New Yorker: Does Football Have a Future?

Maybe you did not get the memo-- sports predictable - we are trying to move SJ to more discussion of craft. I think I've made a valuable contribution with this thread. If you want to hurl insults PM me instead and save the thread.

 

I don't hide behind PMs.

 

Whether he played the game or not has nothing to do with this. Scientific research is increasingly showing that the issue of concussions is not one hard hit doing damage, but the one hard hit being the exclamation point on years of small, sub-concussive hits. Also, that some people are more susceptible to damage than others -- but you don't know that now until an autopsy.

Many studies have been done with hockey as well, but that hasn't gotten quite so much attention in the U.S. because it's not football. However, I have a cousin who played hockey starting at age 5, and at that point he was already playing against 8-year-olds. When he was 15 he got knocked out on the ice, yet his coaches sent him back in. This happened a couple of times.

His parents eventually took him to the doctor, and the guy said, bluntly, if you want your son to go to college, you'll stop having him play hockey right now -- the damage was already that bad. Of course, they took him off the ice -- wait, no, they were so invested in being hockey parents that they couldn't do it. Not only that, but kid played lacrosse, too!

As it turned out, he got more concussions, and he went from a solid B student to barely graduating from high school, and only through the kindness of one teacher who gave him a break. He can mostly function in day-to-day life, but all those hits mean that when he's 30 or 40, he's going to start struggling harder to do so. And for what?

 

By the way, my post wasn't mean to cast aspersions on any and every sports parent. But as far as football's future, between single specialty at any early age (another injury nightmare) and worries about long-term damage, there will definitely be fewer parents wanting their kids to get involved.

 

Bob do you cover football in your work?

 

Not now, but I have. And what does that have to do with anything? What does understanding the game have to do with the health effects of it?

I don't think Alan Schwarz's goal is to kill football. Hey, if people want to play it, great. But does that mean no one can talk about the health risks?

 

My question did not have to do with your understanding of game.
If you were still covering I was wondering if you were conflicted by your feelings and need to work.

 

Well, most of my journalism work is in health care these days, so no conflicts at all!

 

That was a hell of a read.

 

The trick to me is, there is much in our world that can be statistically proven to be ruinous to one's health and even deadly, and yet people continue to do it anyway because they enjoy it.

One example: drinking. Another example: eating cheeseburgers and fries. You can educate people as to dangers and help them make informed choices—drinking and driving campaigns, etc. But if every dangerous activity was removed from the world, we would hardly recognize the place.

 

Sure ... but everything you mention is something people do on their leisure time.

It seems much more troublesome that colleges trade scholarships for health. And that the NFL conditions employment on surrendering your health. Almost seems like it could be an OSHA issue at some point.

 

SI reported on this in November.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1176377/1/index.htm