bodies after the game, and they won't be watching hours of game film to get ready for their next weeks opponent.
I do feel the NFL should worry about stars walking away from the game because there is an increasing number of them doing so in the last couple of years. These men are smart enough to know that their bodies can't take the beating of the game.
I hope Andrew Luck the best, and want to thank him for all the times I was able to see his talent shine on the football field. I am not a Colts fan, but I am a fan of good quarterback play. Luck will be missed, but he will have time to heal his body and live the life he wants.
Andrew Luck, he got booed by fans that thought the star quarterback owes them something. The sore losers have the right to their opinion, but the fact is these fans were never good enough to make it to the professional level and they appear to feel they are owed something from their 29-year-old quarterback.
Why does Andrew Luck owe the fans anyway? He doesn't train his body to play for them. He plays football for himself. Yes, football is a team sport, but an elite athlete makes any team better and Luck was that kind of athlete. The fans know their chances of winning are greatly reduced because of the sudden decision, but that is the reality of life, and that is something the Colts' fans that booed Luck don't get. A star quarterback is human and gets sick of playing a kids game.
Luck did the right thing and walked away. Colts fans may disagree with him, but they aren't the ones getting hit by angry defenders. They won't be picking themselves off the ground after taking vicious hits. They won't be icing their bodies after the game, and they won't be watching hours of game film to get ready for their next weeks opponent.
I do feel the NFL should worry about stars walking away from the game because there is an increasing number of them doing so in the last couple of years. These men are smart enough to know that their bodies can't take the beating of the game.
I hope Andrew Luck the best, and want to thank him for all the times I was able to see his talent shine on the football field. I am not a Colts fan, but I am a fan of good quarterback play. Luck will be missed, but he will have time to heal his body and live the life he wants.
Monday, July 22, 2019
Al Franken Has Regrets
Did Al Franken get railroaded? Jane Mayer's article in the New Yorker tells the story of a poor senator that fell victim to the system of the #MeToo movement. He didn't have the political chops of Joe Bidden to laugh it off, or the political charm of Bill Clinton and Donald Trump to come out of the accusations with his political life unharmed.
There is the public Mr. Franken and the private Mr. Franken. Ms. Mayer's article paints a portrait of a man railroaded by the political system. Due process is mentioned in the article, and he wasn't given a fair chance to defend himself against all the accusations that kept being leveled against him. Eight women came forward with stories of their uncomfortable moments with Mr. Franken.
His political colleagues hit the panic button and called for Senator Franken to resign. But why did they do this? Because they are politicians. They only care about their own jobs. They have no moral or ethical backbone, or they wouldn' have sought to see if these accusations were true. The career politicians raised the white flag and tried to wash their hands of the whole thing.
Senator Gillibrand is quoted in the article saying, "We had eight credible allegations, and they had been corroborated, in real-time, by the press corps." This quote alone is scary because she didn't even bother to do her own research and went off of what the press did. Senator Gillibrand seems to put her faith in the wrong institutions.
Al Franken may have been joking around when he posed for the picture. Yes, he wasn't touching Ms. Tweeden, but the photograph appears to make light of a situation. An old man creeping on a young woman and all this taking place while she is sleeping.
Ms. Mayer does her best to discredit Tweeden and offers a nice story about how Tweeden was going to go to Harvard but pursued modeling instead. The great investigative journalist Howard Stern is the one that broke that story and was the only man to publicly attack the claim. He even went so far as to mock Tweeden for making such a claim. The fact Tweeden was on the show seems a slight attack on Tweeden's character too.
Tweeden was a model that posed for men's magazines. This fact claw at the integrity of Ms. Tweeden. If she will take her top off for the camera, well, what else will she do? She does this with quotes from people that defended Al Franken. There are lines about it being a USO show, it is a burlesque show, and there was no way he was touching her through that flak jacket. The truth is that the picture is taken out of context and shows a moment of poor judgment and not an act of a male predator.
Ms. Tweeden is a Republican, and this is mentioned over and over again in the article. She accepted the apology from Senator Franken and didn't want him to resign. Ms. Tweeden even wanted an investigation.
The article does make clear that Senator Franken wasn't given a chance to prove his innocence. He did what he thought was right and resigned. But he did it because he didn't have an ally in the senate to support him. His fellow senators jumped ship while trying to burn him at the stake. It is one of the sadder moments in recent political history.
It is ironic that the comedian's story has a twinge of Shakespearean tragedy to it. He called it quits when he should have stood his ground and fought harder. He is the one that called it quits. He could have fought the accusations. He had that option. He didn't fight and now he is sad, but maybe that is the problem with being an outsider and not a career politician. He truly viewed these career politicians as his friends and equals and thus the Shakespeare knife is stuck further in the former senator's back.
There is the public Mr. Franken and the private Mr. Franken. Ms. Mayer's article paints a portrait of a man railroaded by the political system. Due process is mentioned in the article, and he wasn't given a fair chance to defend himself against all the accusations that kept being leveled against him. Eight women came forward with stories of their uncomfortable moments with Mr. Franken.
His political colleagues hit the panic button and called for Senator Franken to resign. But why did they do this? Because they are politicians. They only care about their own jobs. They have no moral or ethical backbone, or they wouldn' have sought to see if these accusations were true. The career politicians raised the white flag and tried to wash their hands of the whole thing.
Senator Gillibrand is quoted in the article saying, "We had eight credible allegations, and they had been corroborated, in real-time, by the press corps." This quote alone is scary because she didn't even bother to do her own research and went off of what the press did. Senator Gillibrand seems to put her faith in the wrong institutions.
Al Franken may have been joking around when he posed for the picture. Yes, he wasn't touching Ms. Tweeden, but the photograph appears to make light of a situation. An old man creeping on a young woman and all this taking place while she is sleeping.
Ms. Mayer does her best to discredit Tweeden and offers a nice story about how Tweeden was going to go to Harvard but pursued modeling instead. The great investigative journalist Howard Stern is the one that broke that story and was the only man to publicly attack the claim. He even went so far as to mock Tweeden for making such a claim. The fact Tweeden was on the show seems a slight attack on Tweeden's character too.
Tweeden was a model that posed for men's magazines. This fact claw at the integrity of Ms. Tweeden. If she will take her top off for the camera, well, what else will she do? She does this with quotes from people that defended Al Franken. There are lines about it being a USO show, it is a burlesque show, and there was no way he was touching her through that flak jacket. The truth is that the picture is taken out of context and shows a moment of poor judgment and not an act of a male predator.
Ms. Tweeden is a Republican, and this is mentioned over and over again in the article. She accepted the apology from Senator Franken and didn't want him to resign. Ms. Tweeden even wanted an investigation.
The article does make clear that Senator Franken wasn't given a chance to prove his innocence. He did what he thought was right and resigned. But he did it because he didn't have an ally in the senate to support him. His fellow senators jumped ship while trying to burn him at the stake. It is one of the sadder moments in recent political history.
It is ironic that the comedian's story has a twinge of Shakespearean tragedy to it. He called it quits when he should have stood his ground and fought harder. He is the one that called it quits. He could have fought the accusations. He had that option. He didn't fight and now he is sad, but maybe that is the problem with being an outsider and not a career politician. He truly viewed these career politicians as his friends and equals and thus the Shakespeare knife is stuck further in the former senator's back.
Sunday, July 7, 2019
Ken Stabler Gets Sacked One More Time
The NFL is using a technicality when it comes to giving Ken Stabler's family money from the concussion settlement.
Yes, Ken Stabler died from colon cancer. He also died after April 22, 2015, so he isn't eligible for money because his death occurred too late for his estate to claim any money because he wasn't diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease before he died.
Legally the NFL is doing what they can to make sure they don't have to pay all the players that suffered head injuries.
The NFL lied about concussions. They are spending more money on advertising to make claims that they are changing the game so the game will be safer, and this money could be used to pay these players now suing the NFL. Players are still getting concussions and retired players are still dealing with the issues caused by repetitive injuries.
Professional football has an inherent risk of head injury. There isn't a helmet made that completely eliminates the risk of head injuries. When that concussion-proof helmet is created, the risk of head injury will be eliminated, but until that day happens every player runs the risk of permanent damage.
Just remember that at one point the NFL used to celebrate hard hits. They embraced the animal side of football and made profits from some of the most vicious tacklers. The NFL released annual videos of the best hits and best tacklers. The apparent marketing value of celebrating hard-hitting football was so good for the bottom line that the NFL did their best to suppress medical information pointing to the damage caused by repetitive head injuries.
These players knew the risk they were taking for quick wealth and fame, or you would hope that they knew that they were putting their health at risk.
Should the NFL pay Ken Stabler's family the money they deserve? Will fans get upset at the fact the NFL is using technicalities to get out of paying the money to a lot of players that deserve it?
Is the NFL sticking it to Ken Stabler again? Stabler didn't get elected to the NFL Hall of Fame until after his death. Sure, Stabler threw more interceptions then touchdown passes, but that is because he finished his career on some really bad teams. Ken Stabler has more fourth-quarter comebacks than Troy Aikman, Terry Bradshaw, and Len Dawson. The NFL didn't wait as long as they did with Stabler when it comes to other quarterbacks with fewer wins and less Super Bowl wins.
Just think about the fact the NFL paid out money to 912 former players, and that is out of 20,540 players that sued the NFL. The numbers are weak, but the NFL is still a business, and the bottom line is the NFL doesn't want to pay the players for the injuries they received from a lifetime of football.
Yes, Ken Stabler died from colon cancer. He also died after April 22, 2015, so he isn't eligible for money because his death occurred too late for his estate to claim any money because he wasn't diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease before he died.
Legally the NFL is doing what they can to make sure they don't have to pay all the players that suffered head injuries.
The NFL lied about concussions. They are spending more money on advertising to make claims that they are changing the game so the game will be safer, and this money could be used to pay these players now suing the NFL. Players are still getting concussions and retired players are still dealing with the issues caused by repetitive injuries.
Professional football has an inherent risk of head injury. There isn't a helmet made that completely eliminates the risk of head injuries. When that concussion-proof helmet is created, the risk of head injury will be eliminated, but until that day happens every player runs the risk of permanent damage.
Just remember that at one point the NFL used to celebrate hard hits. They embraced the animal side of football and made profits from some of the most vicious tacklers. The NFL released annual videos of the best hits and best tacklers. The apparent marketing value of celebrating hard-hitting football was so good for the bottom line that the NFL did their best to suppress medical information pointing to the damage caused by repetitive head injuries.
These players knew the risk they were taking for quick wealth and fame, or you would hope that they knew that they were putting their health at risk.
Should the NFL pay Ken Stabler's family the money they deserve? Will fans get upset at the fact the NFL is using technicalities to get out of paying the money to a lot of players that deserve it?
Is the NFL sticking it to Ken Stabler again? Stabler didn't get elected to the NFL Hall of Fame until after his death. Sure, Stabler threw more interceptions then touchdown passes, but that is because he finished his career on some really bad teams. Ken Stabler has more fourth-quarter comebacks than Troy Aikman, Terry Bradshaw, and Len Dawson. The NFL didn't wait as long as they did with Stabler when it comes to other quarterbacks with fewer wins and less Super Bowl wins.
Just think about the fact the NFL paid out money to 912 former players, and that is out of 20,540 players that sued the NFL. The numbers are weak, but the NFL is still a business, and the bottom line is the NFL doesn't want to pay the players for the injuries they received from a lifetime of football.
Thursday, July 4, 2019
The End of Mad Magazine
"Not only do I not know what is going on, I wouldn't know what to do about it if I did." George Carlin
Say it ain't so.
It is hard to believe that Mad Magazine announced it is going to cease production the way we have come to know it. They will still produce books and special collections, so maybe that isn't too bad. The old content is all the funny stuff anyway.
What does this mean for people searching for humor?
Well, the magazine will still be available at comic book stores and to subscribers.
Mad magazine is owned by DC, and DC is owned by Time Warner. The truth is the magazine really hasn't been as relevant and funny as it once was, so declining sales and the reality of young people not buying magazines means the end of an era.
Maybe it is just a sad truth that magazines are just like any other business in the way that they have a life cycle and that Mad magazine couldn't find a way out of the decline cycle. As readership shrinks, and advertisers chase new ways and places to advertise in the age of Facebook and other social media, print magazines just aren't a safe place for advertisers to spend money.
If you look at Mad and the content, yes it is still funny, but the time it takes to produce and reach the end user is too long in today's age of instant gratification. The movie spoofs don't have the appeal that they had two generations ago because the movie is already streaming by the time Mad spoofs it, or so it seems. There are other parts of the magazine that were replaced with comic strips, and the direction of the magazine seems lost at times.
The culture of political correctness also harmed the magazine. The 1990s were rife with political correctness and the stench only got bigger. The readership continued to shrink in the 1990s as the magazine struggled to stay relevant in the age of the internet boom.
Yes, it is easy to point fingers, but the magazine that once pushed boundaries now pulls the doors closed. It seems we lost our appetite for humor that pushed the boundaries of political correctness and humor that required the ability to read and understand satire.
The magazine as we know it is gone, but what is going to replace it?
Say it ain't so.
It is hard to believe that Mad Magazine announced it is going to cease production the way we have come to know it. They will still produce books and special collections, so maybe that isn't too bad. The old content is all the funny stuff anyway.
What does this mean for people searching for humor?
Well, the magazine will still be available at comic book stores and to subscribers.
Mad magazine is owned by DC, and DC is owned by Time Warner. The truth is the magazine really hasn't been as relevant and funny as it once was, so declining sales and the reality of young people not buying magazines means the end of an era.
Maybe it is just a sad truth that magazines are just like any other business in the way that they have a life cycle and that Mad magazine couldn't find a way out of the decline cycle. As readership shrinks, and advertisers chase new ways and places to advertise in the age of Facebook and other social media, print magazines just aren't a safe place for advertisers to spend money.
If you look at Mad and the content, yes it is still funny, but the time it takes to produce and reach the end user is too long in today's age of instant gratification. The movie spoofs don't have the appeal that they had two generations ago because the movie is already streaming by the time Mad spoofs it, or so it seems. There are other parts of the magazine that were replaced with comic strips, and the direction of the magazine seems lost at times.
The culture of political correctness also harmed the magazine. The 1990s were rife with political correctness and the stench only got bigger. The readership continued to shrink in the 1990s as the magazine struggled to stay relevant in the age of the internet boom.
Yes, it is easy to point fingers, but the magazine that once pushed boundaries now pulls the doors closed. It seems we lost our appetite for humor that pushed the boundaries of political correctness and humor that required the ability to read and understand satire.
The magazine as we know it is gone, but what is going to replace it?
Sunday, May 26, 2019
Exercise Hurts?
Why do we tend to avoid exercise?
If you exercise on a regular basis, you probably are scoffing at the idea that the average person avoids exercise. But the reality is that most people have a good reason for avoiding exercise and that is because exercise is painful and time-consuming. Just think about how the average American only takes off 16 days in a year, so making time to exercise means taking time away from work and other activities.
But the question has more to do with why we avoid exercise if you avoid exercise?
There is some interesting research that points to how we talk to ourselves lead to us avoiding exercise. Experiential avoidance is the idea that we avoid things that are negative in our lives.
Exercise is good for us, but with the good, there comes the pain of getting the results you want. It isn't easy to lose weight, it isn't easy to run up a big hill, and it isn't easy to find time to exercise.
The other problem with exercise is that there isn't always the results that are expected from the activity. I say this because you look at a fitness magazine and see pictures of people that exercise and they are insanely skinny and toned. These false images portray an ideal that is based on people that exercise and diet at levels that aren't disclosed.
Can you suppress the negative thoughts to force yourself to exercise? You can and you will if you want to get to the finish line in your first 5K or whatever goal you set for yourself.
There are plenty of reasons for not exercising, but if you make irrational excuses, well, maybe then it is time to take a look for ways to motivate yourself to look at exercise in a way that will benefit your life.
If you exercise on a regular basis, you probably are scoffing at the idea that the average person avoids exercise. But the reality is that most people have a good reason for avoiding exercise and that is because exercise is painful and time-consuming. Just think about how the average American only takes off 16 days in a year, so making time to exercise means taking time away from work and other activities.
But the question has more to do with why we avoid exercise if you avoid exercise?
There is some interesting research that points to how we talk to ourselves lead to us avoiding exercise. Experiential avoidance is the idea that we avoid things that are negative in our lives.
Exercise is good for us, but with the good, there comes the pain of getting the results you want. It isn't easy to lose weight, it isn't easy to run up a big hill, and it isn't easy to find time to exercise.
The other problem with exercise is that there isn't always the results that are expected from the activity. I say this because you look at a fitness magazine and see pictures of people that exercise and they are insanely skinny and toned. These false images portray an ideal that is based on people that exercise and diet at levels that aren't disclosed.
Can you suppress the negative thoughts to force yourself to exercise? You can and you will if you want to get to the finish line in your first 5K or whatever goal you set for yourself.
There are plenty of reasons for not exercising, but if you make irrational excuses, well, maybe then it is time to take a look for ways to motivate yourself to look at exercise in a way that will benefit your life.
Sunday, February 3, 2019
The Hall of Fame
It is that time of year. It is award season. It is that time of year where no talent hacks get to pick who gets into the Baseball Hall of Fame.
The Baseball Hall of Fame seems to vote for certain kinds of players. The gamblers and players that used sports enhancement are shunned like lepers. Don't forget that these modern-day lepers were once loved by an industry that wrote about the heroics of these lepers.
Is it wrong to cheat and gamble? Yes. It is hard to argue that is it okay. But what is defined as cheating at one point was considered acceptable. MLB didn't ban steroid until 1991 and didn't test for it until 2003.
These self-righteous gatekeepers in baseball didn't raise a fuss when players started hitting more home runs. There were a few reporters that investigated these players, but for the most part, the press let the players create news stories for them. Once the public knew these guys cheated, well, that is when these reporters turned their backs on the players.
Baseball has a hard time forgiving players for making human mistakes. The integrity of the game seems to be the only thing that matters. Baseball doesn't hold their ownership and umpires to the same standards they hold their players to when it comes to making the right choices. A bad call from an umpire influences the integrity of the game too. Ownership didn't cry about these cheating players making millions and billions of dollars for them.
Baseball likes their players without sin.
There are some great players that will never be in the Baseball Hall of Fame because of poor moral judgment but their team wins and other team accomplishments aren't take away. That is an odd fact. You celebrate these so-called cheaters victories but deny them the right to be remembered as great achievers because they are tied to gambling and enhancement drugs.
The NFL seems to be able to overlook the flaws of players and see the stars failed at some moral judgments but the players' careers were full of great play.
Maybe someday someone will start a Baseball Hall of Fame that is voted on by just the fans. Because the fans seem to understand the players are human too. The fans know their heroes aren't perfect and they aren't petty hacks looking to stick it to players that they feel did a disservice to the game of baseball.
Baseball and football are team sports where we celebrate individual achievements. Put some of these star players on bad teams and they will give you average results. That is a fact. We want to celebrate the individual but forget that they needed a team around them to make them great. Sure, there are a few players that played well on bad teams, but there aren't a lot of them. We seem to remember the great players that played on great teams.
Roger Clemens was asked about not getting in the Baseball Hall of Fame and he just gave his teammates credit for his great results.
The Baseball Hall of Fame seems to vote for certain kinds of players. The gamblers and players that used sports enhancement are shunned like lepers. Don't forget that these modern-day lepers were once loved by an industry that wrote about the heroics of these lepers.
Is it wrong to cheat and gamble? Yes. It is hard to argue that is it okay. But what is defined as cheating at one point was considered acceptable. MLB didn't ban steroid until 1991 and didn't test for it until 2003.
These self-righteous gatekeepers in baseball didn't raise a fuss when players started hitting more home runs. There were a few reporters that investigated these players, but for the most part, the press let the players create news stories for them. Once the public knew these guys cheated, well, that is when these reporters turned their backs on the players.
Baseball has a hard time forgiving players for making human mistakes. The integrity of the game seems to be the only thing that matters. Baseball doesn't hold their ownership and umpires to the same standards they hold their players to when it comes to making the right choices. A bad call from an umpire influences the integrity of the game too. Ownership didn't cry about these cheating players making millions and billions of dollars for them.
Baseball likes their players without sin.
There are some great players that will never be in the Baseball Hall of Fame because of poor moral judgment but their team wins and other team accomplishments aren't take away. That is an odd fact. You celebrate these so-called cheaters victories but deny them the right to be remembered as great achievers because they are tied to gambling and enhancement drugs.
The NFL seems to be able to overlook the flaws of players and see the stars failed at some moral judgments but the players' careers were full of great play.
Maybe someday someone will start a Baseball Hall of Fame that is voted on by just the fans. Because the fans seem to understand the players are human too. The fans know their heroes aren't perfect and they aren't petty hacks looking to stick it to players that they feel did a disservice to the game of baseball.
Baseball and football are team sports where we celebrate individual achievements. Put some of these star players on bad teams and they will give you average results. That is a fact. We want to celebrate the individual but forget that they needed a team around them to make them great. Sure, there are a few players that played well on bad teams, but there aren't a lot of them. We seem to remember the great players that played on great teams.
Roger Clemens was asked about not getting in the Baseball Hall of Fame and he just gave his teammates credit for his great results.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)