Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

espn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 352 posts

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#291

Post by kelnos »

camiller wrote: post #264
jotux wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Based on the national estimate, the majority of concussions resulted from participation in football (40.5%, n = 55 007), followed by girls' soccer (21.5%, n = 29 167), boys' soccer (15.4%, n = 20 929),..." >So 40.5% of concussions in football and 36.9% in combined boys/girls soccer. If 21.5% of girls (~6270) and 15.4% of boys (~3223) get concussions then 9493 (6270 + 3223) received concussions out of 50096 (20929 +…

Unfortunately n, in this paper, doesn't seem to mean sample size like you would expect in statistics. It is an extrapolated number of concussions nationwide based on a study of 100 high schools.

That still doesn't mean you can just add the percentages. You cannot determine the percent of boys+girls soccer head injuries without knowing the sample sizes.

Or, if you can figure out the relative difference between the number of boys and girls who play soccer, you can do a weighted average of the percentages.

Either way, adding the percentages is completely incorrect.

EDIT: http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/media_kit/keystatistics/ suggests that the split is roughly equal -- in 2008 it was 52% boys and 48% girls.

With that said, the correct weighted value is more like 21.5x.48 + 15.4x.52 = 18.3%, which is significantly less than the 40.5% you quoted for football.

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#292

Post by acqq »

13of40 wrote: post #269
ballenf wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point. In most of the US, a decent 2-bedroom apartment can be had for <$1,000 / mo. An apartment that would be considered quite large by international standards.

Sure, but imagine a stereotypical American family with three kids, two cars, maybe a dog, and both parents working professional jobs. I don't see how you could consider it abnormal for them to spend $2000 a month to rent a house in the suburbs. If you're talking "globally normal" that's one thing, but by that standard nearly everyone within a thousand miles of me is in abnormally large and expensive housing.

> but by that standard nearly everyone within a thousand miles of me is in abnormally large and expensive housing.

Speaking from another side of the ocean, it's really true.

According to the statistics about energy used per capita, it's some oil producing lands and the US. And that even doesn't count all the stuff that ends on the US landfills.

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#293

Post by throwitbaby187 »

kasey_junk wrote: post #288
cookiecaper wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A lot of money" is also known as "Fuck you money". Enough money that you can say "fuck you" to anyone without worrying about the consequences. $1M is not even close to that, especially not for a young guy who has to pay for the next 60 years of his and his family's existence. Don't get me wrong, it's a good starting point, and you can definitely be reasonably secure on it if you invest wisely and continue to work (e…

I hate that term. There is no such thing. Bill Gates can't tell the President "fuck you" and the President can't tell the Pope "fuck you". We live in an interconnected world and there isn't enough money in the world to make your actions consequence proof.

i don't know how much attention you pay to politics but it's pretty clear that just about anyone can say "fuck you" to the president

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#294

Post by vonmoltke »

sokoloff wrote: post #267
fgonzag wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the USA it is in no way FU money unless you are over 60 or something. Assuming you invested it all and didn't spend a single cent, that's 12K a year from interest (generous 7%). You can probably spend 30-40K for 30 years if you decide to dip into the principal. But if you are young, you will have to get a main income source.

"Safe withdrawal rate" is usually pegged at 3.5% to 4%. On an initial lump sum of $1MM, that's $35K-40K/yr, not $12K per year. (I'm not sure where the 7% came from in your post.) Good scenario modeling tool: cFIREsim: http://www.cfiresim.com/# You can login as HNHN : HNHNHN and look at the scenario I modeled using the information in this thread. That has a 100% success rate from now until 2080, assuming a 3.5% annual…

> On an initial lump sum of $1MM, hat's $35K-40K/yr, not $12K per year. (I'm not sure where the 7% came from in your post.)

The original poster calculated the value off the $1.8MM (not the tax-deductible number), and simultaneously made a place value error ($12k/year is 0.7%, not 7%, of $1.8MM).

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#295

Post by jbigelow76 »

sangnoir wrote: post #114
ineptech wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am deriding the sort of discourse that topics like this usually produce, not the people making the arguments. It's certainly possible that the public debate over kids' football will largely be apolitical and civil and productive, such things do happen, but I'm predicting that it won't be.

> I am deriding the sort of discourse that topics like this usually produce You have become what you hate - you are the one who introduced the subject. Its like "Has anyone compared $TOPIC to Nazis yet? This subject has a tendency to be Godwinned".

Maybe we should stop pretending we all start in the middle and then get pulled to the extremes as we are exposed to either (un)biasing information. Maybe we should assume that all wells have already been poisoned (just a saying not a value judgement), science or religion, figure out which team already claimed you and defend your tribe.

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#296

Post by tzs »

paulddraper wrote: post #117
aresant wrote: post #65

A few colorful facts to the story here: 1) 3 years of service vests into NFL pension plan, he just hit qualification - value pegged at $21,360 a year for life (3) 2) He has not publicly commented on his retirement or reasons for it. 3) He has a hugely awesome secondary option - doctorate of math at MIT 4) He was at end of his rookie contract, next year would be the "in the money" year for him so he is clearly leaving…

> after tax is 7 figures but still not a lot What exactly is "a lot of money" (and how much do you think MIT professors are paid)? I think point #6 is more relevant than point #5.

Full professors at MIT on average make about $186k [1]. Assistant professors average around $124k [2], with considerable variation (I'd guess the full professors also have considerable variation).

[1] http://tech.mit.edu/V134/N18/salary.html

[2] https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/MIT-Assistant-Professor-Sal...

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#297

Post by ChuckMcM »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #210
ChuckMcM wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the secret to happiness as far as I am concerned; measure your days by how much you've learned not by how much you have earned. Interesting to know about the retirement 'vest' of 3 years. If he lives another 60 years that is a bit more than $1.25M.

That is the secret to happiness as far as I am concerned; measure your days by how much you've learned not by how much you have earned. Yet the vast majority of the time, this sentiment comes from people who are well-off, e.g. someone with an MIT PhD and an almost impossible-to-screw-up future. There are at least two possibilities. Either people who aren't well-off are just sour grapes, or they deal with a lot more t…

I really like this response, it gives tremendous insights into the person. I'd like to unpack it a bit though and perhaps provide some food for thought.

Starting in the middle:

   > I think it's not productive to pretend like 
   > money doesn't equate to happiness.
That quote and this one:

   > Yet the vast majority of the time, this sentiment
   > comes from people who are well-off
Ties the notion of money to happiness.

It would be great if it were that simple, but it isn't. All of the studies show that once your basic needs are met The correlation between money and happiness essentially goes away. And part of the problem is being imprecise in our language, because their is 'money' which is to say "gee you're pulling in $10,000 a month!" and there is 'wealth' "gee it only takes 10% of your take home pay to cover your rent!"

Many people who work in the STEM sector of the market, will have their basic needs met. They will all have individually varying levels of happiness that are not well correlated with their individually varying levels of wealth. You'll meet them, people who are "rich" and miserable, people who consider themselves "middle class" and are totally happy.

And I assert there is a key to happiness in this uncorrelated range of wealth.[1] That key is to define your happiness in something you have complete control over, rather than something that is externally influenced. Everyone I've ever met who does that is happier, more consistently, than people who don't do that. It doesn't have to be learning like it is for me, I know people who are very happy and measure their days by how many people they have helped.

It is my thesis that everyone has some internal notion of their "score" in life, and once their survival needs are well met (food & shelter) their happiness is entirely a function of how much they are 'scoring' versus an arbitrary benchmark of what a good 'score' should be.

[1] For the literally minded we'll define this uncorrelated region as that level of wealth that starts just above 'I have enough incoming capital to keep from struggling to meet financial obligations' and below 'I have so much capital I don't have to work to meet my financial obligations.'

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#298

Post by rhapsodic »

aresant wrote: post #65

A few colorful facts to the story here: 1) 3 years of service vests into NFL pension plan, he just hit qualification - value pegged at $21,360 a year for life (3) 2) He has not publicly commented on his retirement or reasons for it. 3) He has a hugely awesome secondary option - doctorate of math at MIT 4) He was at end of his rookie contract, next year would be the "in the money" year for him so he is clearly leaving…

Also, endorsement deals:

https://twitter.com/JohnCUrschel/status/887703140652523520

This guys is not going to be struggling financially.

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#299

Post by kelnos »

Azkar wrote: post #28

So what's the big picture here? We've suspected for years that football leads to brain trauma. Does that mean the NFL should shut down? Should they continue to operate as normal? There have been efforts recently to make the game safer for players, but the amount of concussions and injuries seen every season don't seem to be decreasing. Can you make the game "more safe" without drastically changing the game? Any game…

> Does that mean the NFL should shut down? Should they continue to operate as normal?

Saying the NFL should shut down is debatable: at least there we have adults making decisions (which can, after more research is published, be informed decisions) about their health and life.

However, if the incidence really is that high, at the very least high school football should be banned, or modified in such a way that the risk of head injury is diminished, if that's possible.

> Should I feel bad as a fan for watching football? Is it any worse than buying clothing made by child labor from a third world country?

I wouldn't say you should feel bad. NFL players are consenting adults who are being compensated (to some degree, at least) for the risk. We can't say the same of third-world child labor.

Re: Ravens OL John Urschel, 26, retires abruptly, two days after CTE study

#300

Post by [deleted] »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #210
ChuckMcM wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the secret to happiness as far as I am concerned; measure your days by how much you've learned not by how much you have earned. Interesting to know about the retirement 'vest' of 3 years. If he lives another 60 years that is a bit more than $1.25M.

That is the secret to happiness as far as I am concerned; measure your days by how much you've learned not by how much you have earned. Yet the vast majority of the time, this sentiment comes from people who are well-off, e.g. someone with an MIT PhD and an almost impossible-to-screw-up future. There are at least two possibilities. Either people who aren't well-off are just sour grapes, or they deal with a lot more t…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN