I have this feeling, alas, that the only thing that will cause football to truly change for the safety of the players will be a death on the field. And not just a death, it'll have to be a death in the NFL or a big-time NCAA game.

oh, it's happened in the NFL, just not on a big hit.

Also, who's the Pele of lacrosse, exactly? The NASL was built on its ability to attract international stars. That was the catalyst for everything.

While I was in high school (1998-2002 or so) the captain of the Toronto Rock (which I believe won three lacrosse championships during that time), was a gym teacher at my school. I don't really follow lacrosse, so I'm in no position to judge, but he did win seven championships and was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2009, so I assume he was one of the better lacrosse players in the world. If he couldm't make enough money to play the sport as his sole source of income that's probably a bad sign.

10] Leaning no, but it's far from decided. If you were to look at my boy, you'd say he looked like a fullback--massive thighs, big torso...and he's faster than any kid he's played against in flag football, soccer, or baseball so far. He loves playing football, and he's racked up >50 touchdowns in ~25 games. He lives for getting a pick-6. Obviously, physiques and physical ability change, but assuming things hold...if boys like my son don't play high school football, I don't know how schools will even field teams.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Of course we are now in the age of the super-protective helicopter parent, so I can see teams in better school districts having trouble fielding teams with parents pulling their kids out. It might result in football skewing even more towards minority and poor if that's possible.

I get a sad laugh out of how Ray Lewis is viewed in articles today. Future HOF'er, great player, isn't it great he won a Super Bowl, blah blah blah... oh, and he was accused of using a banned substance but denied it thus it is a 'sideshow' and quickly put to bed with a single line.

Days earlier, Lewis was confronted about his use of deer antler spray in his effort to return from the triceps injury. He vehemently denied trying the banned substance, and that sideshow fizzled out quickly enough so that it was not a distraction on Sunday.

Imagine the same thing in a World Series... oh wait, we don't have to - Cabrera was kept out of the World Series by his own team due to use of banned substances and it was mentioned more often than Lewis' "distraction" was.

10. Yes. He is a high school junior and is in the process of choosing which Ivy or Service Academy he will attend after next year, with the intent of playing football there as well. I also let him travel by car, cross the street wothout a helmet, and sometimes spend time alone with girls.

10. Yes. He is a high school junior and is in the process of choosing which Ivy or Service Academy he will attend after next year, with the intent of playing football there as well. I also let him travel by car, cross the street wothout a helmet, and sometimes spend time alone with girls

The future will need medical specimens too, I guess.

What a gay article. But it's Salon, so what can you expect.

So what you're saying is that while reading an article about the bodies of male athletes, your mind immediately went to dude-on-dude buttsex, but Salon's the gay one?

Fascinating.

Did you all link the Le Batard article from yesterday yet? I lost my appetite just skimming through it.

10. yes I would, and do. Both my kids play, my son 13, and my daughter 10. I didn't want to at first, but my son is so into it, it's something to behold. Optional conditioning drills in August in south Florida? He gets pissed when we have to miss one. This past fall both my kids were on the same team, as my 10 year old daughter outgrew the 9-10 year old team. She's the only girl in the league. Yes I'm aware of the risks and hazards, as my son broke his arm in practice 2 years ago and missed half the season.

My kids play other sports as well, my son baseball and tennis, and my daughter, competitive swimming. I'm hoping football is just a passing fancy for them, for my daughter it certainly is. She'll have one more year on the 11-12 year old team, but if she has to move up when she's 12, she will be done. We're not going to let he compete against 15 year old boys as a 12 year old.

It's remarkable how football has helped their other sports. The conditioning and training discipline really carries over. My daughter no longer complains about swimming 50+ laps at practice. He technique is still quite rough, but because of her strength and conditioning, she is still competitive. This past weekend at a large meet, she took a first and a second in 7 events, and she qualified for 2 events at the regional championships in March. My son is a much better baseball player now. 2 years ago he couldn't throw for ####, and now he throws one hop strikes from the CF wall. He is a very fine football player though, and I'll let him go with what he wants.

Yeah, the Le Batard piece is linked off of the Newsblog. It's the final straw in "why I didn't watch a minute of the Superbowl."

Oh wait...that's a diff La Batard article...here's the one I was referring too.

Yeah, I read both.

Didn't your daughter get hit by a foul ball when she was an infant?

Her brother, yes. That's likely why she's not allowed to play and a big part of their mom and I are splitting. So, I understand but still...

Lacrosse is a sport targeted to rich, northeastern white kids. There's a reason football draws its athletes from predominantly lower class, black families. It's the same reason the front lines of the military is populated by poor kids.

When I became acquainted with lacrosse (mid-60s, at Johns Hopkins), the sport was mostly a curiosity in the US except for two major hotbeds, Long Island and the Baltimore metro. A lot of top HS lacrosse players came from rich white prep schools, but not all, even back then. Hopkins then and now fields lacrosse teams that compete for the national title, so their coaches see lots of topflight players, but when I was at JHU it was an essentially unanimous opinion that the best-ever college player was a fellow from Syracuse named Jim Browm.

Probably if lacrosse were a lucrative pro sport, it would draw more from the lower income levels, as a potential road out of poverty. I don't see that happening, whatever the future holds for football.

Edit: I'd have said "yes" to #10, but my decision time was about 25 years ago, and my son had no interest at all in sports. I enjoyed HS and a bit of college football, even got to play one game (my and his final HS contest) against a future NFL star, Jim Kiick, who had some fine seasons as a Dolphins RB. Unfortunatley for my bragging rights, their offense scheme had him running always to our defensive left and I was right DT with "stay at home" responsibility, for counters and reverses, so we never "met" on the field.

Good lord that Le Batard article was nauseating.

football draws its athletes from predominantly lower class, black families

Again, how true is this? An article by Huffman & Cooper (Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 2012, 5, 225-246) does say:

The majority of football student-athletes competing in FBS institutions are minorities
who come from low socio-economic backgrounds

They're citing previous scholarship there, without analysis. Meanwhile the NCAA website says that

In the Football Championship Subdivision, the 2010-11 figures show that white players compose the majority at 47.2 percent (down from 47.6 the previous year), followed by Blacks at 44.1 percent (up from 43.9). The percentage of black football players in that subdivision has steadily increased from 38.5 percent in 1999-2000 to the current level

A paper prepared for the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport (Lapchick, 2011: PDF file!) says of the NFL:

The percentage of white players increased slightly from 30 percent in 2009 to 31 percent in 2010,
while the percentage of African-American players remained at 67 percent.

Clearly the percentage of black college football players undergoes a kind of amplification in the NFL, and one might believe from just watching pro games that since 2/3 of the players are black, they must also be from poor backgrounds; but socioeconomic data are not very easy to come by.

How big an impact will this article on suspicions of wide-spreading match fixing have on soccer? I know the allegations cover different levels and there's no specificity of how many at which level, but if it's really 400+ individuals fixing 600+ games, I would think that's a pretty big blow to the credibility of the sport's leagues.

I would not let my son play football. My wife is adamantly against it.

However, she wants him to play soccer. Aren't there a lot of concussions in soccer too?

However, she wants him to play soccer. Aren't there a lot of concussions in soccer too?

Many youth leagues prohibit headers specifically because of the mild concussion problem. Soccer is less of a contact sport, obviously, but I'd definitely look for a no-headers league for anyone younger than high school.

Clearly the percentage of black college football players undergoes a kind of amplification in the NFL, and one might believe from just watching pro games that since 2/3 of the players are black, they must also be from poor backgrounds; but socioeconomic data are not very easy to come by.

The other amplification is that a disproportionate percentage of the blacks in the NFL outside of the quarterbacks and kickers are stars and starters. Just off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure that when they flashed the pictures of the 44 starters last night, about 37 of them were black, including the entire Ravens defensive unit and 10 of the 11 49ers.

My son has played football for 4 years (started at age 8). This past year I have come to the conclusion that with the increased concern of head injuries it is best not to play until high school if he wishes to continue. Football is a sport which someone can start up in later years and do well if you apply yourself and have the physical attributes. Like Ron Polk said about coaching football, "The first day you teach them how to block. The second day you teach them who to block."

My suggestion for youth football is that kids be allowed to move up in levels if they are excessively larger then other kids in their group. Just because he is a 10 year old and he is a beast compared to everyone else why not challenge him by playing with his physical peers. It is good for him challenge wise and best for the smaller players who don't have to play against a beast and risk injury. It would be like a weight class in martial arts or boxing.

My suggestion for youth football is that kids be allowed to move up in levels if they are excessively larger then other kids in their group. Just because he is a 10 year old and he is a beast compared to everyone else why not challenge him by playing with his physical peers. It is good for him challenge wise and best for the smaller players who don't have to play against a beast and risk injury. It would be like a weight class in martial arts or boxing.

I broke my collar bone my first year in football, when my 65-pound self got crushed by two 150-pound linemen. I'm on board with this position.

My suggestion for youth football is that kids be allowed to move up in levels if they are excessively larger then other kids in their group.

As I alluded to in my previous post, that's how my league operates. Last fall my daughter was 10, but she had to play in the 11-12 year old league because of her size. The league has a weight limit based on age. Basically, the older you are, the lower your weight limit for the age group. It forces bigger kids to move up, but not if they are age inappropriate. A 9 year old at the exact weight as my daughter would not have had to move up. They also have weight limits for ball carriers. For example, based on your age, you may play with no restriction up to 95 pounds. Between 95 and 105 you may play in the lower league, but you may not carry the ball (ie no QB, RB, or receiver. You may of course intercept or recover fumbles). Over 105 you must move up. All players are weighed in before every game. If you don't make weight, you may be restricted or cannot play at all.

My suggestion for youth football is that kids be allowed to move up in levels if they are excessively larger then other kids in their group. Just because he is a 10 year old and he is a beast compared to everyone else why not challenge him by playing with his physical peers. It is good for him challenge wise and best for the smaller players who don't have to play against a beast and risk injury. It would be like a weight class in martial arts or boxing.

I'm pretty sure it's standard that leagues have size limits on who can play in an age group and/or size limits on who is allowed to carry a football.

I was too small to play football as a youth (though now I'm 6'2" 185 lbs.) so I got into other sports. Therefore I have no specific knowledge of how my local leagues worked.

While I was in high school (1998-2002 or so) the captain of the Toronto Rock (which I believe won three lacrosse championships during that time), was a gym teacher at my school. I don't really follow lacrosse, so I'm in no position to judge, but he did win seven championships and was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 2009, so I assume he was one of the better lacrosse players in the world. If he couldm't make enough money to play the sport as his sole source of income that's probably a bad sign.

I'm not a Lacrosse fan, but I watch the occasional game (mostly NCAA and NLL (box), the professional field game isn't as interesting to me). I believe what you said about salaries is still true, the vast majority of players have other jobs, many of them are teachers so they have summers off. Many players play in both the NLL (field, summer) and MLL (indoor, winter), although there are box specialists.

Lacrosse is a sport targeted to rich, northeastern white kids.

Well that and native american and first nations kids. One of the cool things about the Lacrosse World Cup is that the Iroquois have their own team, separate from the US and Canadian teams. The aforementioned Syracuse team is usually stacked with Iroquois players.

Maryland and Long Island are still the centers of US lacrosse, but Upstate New York, Colorado and I think Massachusetts are also hotbeds. In the Western New York (public) high school I went to, Lacrosse was the glamor sport, not football or basketball. Canada is the world power.

I would not let my son play football. My wife is adamantly against it.

However, she wants him to play soccer. Aren't there a lot of concussions in soccer too?

I do not know how old your son is. I presume that because soccer is something he is not playing yet, he is quite young.

All the points about header-free leagues are well-taken.

More generally, though, I would say that there is some injury risk with all sports, but I don't see a lot of risk with beginning soccer, before the game gets very physical.

Moreover, I think there are so many positives in terms of socialization, teaching team skills, etc. My boys are both at young ages where the kids at school all still like each other--there aren't yet the cliques that we will no doubt see. At the same time, you can definitely already see a difference between the kids who have played team sports vs. the ones who haven't. The kids who played team sports are more comfortable around other kids, and more confident around adults. They get invited to do more stuff than the kids who have done no sports or who have done only individual sports like martial arts--not because the team sports kids are cooler, but from the mere fact that people get to know them.

Basically, it's like that Nike commercial about letting girls play team sports, but applied to young boys. There are just tons of benefits. And if not soccer, then what? Baseball (beaning, injuries running the bases), basketball (wreck a knee)? Hockey? Football?

I live in Kansas City, and I am starting to see lacrosse player practice at the park near our home all the time. I'm guessing availability of scholarships is driving this?

when they flashed the pictures of the 44 starters last night, about 37 of them were black, including the entire Ravens defensive unit and 10 of the 11 49ers.

I don't think Isaac Sopoaga and Haloti Ngata are black.

Sports injury statistics:

Baseball also has the highest fatality rate among sports for children ages 5 to 14, with three to four children dying from baseball injuries each year.

From my limited reading of CTE articles, most of the guys seem to be those who have played 20+ years of football. A "study" of self-selected population of long-career NFLers who have behavioral problems and finding they all have CTE doesn't convince me. Letting your kid play in high school doesn't seem crazily more dangerous than other sports, and I would let my son play. Go ahead and tell me I'm stupid and a monster.

Go ahead and tell me I'm stupid and a monster.

OK, if you insist. You're stupid and a monster and should have your kids taken away. And Mike Crudale.

All the points about header-free leagues are well-taken.

That's a pity about headers. In my experience, it's often a neglected craft. I've known people playing at fairly high levels whose instinct on scoring chances is to bring the ball down with their chest and take a shot, when a header would work just fine.

when they flashed the pictures of the 44 starters last night, about 37 of them were black, including the entire Ravens defensive unit and 10 of the 11 49ers.

I don't think Isaac Sopoaga and Haloti Ngata are black.

You're right. I was just flashing on my memory of the pictures, not the names, and making a binary distinction. They "look" more black than white, but they don't fall into either of those categories if you're talking about European Americans or African Americans.

So amend that to saying that 35 of the 44 starters were black. That's still a much higher percentage than the overall percentage of blacks in the NFL.

#102 When I was in school any number of the local CFL teams were teaching school. The practice schedule had to be very flexible since the starting QB (Russ Jackson) was a vice-principal and the job often entailed early and/or late work hours.

He retired in part because he afraid that his football career was impacting his career path. And we're talking the MVP of the league.

"Positional segregation" in the NFL is also notorious, of course. We wonder here from time to time what happened to all the African-American pitchers and catchers, but here's some demographic data on NFL players by position. No kickers listed, but as you'd expect, white NFLers congregate at quarterback and in the offensive line (including tight end). There's no "natural" explanation for any of this, obviously: in segregation times, as in baseball, kids of each color played every position just fine.

My suggestion for youth football is that kids be allowed to move up in levels if they are excessively larger then other kids in their group. Just because he is a 10 year old and he is a beast compared to everyone else why not challenge him by playing with his physical peers. It is good for him challenge wise and best for the smaller players who don't have to play against a beast and risk injury. It would be like a weight class in martial arts or boxing.

I don't necessarily disagree but there are developmental issues as well. I have always been big for my age and at a younger age was massively so. I started in wrestling at age 8 but, based on weight, was wrestling 13 and 14 year olds. And getting my ass handed to me every time. I simply didn't have the physical strength or coordination that a kid 5 years older did. I'm not sure what the best answer is: clearly me mashing smaller kids my age wouldn't have done anyone any good, either. My only point is that physical size at different ages isn't the only factor that should be considered.


To 10: a reluctant yes. I'd rather they played baseball, basketball or soccer but I think playing team sports - provided a reasonable quality of instruction and discipline - is a big net positive for people. And all sports carry risk of injury and very small risk of very serious injury. As does living. It would take a lot of data to convince me that the long term prognosis of a kid who plays football through high school is significantly worse than those that don't. If my son were good enough to play in college or the NFL, I'd have a long conversation with him about the risks and hope he'd find something else to do. But, hell, he'd probably go be a race car driver or pilot or miner...you get the idea. Life carries risk. I don't think there is a lot of risk with football at a young age when it is the parent making the decisions and adults get to take their own risks. Simply saying "no" without a LOT more data isn't warranted, in my opinion.

From my limited reading of CTE articles, most of the guys seem to be those who have played 20+ years of football. A "study" of self-selected population of long-career NFLers who have behavioral problems and finding they all have CTE doesn't convince me. Letting your kid play in high school doesn't seem crazily more dangerous than other sports, and I would let my son play. Go ahead and tell me I'm stupid and a monster.

Chris Henry had it when he died at 26. Owen Thomas (?), ex Penn LB, had it when he died at 21 or 22.

From my limited reading of CTE articles, most of the guys seem to be those who have played 20+ years of football. A "study" of self-selected population of long-career NFLers who have behavioral problems and finding they all have CTE doesn't convince me. Letting your kid play in high school doesn't seem crazily more dangerous than other sports, and I would let my son play. Go ahead and tell me I'm stupid and a monster.

Study: New cases of CTE in players

According to the study, the BU researchers now have 50 confirmed cases of former football players with CTE -- 33 who played in the NFL, one in the CFL, one semi-professionally, nine through college and six who played only through high school. That included Nathan Stiles, 17, who died of a subdural hematoma after a hit in a 2010 high school homecoming game in Spring Hill, Kan.

Would football be safer or less safe if they did away with pads and went back to weak little helmets. You couldn't use your head as a spear anymore. Do rugby players have all these health issues late in life? Apologies if this has already been asked or answered.

Would football be safer or less safe if they did away with pads and went back to weak little helmets. You couldn't use your head as a spear anymore. Do rugby players have all these health issues late in life? Apologies if this has already been asked or answered.

Almost certainly. It would also be much slower and much less exciting to the fans. Football is played as it is currently played because that's what makes the league the most money.

The aforementioned Syracuse team is usually stacked with Iroquois players.

Jim Brown had a great lacrosse career. He played on his high school team on Long Island (a hotbed as well) and for Syracuse.

Deliberate contact to the head is not legal in rugby, but quite a lot happens by accident, and concussions are certainly an issue: see this NY Times story on rugby concussions.

Would football be safer or less safe if they did away with pads and went back to weak little helmets. You couldn't use your head as a spear anymore. Do rugby players have all these health issues late in life? Apologies if this has already been asked or answered.

Rugby has serious concussion problems. I think it would almost certainly exacerbate the problem. Injuries and deaths were common in football in the early years -- it's not like equipment has made things worse, quite the opposite, in fact.

There exist helmets that drastically reduce the risk of concussion. The NFL needs to mandate them.

To 10: No. My sons were forbidden from playing football. Its a wonderful sport, but I've read too many things and seen the aftermath in my professional life too often to allow them to play. Same thing for donorcycles.

As for alternatives, as other people have pointed out each sport carries risk. Headers in soccer mimic some of the repetitive minor impacts talked about earlier in the thread. I coach soccer and we do not practice headers. It may put us at something of a competitive disadvantage but I think its for the best. It probably wouldn't be the worst idea in the world for outfield players to wear Peter Cech style headgear.

I'm sensitive to the criticism that you can't protect your children from everything, but TBIs are incredibly destructive. Chris Henry IIRC was not even diagnosed with a TBI during his career. That should frighten anyone in football.

I'm sensitive to the criticism that you can't protect your children from everything, but TBIs are incredibly destructive.

It doesn't even have to kill or debilitate them for it to be a concern. The risk of making your kid dumber should be concern enough.

Edit: This makes me think that nanites that repair brain damage will be the new market inefficiency / PED.

Almost certainly. It would also be much slower and much less exciting to the fans. Football is played as it is currently played because that's what makes the league the most money.

Well, there's always this.

re: 145

Agreed, I think the general public has a picture in mind of a player being motionless on the field when they think of TBI, but that isn't usually how it works. From what I can recall the extent of the initial trauma is not especially predictive of the severity of the long term residuals, but residuals often include (even from minor head trauma) concentration and memory problems, apraxia, spatial problems, migraines, vertigo, speech problems (verbal and written), and a bunch of other nasty things. It is ugly.

Well, there's always this.

We are at a strange place in history. Maybe it's just because it's the now that it's apparent to me but there seems to be this strange split going on where there is a movement to get greater safety for athletes yet at the same time there is a desire for more voyeuristic and violent entertainment. If you told me that in the next 25 years football as we know it would completely be eradicated I wouldn't be totally stunned but if you told me that in that same time a network would start running a TV series based on "The Running Man" (or The Hunger Games for the kids out there) I would not be stunned by that either.

Well, there's always this.

Or this.

there is a desire for more voyeuristic and violent entertainment

Hasn't civilization been a lot more bloodthirsty in the past? Boxing matches used to last dozens of rounds. We used to have public executions, floggings, etc. A few centuries ago in France, it was popular entertainment to set cats on fire. I think people always like to contrast today with some idyllic notion of the 1950s, and maybe we are more bloodthirsty in comparison to that era, but overall I think modern life is fairly tame. I'm not sure I see any push of the envelope for real violence in entertainment.