The End of Football

[huskyd]

I see at least one poster mentioned the Super Bowl on this board, so I'll take the chance of calling something else related to football to your attention.

On the 50th anniversary of the Super Bowl, George Will in the Washington Post today writes about the demise of football: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/super-bowl-sunday-the-day-america-celebrates-football—and-brain-damage/2016/02/05/4afc537c-cb81-11e5-88ff-e2d1b4289c2f_story.html.

I grew up loving football with the advantage of watching a long line of legendary quarterbacks arrive and play at the U. The Dolphins further fueled my enthusiasm with their own great players and the only perfect season in NFL history. On 3 nights a week, we could watch boxing matches pitting the best fighters against one another.

By now I have given up on boxing and its dreadful off-spring, cage fighting. When you contemplate the objective of those “sports,” it seems like a return to ancient Rome, replete in its barbarity. Just can't watch folks trying to pummel each other into a bloody pulp. Entertainment? Not for me.

Now I've stopped watching football for precisely the reasons Will points out in his article. It's just too violent and leaves its participants with long-term injury and the prospect of dementia and of early death. I can't abide the crowd roaring when someone is left unconscious and twitching on the field after a vicious hit, while the announcers assure us that it was “perfectly clean.” It all seems pointless, and I will miss the first Super Bowl of my life (I've seen them all). May everyone survive unscathed.

 

[UcMiami]

I admit to still loving the NFL and following 'my team', but I do it with more guilt in the knowledge that some large percentage of the players I watch are in fact doing irreparable harm to themselves, and not with the broken bones and torn ligaments and cartilage that we all see, but in an insidiously hidden way that will surface years and decades later.
I gave up on boxing a long time ago and was never tempted by cage fighting of any sort. And I suspect that in time the NFL will follow, but not yet.

I do believe that fundamentally the situation has already changed at the childhood level - what percentage of children are no longer playing football that would have been five years ago is hard to judge, but that change which may now be a trickle will become a stream and then a river, and the talent pool of raw material for the NFL will get less athletically gifted. The actual numbers will probably not shrink for decades if ever, but the talent on display will be diminished.

And the farce that is the attempt to manage and minimize the damage to the players is just that, doomed to failure and 'publicity stunts'. The rules changes to 'protect' the skill position players will continue, but the games is built on violent collisions of body against body and body against ground which means the rapid accelerations and decelerations of the brain within the skull will continue without significant change.

 

[ctfjr]

And the farce that is the attempt to manage and minimize the damage to the players is just that, doomed to failure and 'publicity stunts'. The rules changes to 'protect' the skill position players will continue, but the games is built on violent collisions of body against body and body against ground which means the rapid accelerations and decelerations of the brain within the skull will continue without significant change.

While I can't argue with mos of your assertions Miami, I have faith that this problem can be solved. Someone, somewhere will come up with a new technology or safety utility that will offer significantly more protection in head collisions. I don't know what it is but I do know that there is too much on the line ($$$) for the NFL not to step up in some way to solve a potentially damaging ($$$) issue.

 

[noirwestern]

The problem is basic, unavoidable physics. Short of creating a sort of portable anti-gravity field generator that's worn like a hat or perhaps a blend of human and woodpecker DNA for individuals bred to play football, no, no solutions come to mind.

 

[Bigpetunia]

While I can't argue with mos of your assertions Miami, I have faith that this problem can be solved. Someone, somewhere will come up with a new technology or safety utility that will offer significantly more protection in head collisions. I don't know what it is but I do know that there is too much on the line ($$$) for the NFL not to step up in some way to solve a potentially damaging ($$$) issue.

I understand what you're sayin', but when it comes to a solution, me, I'm pretty skeptical. When I was in jr high school I first learned that equation that multiplied mass times velocity. When 300 lb guys can run the 40 yd dash in under 5 seconds, no equipment devised will prevent the ensuing trauma. I suspect that the answer lies more in the area of less equipment, like the abolition of helmets. Either way, the future of football looks pretty dismal even irrespective of all the money involved...we've only seen the initial tip of the iceberg with respect to the attendant liability issues.

 

[JordyG]

Now here we have the concussion police. Football reports 64-76.8 per 100k. Does anyone know the sport with the second most concussions reported per 100k? Boys ice hockey at 54. So when you "we must protect them from themselves" jackbooters finish with football, lets ban ice hockey who's numbers are close to football at 54. Next up will be boys lacrosse at 40-46.6, then girls soccer at 33, then girls lacrosse at 31-35, then girls field hockey at 22-24.9, then boys wrestling at 22-23.9, THEN of course girls basketball at 18.6-21. Cheerleading reports 11.5-14. Let's ban all sports and just be rid of all of this stuff so we can all sleep at night.

 

[JordyG]

I understand what you're sayin', but when it comes to a solution, me, I'm pretty skeptical. When I was in jr high school I first learned that equation that multiplied mass times velocity. When 300 lb guys can run the 40 yd dash in under 5 seconds, no equipment devised will prevent the ensuing trauma. I suspect that the answer lies more in the area of less equipment, like the abolition of helmets. Either way, the future of football looks pretty dismal even irrespective of all the money involved...we've only seen the initial tip of the iceberg with respect to the attendant liability issues.

By the way let's ban horse racing where the rate of concussions is very high. If you haven't noticed, rugby league and union uses no padding or helmets and the concussion numbers there are staggering. Let's just hoist that sport as well.

 

[Bigpetunia]

By the way let's ban horse racing where the rate of concussions is very high. If you haven't noticed, rugby league and union uses no padding or helmets and the concussion numbers there are staggering. Let's just hoist that sport as well.

Relax. You seem to miss the point. I am not advocating getting rid of anything. Whether or not some of these sports are abolished is utterly a matter of indifference to me. I merely suggest that in the litigious world that we inhabit, the liability issues will ultimately be staggering.

 

[Bestiarius]

Having already lost my job as a Bestiarius Gladiator, thanks to the animal rights activists, I can see a similar demise for Football. Perhaps a modified Zorb Ball uniform can save the game. At least it would be entertaining.

 

[Padutch5]

Now here we have the concussion police. Football reports 64-76.8 per 100k. Does anyone know the sport with the second most concussions reported per 100k? Boys ice hockey at 54. So when you "we must protect them from themselves" jackbooters finish with football, lets ban ice hockey who's numbers are close to football at 54. Next up will be boys lacrosse at 40-46.6, then girls soccer at 33, then girls lacrosse at 31-35, then girls field hockey at 22-24.9, then boys wrestling at 22-23.9, THEN of course girls basketball at 18.6-21. Cheerleading reports 11.5-14. Let's ban all sports and just be rid of all of this stuff so we can all sleep at night.

I think you missed the point. I don't think anyone needs to ban anything . It will be a natural evolution, some of which is already under way. I am a football fan, by the way, and have season tickets for UCONN. However, look round whatever is your hometown. In many of the suburban Ct. Towns, youth football is struggling to put together a Team while soccer and now lacrosse are fielding hundreds of youth.

I don't think football was designed to be played by players as strong, fast and as big as we have evolved to. Yes, football like men's basketball has become a game of freaks [outsized athletes]. It's the rare normal sized person that can excel at either sport. I think head injuries are just the tip of the iceberg. As you watch today's game [or look back at the Pats] and see how many backups are playing because the starters are out.

 

[HardHatGuy#2]

I keep hearing talk about how the NFL is doomed, and that there is no way to control the chaos. There's another comparable contact sport in the world, that is played by athletes every bit as big, strong, and fast as the NFL. They wear almost NO protective gear, and injuries, while they are common, are rarely as severe as they are in the NFL. Furthermore, these athletes are known as the toughest, most outrageously aggressive people in sports. It's called Rugby.

The NFL conglomerate, executives, management, team owners, coaching staffs, etc, need to spend time looking at this sport and how they manage to be so violent, yet not kill each other on the field. The answer lies in Personal Responsibility (profane language in this day-and-age); the players don't try and kill each other because they know that they CAN. They show restraint as a function of a highly developed sense of self-preservation, which the players in the NFL seem to have lost.

 

[Adios]

The Seattle Seahawks are already leading the way with rugby style tackling.

Gladiatorial sports are not going away. C'mon. Let's ban the WWE.

 

[UcMiami]

While I can't argue with mos of your assertions Miami, I have faith that this problem can be solved. Someone, somewhere will come up with a new technology or safety utility that will offer significantly more protection in head collisions. I don't know what it is but I do know that there is too much on the line ($$$) for the NFL not to step up in some way to solve a potentially damaging ($$$) issue.

I certainly agree they will throw large amounts of money at the issue, but as others responded, the basic physics of the situation are I believe 'unsolvable' - the issue being that the brain floats in the scull and while you can create greater and greater cushioning of the outside of the head with better and better helmets, the acceleration and deceleration of the head will still remain much greater than the human body's own cushioning mechanism for the brain can handle. The number of clear concussions may decrease, but the repeated trauma to the brain will remain.

Now here we have the concussion police. Football reports 64-76.8 per 100k. Does anyone know the sport with the second most concussions reported per 100k? Boys ice hockey at 54. So when you "we must protect them from themselves" jackbooters finish with football, lets ban ice hockey who's numbers are close to football at 54. Next up will be boys lacrosse at 40-46.6, then girls soccer at 33, then girls lacrosse at 31-35, then girls field hockey at 22-24.9, then boys wrestling at 22-23.9, THEN of course girls basketball at 18.6-21. Cheerleading reports 11.5-14. Let's ban all sports and just be rid of all of this stuff so we can all sleep at night.

'Jackboots' which refers to Nazi Germany is pretty harsh - and I don't see anyone looking to outlaw the game, as no one has outlawed cage fighting or boxing. What I do see is more and more parents deciding 'not for my kid', including former football stars. And a few more of those stars walking away from the game early as well as mocking the NFL's response of 'Head Up' football.

And the real issue, and the difference between most of your list of concussion sports and football, is that in tackle football almost every play results in some portion of the 22 players on the field experiencing those rapid accelerations or decelerations of their head. The actual number of diagnosed concussions is a relatively minor part of the issue, just like the number of actual concussions in boxing is less important than the accumulation of 1000s of blows to the head. The one sport that is likely to also come under increasing scrutiny is soccer - but unlike football it could survive rules reducing the use of the head. In fact some youth leagues are already implementing rules reducing or completely removing the header from practice and play.

And that is an indication of the problem inherent in an equipment solution for football - the forces involved in heading a soccer ball are generally a lot less than those involved in football - the speed of the ball is greater than a human but the mass is much less. If heading a soccer ball is 'problematic' and people believe it is, then the increased protection required to get football just to that level of potential trauma is likely unattainable.

 

[UcMiami]

I keep hearing talk about how the NFL is doomed, and that there is no way to control the chaos. There's another comparable contact sport in the world, that is played by athletes every bit as big, strong, and fast as the NFL. They wear almost NO protective gear, and injuries, while they are common, are rarely as severe as they are in the NFL. Furthermore, these athletes are known as the toughest, most outrageously aggressive people in sports. It's called Rugby.

The NFL conglomerate, executives, management, team owners, coaching staffs, etc, need to spend time looking at this sport and how they manage to be so violent, yet not kill each other on the field. The answer lies in Personal Responsibility (profane language in this day-and-age); the players don't try and kill each other because they know that they CAN. They show restraint as a function of a highly developed sense of self-preservation, which the players in the NFL seem to have lost.

The inherent difference between all forms of Rugby and american football is blocking - rugby does not permit teammates to be in advanced positions of the ball so the tackling can much more easily be controlled, and there are no collateral collision, nor typically impacts involving two players moving at full speed. It is certainly not devoid of powerful collisions, nor head trauma, but even the scrums which are the parts of play involving lots of bodies are tests of strength rather than collisions.

 

[Sonny44]

I see at least one poster mentioned the Super Bowl on this board, so I'll take the chance of calling something else related to football to your attention.

On the 50th anniversary of the Super Bowl, George Will in the Washington Post today writes about the demise of football: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/super-bowl-sunday-the-day-america-celebrates-football—and-brain-damage/2016/02/05/4afc537c-cb81-11e5-88ff-e2d1b4289c2f_story.html.

I grew up loving football with the advantage of watching a long line of legendary quarterbacks arrive and play at the U. The Dolphins further fueled my enthusiasm with their own great players and the only perfect season in NFL history. On 3 nights a week, we could watch boxing matches pitting the best fighters against one another.

By now I have given up on boxing and its dreadful off-spring, cage fighting. When you contemplate the objective of those “sports,” it seems like a return to ancient Rome, replete in its barbarity. Just can't watch folks trying to pummel each other into a bloody pulp. Entertainment? Not for me.

Now I've stopped watching football for precisely the reasons Will points out in his article. It's just too violent and leaves its participants with long-term injury and the prospect of dementia and of early death. I can't abide the crowd roaring when someone is left unconscious and twitching on the field after a vicious hit, while the announcers assure us that it was “perfectly clean.” It all seems pointless, and I will miss the first Super Bowl of my life (I've seen them all). May everyone survive unscathed.

Well football has less than a year left to be banned by an executive order. After that, no chance.

 

[Sonny44]

The inherent difference between all forms of Rugby and american football is blocking - rugby does not permit teammates to be in advanced positions of the ball so the tackling can much more easily be controlled, and there are no collateral collision, nor typically impacts involving two players moving at full speed. It is certainly not devoid of powerful collisions, nor head trauma, but even the scrums which are the parts of play involving lots of bodies are tests of strength rather than collisions.

It's a little hard on teeth though.

 

[Wally East]

I have faith that this problem can be solved. Someone, somewhere will come up with a new technology or safety utility that will offer significantly more protection in head collisions.

Yup, it's called, "flag football."

I'm only 5% kidding.

 

[Bonpland]

My son played football and excelled at two positions (tight end and inside linebacker). He also played lacrosse and wrestled. He drew interest from coaches in all three sports, but he decided to play college lacrosse. That decision followed a pattern that developed locally where four or five of our area's top male athletes decided to forego playing football at all (even in high school).

I wanted to see him play football at the next level, but I understood his decision. He had suffered a concussion (the aftereffects of which lingered for months) in a mid-field collision with a fullback and his mother (my wife) complained thereafter about every game he played. My son by and large ignored her commentary but eventually decided to stick with lacrosse and had a fine college career making opposing attackers pay for standing in front of the net.

The only thing instructive about that story is that his decision is reflective of ones being made by other 6'-3" 210 pound athletes. Unlike others I don't think that football will be banned or legislated out of existence, but it is in danger of suffering the consequences brought on by its own unbridled hubris.

Poly-Sci majors know that despite the noise that is made by male politicians pontificating on behalf of their beliefs, that it's "the hand that rocks the cradle (that) rules the world", and I'd suggest that football has as much to fear from the concern of mothers about the health of their sons, as it does from the impact of future litigation.

Men are largely appalled by the suggestion that football could be undermined by a lesser sport, or by a conspiracy of football haters, but football's (particularly the NFL) greatest enemy is, and has been its own inability to recognize the danger of ignoring (and then lying about) the serious nature of the concussion crisis.

Football's popularity will survive my lifetime, but the slow attrition of interest that will develop over time as families recoil from involving their sons in a "blood sport" promises to eventually relegate pro football to the status of professional boxing.

The NFL is a multi-billion dollar industry, but it's done a poor job of planning for the long term. They scrape every penny from the table, but they've shown little respect for the health of the players that have made them so rich.

Someday soon mothers are going to make them pay.

 

[JordyG]

I keep hearing talk about how the NFL is doomed, and that there is no way to control the chaos. There's another comparable contact sport in the world, that is played by athletes every bit as big, strong, and fast as the NFL. They wear almost NO protective gear, and injuries, while they are common, are rarely as severe as they are in the NFL. Furthermore, these athletes are known as the toughest, most outrageously aggressive people in sports. It's called Rugby.

The NFL conglomerate, executives, management, team owners, coaching staffs, etc, need to spend time looking at this sport and how they manage to be so violent, yet not kill each other on the field. The answer lies in Personal Responsibility (profane language in this day-and-age); the players don't try and kill each other because they know that they CAN. They show restraint as a function of a highly developed sense of self-preservation, which the players in the NFL seem to have lost.

I think perhaps you should look at the prevalence of concussions in modern rugby, both union and league. It is, as in the NFL, an epidemic. The argument that the NFL should consider going helmet and/or padless is specious

 

[cohenzone]

Play without helmets.

 

[ursusminor]

I certainly agree they will throw large amounts of money at the issue, but as others responded, the basic physics of the situation are I believe 'unsolvable' - the issue being that the brain floats in the scull and while you can create greater and greater cushioning of the outside of the head with better and better helmets, the acceleration and deceleration of the head will still remain much greater than the human body's own cushioning mechanism for the brain can handle. The number of clear concussions may decrease, but the repeated trauma to the brain will remain.

My understanding is that some of these problems have already been solved, if you can absorb and distribute the force of impact efficiently and not transfer so much energy to the skull directly. The answer, quite simply, is to have padding on the outside of the helmet. Hard-shelled helmets bounce off each other and transfer a lot of energy. No matter how well you pad the inside, the bouncing still shakes up the brain. Padding the outside of the helmet can make a big difference. It also, by the account of the article I read, looks extremely dorky and players refuse to wear them.

 

[UcMiami]

My understanding is that some of these problems have already been solved, if you can absorb and distribute the force of impact efficiently and not transfer so much energy to the skull directly. The answer, quite simply, is to have padding on the outside of the helmet. Hard-shelled helmets bounce off each other and transfer a lot of energy. No matter how well you pad the inside, the bouncing still shakes up the brain. Padding the outside of the helmet can make a big difference. It also, by the account of the article I read, looks extremely dorky and players refuse to wear them.

I know there was a player who had a few concessions who was wearing a specialized helmet for about a year (Aaron Rogers? and I think there was a defensive back who had a similar one) with external padding, and I am sure that kind of thing can help to some degree. It would decrease the direct concussive nature of the blow, but the brain will still be bouncing around the inside of the skull - it is like putting an egg in a box and dropping it from ten feet - you can pad the drop zone as much as you want, but the egg is still going to hit the inside of the box hard enough to shatter unless you are able to secure the ball inside the box before you drop it. And without changing the nature or the intracranial fluid I don't know that you can 'secure the brain' inside the skull.

 

[ursusminor]

I know there was a player who had a few concessions who was wearing a specialized helmet for about a year (Aaron Rogers? and I think there was a defensive back who had a similar one) with external padding, and I am sure that kind of thing can help to some degree. It would decrease the direct concussive nature of the blow, but the brain will still be bouncing around the inside of the skull - it is like putting an egg in a box and dropping it from ten feet - you can pad the drop zone as much as you want, but the egg is still going to hit the inside of the box hard enough to shatter unless you are able to secure the ball inside the box before you drop it. And without changing the nature or the intracranial fluid I don't know that you can 'secure the brain' inside the skull.

You're right, but you can reduce how much the skull bounces around inside the helmet. If the helmet absorbs more energy, then less is transferred to the skull, and still less is transferred to the brain.

You're talking a lot in terms of momentum, which is very intuitive and makes sense, but at the end of the day, energy is king. And the heir apparent is acceleration, which, if you can soften the blow, you extend the time of interaction which will reduce the overall impact. You could, theoretically, pad your drop zone and the box well enough that the egg won't hit hard enough to break. It may be impractical, but it's mathematically possible.

 

[Bliss]

I still have no memory of a football game during which I suffered a concussion playing safety in 1954. Every game before and after okay but not that particular one. Scary stuff.

 

[bags27]

I'm turning off from football not because of the violence (I watch a lot of violent movies and TV). I'm turning off because it is so vulgar. The false patriotism, the linking with sanitized rock 'n roll, the pseudo "football is family"; the billionaire owners who pay $45M/yr to that empty suit of a commissioner to be the punching bag. That's the NFL. But college football isn't that far behind...