Homecoming Queen: With Brady Rule, Should NFL Allow Women to Play Quarterback?

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
Homecoming Queen: With Brady Rule, Should NFL Allow Women to Play Quarterback?

I have wondered something about The Brady Rule.  Since it almost all but negates the ability of a defense to pressure an NFL quarterback, and thus makes the position easier and less physically demanding: How long before the NFL allows a woman to actually play quarterback?

Thanks to the Brady Rule, not only do quarterbacks not have to worry about getting dirty, they also don't have to worry about their hair or manicures either.

Thus, even an effeminate woman could play the position.  Giselle Bundchen is about 5'11", which would not make her the shortest quarterback to ever play (shout out to Doug Flutie).  Why not give the ball to her to throw?  How 'bout Jennie Finch?  Another ten pounds and she'd be the same size as Jeff Garcia.

And in fact, rules have in the past allowed for women to fill a position, by making the position less physically demanding (ex, the military).

I never watched the whole movie, but once I flipped through the TV stations to see the end of a movie called Quarterback Princess in which a high school girl fights to play quarterback for her high school team.  Not only does she lead the team to a title, but is also named homecoming queen.

That seems appropriate with Tom Brady's homecoming from London after the New England Patriots rout of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

You might thing this article has under-handed sexist insinuations.  I know that I'm being tongue in cheek, but the intent is true.

What the NFL has done through the Brady Rule is admit that the physical demands of the NFL no longer matter and are unimportant to the position of quarterback.  In the past, the argument against women playing in the NFL or football is that the game is too physically demanding and violent.

 

Blowouts Will Lead to More Blackouts / Parity Made the NFL Profitable

The NFL now is not about a physical game: it is about meaningless points on the board that put me to sleep.  The NFL has been a snooze-fest in 2009.

There is no excitement to any of these games, as we are seeing more and more blowouts in the NFL.  They are just one-sided exhibitions.  The NFL frankly, sucks.

Those who know my work know that I'm a Raider fan.  So obviously, I have seen my share of blowouts.  The reality is that, that is a phenomenon across the board in the NFL, thanks to the emphasis on protecting the prissy passers.

At least in the past, I could enjoy football in the abstract by watching other teams play great football.  Now, all that matters is what team you choose to be a fan of.  You can't enjoy football for the sake of football.

Eventually, people will stop watching all together because there is nothing to watch, which could have untold detrimental effects on the profitability of the NFL; a league that relies on profit sharing.  Fans on the losing end will stop caring, and when that happens, the fans on the winning end will have no satisfaction of gloating because the other side stopped caring.

As the NFL has argued in court and is currently doing so against American Needle, NFL franchises are not independent entities within the NFL, because an NFL team cannot compete against itself (as the NFL argues). 

Under the Brady Rule, NFL teams essentially do compete against themselves, while their opponent's are just punching bags, and all it comes down to is whether the quarterback does or does not have a not so fresh feeling.

 

So how 'bout some new life in there by shaking-up things?

Nevertheless, I think that I'm just extrapolating the logical consistencies of The Brady Rule.  The NFL continues to make the demands of quarterback less demanding and put the emphasis on making NFL games allegories of retaliation of back-room grudges (just ask Sally Reese).

Thus logically, that should open the job to a more diverse candidate pool in a field that used to model itself on being a brutal game that wasn't meant for some people physically.

If the passing-game is supposed to be about, "the complex defenses" and learning the playbook, rather than the combination of physical rigors of the game: Why not let a woman play?  It is only fair based on the NFL rules.

Even Matt Hasselbeck with his bad back can throw four touchdowns.  Does that prove anything about the Seattle Seahawks?  No.

Who is to say that a woman can't lead a football team if given the opportunity?  I mean, c'mon: What woman wouldn't love to win a fancy ring?  Don't tell me then that she would have no motivation.

More and more today, we see more female body-builders that could compete under the NFL's new rules that take-out the tension that once made the NFL exciting; that being, the tension as to whether the quarterback can stay cool under pressure, and whether the defense can "Checkmate" the quarterback.

As it stands, the NFL may as well just use rules of golf for quarterback statistics and spot the passers a handicap of 100 yards passing and a touchdown to start each game.

Now however, the quarterback is not the "King" of the field because the NFL has basically set up Police Tape around the quarterback that says Do Not Cross with rules like The Brady Rule.  The quarterback is the "Princess" of the field.  He's a delicate investment that needs to be protected.

Just ask Jay Cutler.

If all it takes to succeed in the NFL is to intentionally draw roughing the passer calls, like Tom Brady has done, then it seems like the logical next step on a continuum to allow a woman to play quarterback, because clearly, the NFL won't allow the quarterback to get hit.

 

Load More Stories

Follow New England Patriots from B/R on Facebook

Follow New England Patriots from B/R on Facebook and get the latest updates straight to your newsfeed!

Out of Bounds

New England Patriots

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.