Sports reporter, Kevin Clark, in his article, “The NFL Can’t Protect Its Quarterbacks,” insists that the NFL is incapable of properly protecting their quarterbacks. Clark notices that players are continually getting injured from illegal passes that are not being called as penalties. Clark’s purpose of writing this article is to gain support for his argument that penalties are not being called and the players’ safety of is at risk. He also argues that the NFL needs to find a better way to protect its players. He adopts a concerned tone in order to gain his reader’s attention, which helps Clark persuade his own point of view. Clark’s audience consists of football fans that may or may not agree with him. Therefore, Clark uses heartfelt emotions,
…show more content…
Following the emotion Clark makes the audience feel, Clark writes,“commissioner Roger Goodell had to address the matter before the season’s first Monday Night Football game in Washington, saying, ‘ What is it we can do to try to ensure those hits don’t occur?’” (Clark 1) Here Clark is borrowing credibility. This shows the audience what Clark has to say is credible and he is a reliable source for the information. Not only does the evidence Clark use establish his credibility, but it also expresses his opinion on the seemingly dangerous matter. Clark needs to establish his credibility because his audience who might not agree with side he takes. Football fans that disagree with Clark find it hard to rebut his argument knowing that the commissioner of the NFL has said that there is something that needs to be fixed. By quoting Goodell, Clark is able to show those that disagree with what he is trying to say, but at the same time is able to convince them his point. By borrowing credibility, Clark is able to strengthen his argument and turn a few more heads in …show more content…
The use of ethos, logos and pathos to reinforce his argument that the NFL needs to fix its rules for penalties to stop quarterbacks from getting seriously injured, and to stop other players from not getting in trouble for their own actions. Clark also uses ethos, logos and pathos to further his opinion, that the NFL needs to find a better way to look for illegal plays. In a way, Clark’s use of the rhetorical appeals makes his opinions seem more like facts. He makes the reader feel a certain emotion by his diction. Afterwards he proves he’s not the only with the same argument about the penalties, and gains his credibility for the the facts and arguments he makes with quotes from credible people who the audience would know. Following this, Clark uses facts about previous years in the NFL and current-day facts (and statistics) about players and their resulting injuries from the recent football games. By using all three rhetorical appeals together, Clark is able to make the audience feel concerned for the players safety, to tell them that credible people within the NFL also feel the same, and to show the audience why they should feel that way all while strengthening his
Following the emotion Clark makes the audience feel, Clark writes,“commissioner Roger Goodell had to address the matter before the season’s first Monday Night Football game in Washington, saying, ‘ What is it we can do to try to ensure those hits don’t occur?’” (Clark 1) Here Clark is borrowing credibility. This shows the audience what Clark has to say is credible and he is a reliable source for the information. Not only does the evidence Clark use establish his credibility, but it also expresses his opinion on the seemingly dangerous matter. Clark needs to establish his credibility because his audience who might not agree with side he takes. Football fans that disagree with Clark find it hard to rebut his argument knowing that the commissioner of the NFL has said that there is something that needs to be fixed. By quoting Goodell, Clark is able to show those that disagree with what he is trying to say, but at the same time is able to convince them his point. By borrowing credibility, Clark is able to strengthen his argument and turn a few more heads in …show more content…
The use of ethos, logos and pathos to reinforce his argument that the NFL needs to fix its rules for penalties to stop quarterbacks from getting seriously injured, and to stop other players from not getting in trouble for their own actions. Clark also uses ethos, logos and pathos to further his opinion, that the NFL needs to find a better way to look for illegal plays. In a way, Clark’s use of the rhetorical appeals makes his opinions seem more like facts. He makes the reader feel a certain emotion by his diction. Afterwards he proves he’s not the only with the same argument about the penalties, and gains his credibility for the the facts and arguments he makes with quotes from credible people who the audience would know. Following this, Clark uses facts about previous years in the NFL and current-day facts (and statistics) about players and their resulting injuries from the recent football games. By using all three rhetorical appeals together, Clark is able to make the audience feel concerned for the players safety, to tell them that credible people within the NFL also feel the same, and to show the audience why they should feel that way all while strengthening his