Are Joint Practices Worth the Risk in the NFL?
Introduction:
Joint practices between NFL teams have recently made headlines for all the wrong reasons—fights breaking out on the field. While this kind of behavior is not new to football, the increased attention and coverage of joint practices have turned them into spectacles. In light of these incidents, it’s worth questioning whether joint practices are worth the risk involved.
The History of Joint Practices:
The concept of joint practices dates back to as early as 1902 when Republican Congressman John A. T. Hull voiced his disapproval of them, deeming them “impractical.” Even then, the idea of bringing together regular forces of the United States Army and the National Guard for joint practice operations was met with skepticism. Fast forward to the present, and the sentiment remains the same, albeit in the context of the NFL.
The Recent Incident:
The most recent incident involved a fight between the Detroit Lions and the New York Giants during a summer camp jamboree. The altercation between rookie receiver Malik Nabers and Lions safety Kerby Joseph turned into a series of mini one-on-one fights. While players like Nabers acknowledge that these scuffles are part of the game, the question arises whether they should be tolerated in joint practices.
The Evolution of Joint Practices:
Joint practices have evolved from low-key, under-the-radar sessions to full-scale events covered like regular-season games. With an audience comprising fans, cameras, and reporters, the pressure to perform and stand up for oneself has intensified. Former NFL linebacker Steve DeOssie, who played during the 1980s and 1990s, points out that the presence of fans and media has created a different dynamic, where players feel compelled to respond to perceived provocation.
The NFL’s Response:
In response to the Giants-Lions incident, the NFL fined both teams $200,000, emphasizing that fighting and unprofessional conduct would not be tolerated. While networks may not be overly concerned about these incidents, the league’s stance is justified in ensuring the professionalism and safety of players.
Protecting Players:
Football is a brutal sport, and the NFL has implemented various rules to protect players. However, joint practices introduce additional risks, such as the potential for injuries that could end a player’s season or career. Considering the short shelf life of professional football players, it is essential to prioritize their safety and well-being.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Joint Practices:
Joint practices offer advantages such as increased practice time and opportunities for talent evaluation. Coaches can have more one-on-one interactions with players, leading to improved performance. Additionally, with fewer preseason games, joint practices fill the void. However, the cons, including the risk of injury and fights, cannot be ignored.
Conclusion:
While joint practices provide valuable opportunities for teams and players, the recent incidents of fights highlight the need to reevaluate their worth. The NFL must strike a balance between improving performance and protecting players. Perhaps limiting or rethinking joint practices could reduce the chances of injury and maintain the integrity of the game. As Allen Iverson famously said, “We’re talking about practice,” and it’s time to consider whether joint practices truly serve the best interests of the players and the sport.