Skip to main contentSkip to footer
of stories this month>Get unlimited stories
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily.
Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Select free newsletters:
');});$( document ).ready( function(){triggerNewsletterModal(); if( $('body').hasClass('ezn-1156735') ) { $('.newsletter-banner').remove(); }if ( sfid && typeof csmJs.pageData.section === 'object'){var pagePath = csmJs.pageData.sections;if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Books' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'books' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Politics' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'politics' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Education' ) > -1 || pagePath.indexOf( 'The Culture' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'culture-learning' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Science' ) > -1 || pagePath.indexOf( 'Environment' ) > -1 || pagePath.indexOf( 'Technology' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'science' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'A Christian Science Perspective' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'csperspective' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Commentary' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'commentary' );}else{csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'weekend' );}}});
2. Football’s 100-yard field
SHARON ELLMAN/AP/FILE
n this Oct. 23, 2011, file photo, fans cheer as the St. Louis Rams and Dallas Cowboys play in an NFL football game at Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas.
By Ross AtkinStaff writer
The field’s length seems so logical today that it’s hard to imagine it was ever any different, but it was. In its early days, when the game resembled rugby, the field size – as in rugby up this day – varies somewhat. It wasn’t until 1881, according to ESPN, that the field’s length was standardized at 110 yards, which is roughly equivalent to 100 meters, and may have been influenced by rugby and a couple of games Harvard played against Montreal’s McGill University.
By 1912, the rule makers decided to add 10-yard-deep end zones to either end of the field, which would have made for a 130-yard-long field in toto. The problem was a number of colleges had built stadiums that wouldn’t accommodate that length, so the distance between the goal lines was shortened to 100 yards. The modern Canadian field is 110 yards goal line to goal line, probably a carryover from football’s early metric/rugby influence.
Standardizing the American field at 100 yards is ideal for several reasons. One is simply that 100 is a magical number. Second, it makes for easy sectioning into 10-yard increments that provide teams and spectators a quick reference for gauging progress up and down the field. And, of course, 10-yard thinking is woven into football’s mindset because that is the distance that must be gained for a first down.
2 of 10
Editor
Dear Reader,
About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:
“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”
If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.
But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.
The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.
We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”
If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.
You've readoffree articles.Subscribe to continue.
Help fund Monitor journalism for $11/ month
Already a subscriber? Login
Mark Sappenfield
Editor
Monitor journalism changes lives because we open that too-small box that most people think they live in. We believe news can and should expand a sense of identity and possibility beyond narrow conventional expectations.
Our work isn't possible without your support.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily.
Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Select free newsletters:
');});$( document ).ready( function(){triggerNewsletterModal(); if( $('body').hasClass('ezn-1156735') ) { $('.newsletter-banner').remove(); }if ( sfid && typeof csmJs.pageData.section === 'object'){var pagePath = csmJs.pageData.sections;if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Books' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'books' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Politics' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'politics' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Education' ) > -1 || pagePath.indexOf( 'The Culture' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'culture-learning' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Science' ) > -1 || pagePath.indexOf( 'Environment' ) > -1 || pagePath.indexOf( 'Technology' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'science' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'A Christian Science Perspective' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'csperspective' );}else if ( pagePath.indexOf( 'Commentary' ) > -1 ){csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'commentary' );}else{csmJs.cta.changeBanner( 'weekend' );}}});
Subscription expired
Your subscription toThe Christian Science Monitor has expired.Youcan renew your subscription orcontinue to use the site without asubscription.
If you have questions about your account, pleasecontact customer serviceor call us at 1-617-450-2300.
This message will appear once per weekunless you renew orlog out.
Session expired
Your session to The ChristianScience Monitor has expired. Welogged you out.
If you have questions about your account, pleasecontact customer serviceor call us at 1-617-450-2300.
No subscription
You don’t have a Christian Science Monitorsubscription yet.
If you have questions about your account, pleasecontact customer serviceor call us at 1-617-450-2300.
As someone deeply immersed in the subject matter, I'd like to emphasize the importance of recognizing the insidious nature of evil, especially as portrayed in the Netflix series "All the Light We Cannot See" and discussed in the review of "The Zone of Interest." The portrayal of Nazis as seemingly normal individuals in the series resonates with historical realities. Understanding the chilling aspect that evil can manifest in ordinary people is crucial for grasping the gravity of such situations.
The concept of evil infiltrating the mundane is a profound one, and it aligns with the broader theme of vigilance in societal awareness. In the context of the article, the call to watch not only the overtly enraging elements but also the subtle, less apparent ones serves as a poignant reminder. It prompts us to be mindful of the nuances that might escape our attention but can be equally, if not more, dangerous.
Now, shifting gears to the content about football's history, the article delves into the evolution of the football field's dimensions. The information traces back to the early days when football resembled rugby, highlighting the standardization of the field's length at 110 yards in 1881. The addition of 10-yard-deep end zones in 1912 is a fascinating historical detail, showcasing the dynamic nature of the sport's rules.
The decision to standardize the American field at 100 yards is presented with logical reasoning, emphasizing the significance of the number 100 and its practicality in terms of measurement. The incorporation of 10-yard increments aligns with football's fundamental concept of gaining 10 yards for a first down, emphasizing how deeply ingrained this measurement is in the sport's mindset.
In summary, the article weaves together the themes of recognizing evil's subtlety in society, drawing parallels with historical portrayals, and seamlessly transitions into the intriguing history of football field dimensions, emphasizing the thought process behind standardization. It's a thought-provoking piece that encourages readers to reflect on both societal dynamics and the evolution of sports rules.
