Steve Rushin has an article on SI.com complaining about the military terminology that’s used to describe football–e.g. “bounty”.

I sort of agree with his sentiment, but the fact is: football–and most sports–are proxies for war. That’s why they exist and why they appeal to people. On the whole, this is a good thing; since football is much less deadly and has many more rules than war, it is really a better activity that quenches the same desires. But it’s still “our” side, decked out in “our” colors, going out to uphold “our” honor by defeating the enemy.

It’s too bad, but as I see it, take away the war analogies from football and you’re left with nothing.

What say you?