ESPN Football Analyst Walks Away, Disturbed by Brain Trauma on Field • Hacker News Board

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

#381

Post by Zanta » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 3:02 PM UTC

koolba wrote: post #220

pwthornton wrote: post #166

Football's core problem is still denial that this is an issue. Until that happens, real, concrete steps won't be taken to address it. Here are a few suggestions: 1) No tackle football before a certain age (to be determined by scientists based on brain development and how damaging a concussion would be). You can learn a ton about football, running routes, learning plays, getting in shape, etc. without hitting people.…

> 1) No tackle football before a certain age (to be determined by scientists based on brain development and how damaging a concussion would be). You can learn a ton about football, running routes, learning plays, getting in shape, etc. without hitting people. Good luck enforcing this with kids. We played flag football in school but full tackle with zero supervision after school in the park. > 2) Ban hitting. Everythi…

'> 2) Ban hitting. Everything should be a wrap around tackle. No more players running full speed and launching themselves into other players. Look at how few players actually try to tackle people. I get what you're going after but it's tricky when you're dealing with the boundaries. How do you push a guy out of bounds without "hitting" him?'

Pushing a guy out of bounds (e.g. a two handed shove) is an illegal tackle in rugby. You have to attempt a normal tackle, and basically attempt to force him out of bounds in the process if that's your goal.

I remember clearly being called for this (didn't know the rule at the time) when I was trying to prevent someone from scoring while he was running close to the sidelines. The ref called a penalty try on me for it.

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

#382

Post by bonzini » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 3:51 PM UTC

majani wrote: post #300

kenjackson wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen this video. I always had heard that without the gear that rugby was less brutal than football -- but seriously I don't know. Those hits looked devastating... I could not watch that sport.

That's not rugby, it's Aussie Rules, but those are illegal tackles in both sports. I don't know why the poster chose a video of vicious fouls to make his point about safety.

What % of players are going to get such a tackle once in their careers? How many are going to get five?

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

#383

Post by jethro_tell » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 4:37 PM UTC

lojack wrote: post #340

jethro_tell wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go back to leather helmets and cotton pads and it's a different game. No reason we need to turn their heads into sledgehammers. We do that because then they feel more comfortable with the big unsafe hits and the flying around but we could get back to the real game with the ruck style running game and wideouts with hand fighting all the way down the sideline and half the commercials and I bet ratings would start going…

Ratings may go up, but with half as many commercials the profits would also go down. The league only cares about ratings insofar as it helps their bottom line. I'm not saying these changes would be a bad thing, only that I have doubts it'll ever happen.

meh if they sold it for $2 or $4 per game directly to the customer they would get the money anyway. They need to look at new ways to monitize and it probably involves cutting the commercials and the middle men and putting the money directly in their pockets. The only reason they need cable is for 1. distribution which is not an issue since the internet. 2. to splice the commercials in which could easily be done. Sell the games directly and get 100% of your add revenue and you'd probably make more.

If viewership continues to go down, and parent stop letting their kids play at lower levels because of health conserns, they will also lose money.

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

#384

Post by Bartweiss » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 5:25 PM UTC

hkmurakami wrote: post #357

differentView wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They lose money when they're banned.

More often than not, they wouldn't be able to make the first batch of money without the aid of PEDs. This is pressure that even MLB minor league players face.

This seems like an almost irreducible problem. For existing players, the risk of consequences is a deterrent. For prospective players, the risk is worthwhile for anyone who wouldn't be drafted without PEDs.

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

#385

Post by exclusiv » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 5:49 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #365

exclusiv wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not most lucrative if you consider 16 games for the NFL versus 82 for NBA. The NFL actually makes more than the NBA as well (they just have a better revenue share deal, less players, max contract rules, etc) [1]. Injuries are far less common in basketball because the rules made it so. Everything is a foul these days. And you can't score points in foul trouble so the defense isn't as aggressive as it used to b…

> They're not most lucrative if you consider 16 games for the NFL versus 82 for NBA. NFL contracts aren't guaranteed and they're still lower on an annual basis than the NBA. The biggest star QB's in the NFL might be Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers, but Brady makes less than the second highest earning player on the Celtics and Rodgers makes less than the highest earning player on the Bucks. NBA minimum contracts are also…

There's a lot more spots in the NFL so I don't think it makes you an idiot to go for the NFL if you can do both. Very few can do both anyway.

> I can't believe you're making a serious argument that the NFL requires more athleticism when half the players are morbidly obese and the other half never have to exert themselves for more than five seconds at a time.

Your definition of athleticism seems to be tightly related to body fat but the definition of the word encompasses much more.

physically active and strong; good at athletics or sports.... of or relating to athletes; involving the use of physical skills or capabilities, as strength, agility, or stamina: [1]

So you're saying this guy can't be as athletic as Kevin Durant because he's 330 pounds? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linval_Joseph.

You're also picking the lineman to try and make your point but there's 53 roster spots per team. You aren't going to see anyone in the NBA run a 4.24 40 like Chris Johnson or bench press 500+ pounds. Really any measure of strength. Or enter track and field in the Olympics.

> NFL players had the athletic ability to outperform NBA players, they would be in the NBA purely out of financial incentive

That would assume they actually cared about the NBA. It's not a loss to get in the NFL instead of the NBA, esp. if you come from a poor background like many of the players.

Your argument, if applied to technology, would mean that developers making more money in a certain technology are more skilled than people in other languages for the sheer fact that money is the determining factor of all skills. And anyone that goes into the lower income field is less capable and idiots for doing so. That's ridiculous.

[1] http://www.dictionary.com/browse/athleticism?s=t

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

#386

Post by DeBraid » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 6:40 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #348

firebones wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also suspicion, if I recall correctly, that the routine repetitions of linemen taking knocks to the head in practice does more long term damage than what we see on game day. This may be more pronounced in high schools and to a lesser extent, college, where the coaching can be more suspect.

Yes, research has suggested that a number of smaller collisions can cause damage even if a player never suffers an actual concussion. A helmet also only protects you from external trauma. It acts as a second skull. But the problem isn't always from external trauma. If you are moving at speed and you are put to an immediate stop due to a collision with another player, your entire body experiences a lot of force. Your…

Analogy I've stolen from a Uni. of Toronto brain doctor: fill a mason jar (skull) with water (cerebrospinal fluid), and throw in a golf ball (brain). Shake the jar, the golf ball will hit the side of the jar.

You could bubble wrap the jar (helmet), but the ball will still collide with the inside of the jar.

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

#387

Post by vacri » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 7:34 PM UTC

BearGoesChirp wrote: post #374

vacri wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you have a major problem with consenting adults at college level, but not at professional level? How is consenting-for-money any different to consenting-in-hopes-of-money? As for fame, which players get significant fame? Every team has over fifty guys on their roster - how many of those could ever be named by a random member of the public who isn't a diehard fan of that same team? The linemen are the ones that…

>Why do you have a major problem with consenting adults at college level, but not at professional level? How is consenting-for-money any different to consenting-in-hopes-of-money? Because often the offers are made and accepted when the person is underage and the collusion to keep there being no pay. If colleges didn't get involved at all until people were 18 and players were paid I wouldn't have an issue. It is like…

> when the person is underage

This feels like post-hoc reasoning, given that the parents are involved, and that the person can also stop, transfer, whatever on their own later on.

> while they were still a child

Referring to 17-year-olds as 'children' is simply being disingenuous. You can join the army at 17.

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

#388

Post by takk309 » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 7:37 PM UTC

mattm wrote: post #341

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the rules could get reworked to make it less dangerous for brain injury. Take a cue from Australian Rules Football: remove all padding and make high tackles that endanger the head illegal.

As a big hockey fan, I completely agree with this. The pads players wore 30+ years ago were pretty much nothing so if you tried to hit someone hard it hurt you as well. My theory is that the NHL would see less concussions if they reduced the padding but such a counter-intuitive process is never going to happen. I'm curious, did Australian Rules Football go to padding and then remove it? Because I think that once padd…

One big reason for padding that is not directly related to player-on-player contact is getting hit with the puck. I play in beer league hockey (non-check) as a defense man and I wear full shoulder and chest pads to protect from the puck, not hits from other players. At the pro level, taking a hit from a puck without padding could easily cause very severe injury.

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

#389

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 7:46 PM UTC

vacri wrote: post #387

BearGoesChirp wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why do you have a major problem with consenting adults at college level, but not at professional level? How is consenting-for-money any different to consenting-in-hopes-of-money? Because often the offers are made and accepted when the person is underage and the collusion to keep there being no pay. If colleges didn't get involved at all until people were 18 and players were paid I wouldn't have an issue. It is like…

> when the person is underage This feels like post-hoc reasoning, given that the parents are involved, and that the person can also stop, transfer, whatever on their own later on. > while they were still a child Referring to 17-year-olds as 'children' is simply being disingenuous. You can join the army at 17.

> Referring to 17-year-olds as 'children' is simply being disingenuous. You can join the army at 17.

The second statement in no way supports the first.

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

#390

Post by takk309 » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 7:49 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #322

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 always had the impression that hockey fights were nerfed by the fact that you're on ice. Most of the power of a punch comes from planting your feet on the ground.

It is pretty easy to plant you foot with skates and get a very strong push. The big difference is the stance that you have to take. Remember, the pros are easily the best skaters in the world. Many players have on-ice boxing training at some point during their careers, often during juniors or college.