The Concussion Thread

[Z.I.P.]

Yes. It was almost as bad as the episode that was on at 8:00 talking about high school football: a player that dies of heat stroke, brain damage starting as early as high school for football players, high school coaches that will win at all costs and a mega church preacher in Arkansas who started his own football factory school and says they win because God wants them to win.

I'm not sure that if I had a child old enough to play football...8th grade is old enough, no need for pee wee...I would allow him to play the game. The evidence is becoming pretty clear that football is a game that is going to cause permanent brain damage, on some level, to an unacceptable number of participants starting as early as they years their brains are developing.

Want to solve the football problem in the US? Outlaw football for two years. People will be surprised at how free their weekends become and realize there are thousands of other things people can do other than watch football.

I have to agree wholly with GP1 (Holy agreement Batman!). But I also understand where mivid12 stands, after all, I was a sociology major!. American Football holds a big place in the pantheon of the entire national "mystique", and I suspect that those who point out the medical dangers of the game are pushing an idea which some people just cannot accept. Kind of like politicians undercutting the national pioneer mentality with social welfare programs. Well, as they say, The whole nation is going to Helena Handbasket. Ever shop there?

[Dave in Green]

@GP1, I agree. The only reason football players bulk up like sumo wrestlers is to have a physical advantage. The bulking up is bad for their health, and the result of the collisions is bad for their health. It's a lose-lose situation for everyone. The bulking up is not necessary to have great football. Set reasonable weight limits and let them bulk down to reasonable, healthy weights. If the current trend continues, football players will average more than 400 pounds and have an average life expectancy of about 40 years. Stupid pursuit of winning at any cost, as long as it's their body and not mine.

[GP1]

The bulking up is bad for their health, and the result of the collisions is bad for their health.

I would also like to add that it is bad for the game. Weight gain, along with rule changes, have made it impractical to run the ball. The line is so big now there is nowhere to run when the back gets the ball. In a 16 game season, a running back still getting 1,000 yards in a season is a big achievement. It's only 63 yards per game.

If they aren't going to adopt weight policies, I would like them to adopt a rule the CFL has. The d-line must play one yard off the ball. Doesn't seem like much, but it forces linemen on both sides of the ball to be more nimble. Therefore, they don't have all the fat guys across the line and even though they only have three downs, team can still run because there are holes created.

[mivid12]

watched it last night, one thing i found curious was the no mention of the NFLPA....they had members on that committee

[GP1]

I suspect that those who point out the medical dangers of the game are pushing an idea which some people just cannot accept.

Or, there is a large part of the population that simply doesn't care if someone gets killed playing football as long as it isn't someone in their immediate family.

We live in a country where MMA is a huge sport now. I would contend it is human cockfighting that caters to a society where pornographic images (not nude photos, but the true definition of pornography which is an image designed to provoke a strong emotional response) are common to the point most people are numb to it. Quite frankly, I think MMA satisfies homoerotic feelings some men may have. Some men fantasize about two women in their underwear hitting each other with pillows. Some men fantasize about two men in their underwear rolling around in a cage punching/kicking at each other until one is knocked unconscious or is hurt to the point he has to quit. I'm not a judgmental guy, so if either fantasy makes someone happy, so be it. The former makes me happy.

Many Americans have bought in to the notion that football is a "violent" game and the want to see images like James Harrison taking cheap shots with his head. They watch to see it. Therefore, since it is violent, some level of death and permanent injury should be expected and disregarded. The NFL created this idea of football, now they are having to change their ways.

[GP1]

watched it last night, one thing i found curious was the no mention of the NFLPA....they had members on that committee

The NFLPA turned its back on former players years ago. Mike Ditka once gave unusually cogent testimony in front of Congress about it.

[Spin]

Funny you pick on MMA which has statistically less concussions than football, instead of boxing where the whole idea of the sport is to CAUSE a concussion.

There are many ways of winning an MMA match besides knocking the other guy out or going the distance and waiting for the judges. If you doubt that I'll have my son come over and demonstrate.

And in all the centuries that people have been watching men fight (including in football and hockey) you're the first to turn it into a homosexual fantasy. What is it about buff men in tight shorts that makes you uncomfortable?

[GP1]

And in all the centuries that people have been watching men fight (including in football and hockey) you're the first to turn it into a homosexual fantasy. What is it about buff men in tight shorts that makes you uncomfortable?

Look, I don't want it to seem like I'm passing judgement on guys who find it homoerotic to watch MMA. If they enjoy it and get an emotional response from it, then I say live and let live.

You say tight shorts. Some might call them tights. Others might call it

.

Edit: Don't shoot the messenger.

When I read about it not being homoerotic because men have wrestled together in the nude since the first Greek Olympics, I think of a joke a friend of mine down here in Charlotte, from Norton and a Greek, tells.

Question: How do you pull two Greek men apart?

Answer: A crowbar.

[Dr Z]

Can We Really Support a League Which Has Caused so Much Harm to Its Players?

Steve Fainaru and Mark Fainaru-Wada, working together with the Frontline folks and other journalists, told the story of an NFL that spent almost two decades stonewalling, blackballing and bullying everyone who looked into the connection between football and brain injuries. From broken-hearted widows and teary-eyed children to doctors and scientists at the very peak of their professions, the NFL shunned and belittled them all. The players and their families were pushed aside and silenced by NFL leadership. The league smeared the doctors and scientists working to understand the truth, publicly trying to discredit their work.

Bonus story: Tax Exempt NFL?

[GP1]

Article

I recommend his book as well cited at the bottom of the article.

[Dr Z]

Darrell Green suggests an easy rule change. The rule change would cut down on dangerous, concussion-causing hits. He suggested rules that stipulate safeties line up much closer to the line of scrimmage and cornerbacks must play man-to-man defense.

Read more here

[Sergeant Zip]

Aaron Hernandez's brain will be examined for CTE

[Sergeant Zip]

Brian Price runs through a glass door  Brian Price is 28.

 

202 deceased football players examined for CTE.  More than half contemplated suicide. Suicide was the leading cause of death among those with mild CTE.

[Cykron]

My daughter has done quite a bit of research on concussions.  The biggest problem isn't the concussion itself, but the undiagnosed and untreated concussions and returns too soon that are what cause the big damage.  

[Balsy]

The problems of studies with CTE, and I'm not trying to downplay the findings but I'm a scientist and critical of all research whenever I read it, is it's always been on either people who have died mysteriously which led to an autopsy (Concussion Movie demonstrates this), or those conducted on volunteers who donated their brains to science.  We don't have a valid base for which to compare to within the general population, so we don't have a good idea as to how frequent CTE is amongst the general population, which is necessary to understanding the impacts of one particular activity on CTE rates.  We only have the brains of the 202 donated deceased former NFL players, not all of them...which also contributes to the problem with truly understanding the connection.  Of course you're going to study 200 football players, because it's a high impact sport, but we also need to study the the brains of other populations/activities for comparison. 

 

With that said, it is clear that repeated head trauma is not good for the brain, and we're desperately trying to play catchup (as we always are in science research) to understand it.  Hopefully we can find a way to diagnose CTE in living people.  There is currently a 7-year study being conducted on 240 people age 45-75; 120 NFL players, 60 college players, and 60 men that never seriously took on contact sports.  There are obviously problems with this methodology IMHO, but it's certainly better than the current way of diagnosing CTE in the living...which is none.

It's certainly a step in the right direction.  Perhaps the NFL and or Congress could step in and help fund the research so it could expand it's umbrella.  But alas, I don't expect that to happen.  NFL makes $$$ why would they want to fund research that could jeopardize any of it.  And the opposite of progress, is congress.

[LZIp]

Great point Balsy. Joe Thomas said essentially the same when asked about the recent CTE study the other day, that the findings don't mean much without being able to compare it to the general population.

[ZipsVoice]

Nice synopsis Balsy.  Well done.

[zipsoutsider]

On 2/19/2012 at 9:54 PM, ctmjbowes@sbcglobal.net said:

Why then don't colleges and the NFL start looking at maximum weights for players?

Say, how many concussions do professional rugby players suffer and how big are the players today? I ask because professional rugby players absolutely do not hit the same as football players do, and I believe that it's obviously because they aren't layered up with "cladding" the way football players are. Self preservation dictates that they wrap up more and they deliver more glancing blows. You also never see rugby players leading with the head blindly. The problem with American football is one of too-large steroid freaks who are protected from many injuries they would otherwise incur when they spear other players with their heads and shoulder pads. The game has gotten to the point of actually requiring smaller players wearing much less equipment. Guys like Ray Lewis would be out of the game immediately without the multiple ridiculous layers of gear. The more I think about this issue and the more I see players layered in about 100 layers of under armor and Nike plastic crap, the less respect I have for our American game. It's become a freak show.

This is very close to what I have seen Bobby Bowden propose. He actually suggested going back to no helmets for the reasons you mention.

[K92]

I was listening to XM84 this week and they were discussing the CFL decision.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4290708

 

Varying opinions on the show, but Danny Kanell said "the future of football is in big trouble".

[K92]

Another county heard from.

In wake of new research, brain expert says he doesn't think children should play tackle football

[LZIp]

Yawn. I started playing in 2nd grade and turned out just fine. How about we concentrate on teaching kids how to properly tackle.

[K92]

44 minutes ago, LZIp said:

Yawn. I started playing in 2nd grade and turned out just fine. How about we concentrate on teaching kids how to properly tackle.

Yeah?  What's that mean?  I was taught there were 2 genders and I didn't need a child's car seat until I was 10.

[CDMac]

1 hour ago, K92 said:

Another county heard from.

In wake of new research, brain expert says he doesn't think children should play tackle football

Counter point

 

A brain scientist explains why he’s letting his son play football

 

Not sure we'll ever really have enough data to determine how safe or unsafe football is.

 

It's certainly less safe than playing piano.

 

Yet, is its inherent danger a risk to take due to the positive life benefits of having played the ultimate team game?

Edited September 19, 2017 by CDMac

[K92]

The actual quantifiable danger of football is not the real issue.  If parents believe it is a risk and choose to stop their children from playing the sport is the real issue.  I think the scare factor is real.

[CDMac]

@K92 That's a great point.

 

I guess I was just thinking that at some point, the public opinion may get balanced out with new studies, new information, etc.

 

There will always be mommas that won't let their kids cross the street, let alone play football.

 

Team sizes of the high schools in Texas would attest to the fact that we're not currently running short on players to field teams.

 

I'm sure that's true in most "football states".

 

In the end, as is with most things, you could probably find numerous studies to support both a pro and an anti-football stance.

 

Where do you fall in regards to the question of whether to allow kids to play football?

 

For some, it's an age thing (they don't want them to play until they are X years old), while, for others, it's a binary decision regardless of age.