MLA KILL EM CRUSH EM EAT EM RAW
Amanda Hernandez
Hall
ENGL_COMP I
19 February 2015
Analysis Questions Kill ‘Em! Crush ‘Em! Eat ‘Em Raw!
1. The anecdote lends credibility to his argument by knowing that he's been there and has dealt with the good and the bad of playing sports. Also, he can imply that McMurtry had a great passion for the sport by the amount of time it took before he'd finally quit in order to be treated. This shows that McMurtry has felt a love for football. But this anecdote also shows that he has felt the destructive effects of such a contact sport, which allows him to argue his point.
2. The comparison is convincing because he not only compares them, but also differents them. The fact that McMurtry appeals to logos, and backs up his argument with plenty of facts from his own experience and also from reliable sources, also makes this comparison more convincing. He suggests to famous people that are associated with war, that are also associated with sports.
3. McMurtry achieves the shift by reminiscing on his own childhood memories of playing football for the sole reason of having fun. He describes the laughs he had running barefoot on an open green field with no one keeping score. McMurtry transitions from playing football for careless enjoyment to becoming routine and dangerous.
4. The study's findings support McMurtry's argument against the brutality of football by proving that the football players on the top football teams are the most brutal of them all. If more football players are chosen with that characteristic, then more of the teams are going to be made up of those type of football players. If more teams are made up of those players, then there is a higher chance of brutality in every single game of football.
5. McMurtry sees little to recommend such a view that sports are a more peaceful channel. Organized football only crushed his natural urges and express them in an alienating violent for a while football can often be a good energy outlet, it often takes peaceful
Hall
ENGL_COMP I
19 February 2015
Analysis Questions Kill ‘Em! Crush ‘Em! Eat ‘Em Raw!
1. The anecdote lends credibility to his argument by knowing that he's been there and has dealt with the good and the bad of playing sports. Also, he can imply that McMurtry had a great passion for the sport by the amount of time it took before he'd finally quit in order to be treated. This shows that McMurtry has felt a love for football. But this anecdote also shows that he has felt the destructive effects of such a contact sport, which allows him to argue his point.
2. The comparison is convincing because he not only compares them, but also differents them. The fact that McMurtry appeals to logos, and backs up his argument with plenty of facts from his own experience and also from reliable sources, also makes this comparison more convincing. He suggests to famous people that are associated with war, that are also associated with sports.
3. McMurtry achieves the shift by reminiscing on his own childhood memories of playing football for the sole reason of having fun. He describes the laughs he had running barefoot on an open green field with no one keeping score. McMurtry transitions from playing football for careless enjoyment to becoming routine and dangerous.
4. The study's findings support McMurtry's argument against the brutality of football by proving that the football players on the top football teams are the most brutal of them all. If more football players are chosen with that characteristic, then more of the teams are going to be made up of those type of football players. If more teams are made up of those players, then there is a higher chance of brutality in every single game of football.
5. McMurtry sees little to recommend such a view that sports are a more peaceful channel. Organized football only crushed his natural urges and express them in an alienating violent for a while football can often be a good energy outlet, it often takes peaceful