Rockne's Roundtable

Allen really came across bad, the hosts tried to help him out and clearify but he really meant what he was saying.

What he said was not politically correct but so accurate! Didn't Stonebreaker get a nice DUI?

I can understand what Pinkett is trying to get across or his meaning. But he just worded it badly and it came across really ugly.

This issue goes to the heart of the self-contradictory nature of college football. A game I love like no other. I mention this because one might question if I like football at all given the following remarks. I assure you, though, that I do and am not just an old cynic.

Without directly opining on what Pinkett said, I would just like to clarify that college football is a nasty, brutal game, as is all football. CFB is not as vicious as pro football, but it's only a difference of quantity, not quality.

The tougher your team, the more violent and less socialized your players, the better you are likely to do. Sure, you need smart players, too, but just because a guy is a potential bouncer, boxer or felon does not mean he is stupid. Look at guys like Ditka or Mike Tyson. A little crazy? Yes. But not stupid.

Among many fans, there remains this notion that you can play -- particularly at ND -- a kind of chivalric football, using Marquiss of Queensbury rules and relying on a cast of Jack Armstrong types, intent on good clean fun.

I think that's how we often wish to see it. In truth, we are watching a game that is intentionally violent and, whether you get blindsided by a so-called tough guy like Aarron Lynch or by someone less overtly warlike, the result will be the same.

Nasty is nasty, and there is no more sought after quality on a football team than that. Football is combat, and you want guys who can -- pardon the expression -- knock the snot out of one another. Guys who will block, tackle, throw their heads in there, sacrifice their bodies and not worry about inflicting permanent damage on their brain tissue.

Given that CFB is sponsored by, of all things, universities, the violence aspect of the game must be continually massaged with rallies, new uniforms, TV coverage, new stadiums, media puff pieces, human interest stories, crisp fall weather, marching bands, female reporters, polished coaches, seer-like AD's, QB camps, and the whole pomp and circumstance that is the CFB BUSINESS.

Yes, CFB is in the VIOLENCE BUSINESS for the entertainment and purchasing power of millions upon millions. Whereupon, every now and then, someone -- somewhere within this system that is forever stroking and kidding itself -- unwittingly channels its collective unconscious, releasing, in the process, some taboo.

Let me repeat, I love the game and, for that sin, who knows what I'm in for, but I have no illusions about what is going on here, nor, would I expect, do many of the rest of you. We are complex creatures capable of enjoying what, at other times, we might deplore. We pick our battles and beliefs.

Watching this game is a lot easier than playing it, and those of you who did play, who cannot help but know this, can't tell me that you're not aware of what a lie it can look like from this, the safe side of the TV, as opposed to the mashing that actually takes place.

It is a violent game, and the tougher your players, the better you will do. How colleges sort that out versus their higher purpose is the stuff of fantasy, complicity and All-American PR. Their goal is to santize the violence in football, even as they serve it up. Guys with microphones sometimes forget this. Lose the script. Or just don't care.

I'm not interpreting what actually happened, but merely what sometimes can. Given the nature of football. Given what it actually is.

You're absolutely right, Risk. It's a form of gladiatorial combat, which we've loved for centuries. Nasty is a prerequisite. Criminal is not. They are not synonyms. On the football field, Alan Page was a badass. Off the field, he put criminals in jail. Give me twenty-two Alan Page's and I'll like my chances against twenty-two criminals.

If we're to take Pinkett at his word, then ND needs more Tommy Rees'.

If that's not what he meant, then he needs to figure out how to say it differently. "Nasty" doesn't get arrested. "Dumbass" gets arrested.

That is too funny! and true.
+1 from me, Ham.

I jaywalk on a daily basis, refuse to recycle and never rinse and repeat..........put me in the game coach.

Thanks very much, Lou.

That's high praise coming from a professional such as yourself, whose honesty and commitment to what you do I've always admired.

I'm humbled and just glad to be a part of this board. You guys have done a great job in turning it into nothing less than a good-faith community.

And, of course, it's always fun sparring with you on the endlessly debatable topic of a coach's third year!

IMHO, we definitely don't need criminal, but I don't even think we need nasty. What we do need is twenty-two "warriors" with a single-minded focus and commitment to winning, so much so that it absolutely rips their guts out when they lose. Also need talent, but that's a given. To me, that was always symbolized by the look in Mike Singletary's eyes.