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

ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 396 posts

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#131

Post by eropple »

Bud wrote: post #56
aaron-lebo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Willingly plays 5 years in the league, makes $10,000,000, has 50% chance of reduced health in the future. 2. Willingly works 5 years in the factory, makes $10,000, has 50% chance of reduced health in the future. Why does the first situation bother us so much more than the second? Most products we use are built via the second, but you're probably still using those products. The NFL seems like better employment than…

You're leaving out the fact that most of these players never get to the NFL, and they have a very high risk of brain injury, but they get paid $0.00, even though their work is generating billions for the NCAA, for ESPN, for basically every large university in the country, etc. College football players need to be paid fair market value.

Hell--high school players need to be paid fair market value. Which, in many parts of the country, is not a trivial amount.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#132

Post by skewart »

Bud wrote: post #56
aaron-lebo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Willingly plays 5 years in the league, makes $10,000,000, has 50% chance of reduced health in the future. 2. Willingly works 5 years in the factory, makes $10,000, has 50% chance of reduced health in the future. Why does the first situation bother us so much more than the second? Most products we use are built via the second, but you're probably still using those products. The NFL seems like better employment than…

You're leaving out the fact that most of these players never get to the NFL, and they have a very high risk of brain injury, but they get paid $0.00, even though their work is generating billions for the NCAA, for ESPN, for basically every large university in the country, etc. College football players need to be paid fair market value.

Yup. There seems to be a lot of focus on the NFL mistreating players, but college football seems far more exploitive.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#133

Post by eropple »

addicted wrote: post #31

It's become increasingly difficult for me to watch football as well. I really enjoy the sport, but the research is pretty unforgiving. I can still justify watching the NFL because the players are getting paid very well, and at least at this point are aware of the risks. But it is impossible for me to justify watching college anymore. I was always leary of the billion dollar contracts conferences were signing, while s…

The NFL doesn't exist without the legions of unpaid, bodies-broken, brain-scrambled college (and high school) athletes who get nothing for their troubles.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#134

Post by autokad »

guiomie wrote: post #58
kpwags wrote: post #24

Good for him. I stopped following football after watching League of Denial on PBS. If I'm at the bar or something and it happens to be on, I might passively watch it, but I haven't sought it out since. I just can't support the NFL. I do feel torn though because I love hockey. I know they're dealing with similar controversies. My justification, however flimsy it might be is that I don't like the fighting (I might be i…

I'm on the same side as you about the fights. I'm just not a fan of the hypocrisy of letting people fight their anger away on national TV when someone doing the same in a public space would get arrested. I've played hockey, I get the whole aspect of being emotionally invested in the game, but I still don't think it's the right thing to do. Otherwise, I always thought the concussion aspect was much less worst in the N…

hockey has more concussions today than the clutch and grab days of the past. this is a 2 fold reason: #1 players are moving faster now - expected #2 clutch and grab actually penalized larger players, as it took more energy to get moving again (hockey is an endurance sport). now player size is inflating.

I think the football solution is to force players smaller again. One way to accomplish this is to weight pun salary caps by body weight. The sport can keep its old aspects.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#136

Post by mrspeaker »

bglazer wrote: post #127
mrspeaker wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great idea! Less head injuries, but still a hard-hittin' sport https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1aU0hz5Tf8

Virtually every example of a "big hit" in that video ends with the person who got hit showing the fencing response ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fencing_response ). That body pose indicates a pretty severe concussion. In fact, the most popular video on YouTube about the fencing response has a shocking amount of overlap with the "big hits" video you shared. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlXjwAlOflA Frankly, your v…

That's true! I didn't think about it because it was a collection of "rare" events - hitting above the shoulders is not a valid tackle. Usually won't get these hits in a game.

But still, obviously it certainly exists, and I'm sure there is a lot of head trauma every year.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#137

Post by le-mark »

eropple wrote: post #133
addicted wrote: post #31

It's become increasingly difficult for me to watch football as well. I really enjoy the sport, but the research is pretty unforgiving. I can still justify watching the NFL because the players are getting paid very well, and at least at this point are aware of the risks. But it is impossible for me to justify watching college anymore. I was always leary of the billion dollar contracts conferences were signing, while s…

The NFL doesn't exist without the legions of unpaid, bodies-broken, brain-scrambled college ( and high school ) athletes who get nothing for their troubles.

Plus, only elite NFL players get the million dollar contracts, the rest are at league minimum, which many silicon valley devs surpass.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#138

Post by mcguire »

emodendroket wrote: post #61
beachy wrote: post #17

Speaking as someone from a rugby-playing nation, where mostly players wear no protection except mouthguards and shin pads, American Football is spectacular but insane. Wearing protective helmets just ups the ante as players launch into each other with full force. In rugby, you don't tackle someone like that as you'll hurt yourself, and fail to stop the opponent. Rugby is a plenty violent sport, and has its own health…

They started using that stuff because people were sustaining spectacular injuries (like cracking their heads open). I'm not sure it is so simple.

"The committee counted 49 deaths related to football in 1931--31 direct and 18 indirect. The only year on record between 1931 and 2013 with more direct fatalities was 1968 (36), but that year's indirect fatalities were lower (12) than 1931. Indirect fatalities were only equal or higher in 1933, 1935, 1936, 1961, 1965 and 2009. Only 1965 manages to tie 1931 for total deaths, leaving them sharing the title of deadliest year."

http://time.com/3387798/football-deaths/

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#139

Post by brandonmenc »

Switch to rugby-style tackling (like the Seahawks), get rid of facemasks (per Ditka), maybe introduce per-position weight limits, get rid of kickoffs, tweak the other rules a bit, and we can probably keep the game mostly intact and reduce concussions.

They'll never be fully eliminated, though. In any sport.

Re: ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field

#140

Post by QuotedForTruth »

Isamu wrote: post #49
beachy wrote: post #17

Speaking as someone from a rugby-playing nation, where mostly players wear no protection except mouthguards and shin pads, American Football is spectacular but insane. Wearing protective helmets just ups the ante as players launch into each other with full force. In rugby, you don't tackle someone like that as you'll hurt yourself, and fail to stop the opponent. Rugby is a plenty violent sport, and has its own health…

> Wearing protective helmets just ups the ante as players launch into each other with full force. Agreed, but funny thing is the protection has gradually developed over time to limit injury. American football used to be played with no protection, then with very limited protection, leather helmets, pads. Then hard helmets, armored pads. Etc. Kind of an arms race, as with increased protection, the hits keep getting har…

And people were dying before helmets. The differences in risk between Rugby and football are not because of helmets. Its an entirely different game. There is blocking in football whereas hitting in Rugby is mostly limited to the ball carrier. The flow of rugby is much more lateral than football where most players run right at each other.
Post reply on HN