GB-Det game brings up interesting ethical question

[aikemirv]

It's classical philosophy vs post modern philosophy.

It's not objective. It's agreed upon and consensual reality. In one culture our pain isn't their pain. Our love isn't their love. Our ethics isn't their ethics. It changes dependent on agreed upon things and conditioning.

Yes in the NFL ethics this is wrong. But that's still subjective ethics. Subject to the culture of the NFL and I guess the wider American culture.

So are you telling me that cannabilism is ok in the societies that deem it so?

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

So let me ask if playing for a tie is unethical is holding out starters unethical? Cowboys have the #1 seed in hand but is sitting key players unethical if the object is to win

LOL way to be a deconstructionist on a cowboys forum. Props. All this is very subjective.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

So are you telling me that cannabilism is ok in the societies that deem it so?

It's ok to them. Not to me. I'm not in that culture so I wasn't groomed that way.

But if u really want to get down to it. An organism always lives off another organism In the end. Something is ALWAYS feeding off of something else for energy in biology.

 

[perrykemp]

If it goes to overtime, expect to see both teams start punting the ball back and forth to each other. Or maybe, you would see one team try to run the clock out, then punt and the other team try to run the clock out. The possibilities are endless...

Now if the game got into overtime legitimately... I wouldn't be surprising at all for both teams to completely clam up and punt themselves into the playoffs.

That wouldn't be unethical would it?

 

[perrykemp]

Yeah because I'm sure either team would be thrilled with their division rival making it to the playoffs.

I honestly don't think most Packer fans care one way or another about the Detroit and the is very little hatred. I know a bunch of Packer fans who consider the Lions their 2nd favorite team.

I just think it's a different division that the NFC East where there is bitter hatred. The Packers have basically dominated that division for 25 years.

 

[aikemirv]

It's ok to them. Not to me. I'm not in that culture so I wasn't groomed that way.

But if u really want to get down to it. An organism always lives off another organism In the end. Something is ALWAYS feeding off of something else for energy in biology.

Probably not OK for the person getting killed and eaten is it?

 

[Nightman]

So let me ask if playing for a tie is unethical is holding out starters unethical? Cowboys have the #1 seed in hand but is sitting key players unethical if the object is to win

I imagine it is because the backups are still putting forth their best efforts to win the game.....resting a few key players is not the same as conspiring with the opponent to get a desired outcome

 

[FLCowboyFan]

They play Sunday night so they will know whether the skins won or lost. If the skins win, then the loser is out of the playoffs. If that happens, it would be beneficial to both teams to agree beforehand to have a tie game so that both teams would ensure themselves of a playoff berth. Obviously that would raise ethical issues but how is it unethical to do what's in your best interest. So that's the question. Is it ethical to play for a tie if it ensures you make the playoffs. I suppose I come down on the side that it's unethical for teams to agree on anything beforehand but it certainly wouldn't be unethical for either of the teams to make decisions in the game or at the end that would lead to the tie. If it's tied with 2 minutes to go in overtime, a team could run out the clock instead of risking a turnover and losing. I would be fine with that.

Isn't it a win or tie and you are in for each team? If so why would they want a division rival in the playoffs? I would think that each team would want to win and knock out the other team.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Now if the game got into overtime legitimately... I wouldn't be surprising at all for both teams to completely clam up and punt themselves into the playoffs.

That wouldn't be unethical would it?

Would it?

9 minutes left in overtime, Packers with the ball on their own 25. 3 timeouts, plenty of time to "ethically" try to win the game. They look at the clock and say, "well we certainly don't care if we win or tie, let's burn clock with up the gut, both hands on football runs."
The Lions also look at the clock and say, "well as long as they don't care about scoring...". Eventually they are "stopped" though, and they punt to the Lions with about 3 minutes left in their own territory. Now the Lions look at the clock and score and say, "well, we're deep on our own end, don't want to make a mistake... let's burn clock." The Packers then say, "well as long as they don't care about scoring..."

This wouldn't be some staged mockery of football, but is this collusion?

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

Probably not OK for the person getting killed and eaten is it?

Nope. But that's subjective to that person lol. Not a grand law beyond us.

 

[perrykemp]

Would it?

9 minutes left in overtime, Packers with the ball on their own 25. 3 timeouts, plenty of time to "ethically" try to win the game. They look at the clock and say, "well we certainly don't care if we win or tie, let's burn clock with up the gut, both hands on football runs."
The Lions also look at the clock and say, "well as long as they don't care about scoring...". Eventually they are "stopped" though, and they punt to the Lions with about 3 minutes left in their own territory. Now the Lions look at the clock and score and say, "well, we're deep on our own end, don't want to make a mistake... let's burn clock." The Packers then say, "well as long as they don't care about scoring..."

This wouldn't be some staged mockery of football, but is this collusion?

That scenario would be collusion.

I guess what I am point to is I could see both team becoming unbelievably conservative in overtime if the outcome of a tie is both teams go the playoffs.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

I imagine it is because the backups are still putting forth their best efforts to win the game.....resting a few key players is not the same as conspiring with the opponent to get a desired outcome

Agreed. But the hierarchy that you have Implied is consensual. Right now it's not the same. But things change in football and in culture. Not saying this will eventually (u never know) but at one time suplexing a running back or a qb was not unnecessary roughness.

 

[aikemirv]

Nope. But that's subjective to that person lol. Not a grand law beyond us.

What if there is and you choose to ignore it?

 

[perrykemp]

Agreed. But the hierarchy that you have Implied is consensual. Right now it's not the same. But things change in football and in culture. Not saying this will eventually (u never know) but at one time suplexing a running back or a qb was not unnecessary roughness.

You are pushing my mental limits introducing philosophy into a football discussion.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

That scenario would be collusion.

I guess what I am point to is I could see both team becoming unbelievably conservative in overtime if the outcome of a tie is both teams go the playoffs.

It would also be extremely hard to prove. It would be one thing to have the two coaches shake hands before the game on it and then watch two teams play a comically obvious attempt to have the score end in a tie. It's another to question smart in-game decision making and say that it's being coordinated somehow. I would be wary of the NFL stumbling and bumbling in as some kind of ethics cop on the outcome of such a game.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

What if there is and you choose to ignore it?

Feeling wise I abide by a code. But in logic (head wise)... after all that's what we all use in discussions on here and in the wider culture (some less than others lol) I understand subjectivity vs objectivity. Or at least I'm aware of it.

If there is a universal law religion or theology can't objectify it with logic. No one has been able to.

There is always a logic to counter and tear it to shreds.

On the other hand rationalism can be a crutch.

A push from the left is a pull from the right.

 

[Doomsday101]

I imagine it is because the backups are still putting forth their best efforts to win the game.....resting a few key players is not the same as conspiring with the opponent to get a desired outcome

If the team was playing to win they would put their best out there.

 

[Nightman]

Agreed. But the hierarchy that you have Implied is consensual. Right now it's not the same. But things change in football and in culture. Not saying this will eventually (u never know) but at one time suplexing a running back or a qb was not unnecessary roughness.

What if WAS and GB conspired to trade GB 3 first round picks if they lost the game on purpose

WAS gets the playoffs and GB gets a brighter future......... it is not subjective...it is unethical

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

You are pushing my mental limits introducing philosophy into a football discussion.

The OP started it by mentioning ethics. Lol

Can of worms.

 

[Nightman]

If the team was playing to win they would put their best out there.

not even the same ballpark