23 ms·

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

• abraae 9y ago
  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 issues, but the lack of protective helmets and body armour (and rules preventing tackling without using your arms) means that attacking players think about their own safety before launching ridiculously high impact hits on each other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F6POhAbAhE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F6POhAbAhE
  • alistairSH 9y ago
    The other difference is rugby limits the contact to the guy carrying the ball to a greater degree than American football. In the US version, the majority of players on the field will have contact on the majority of plays.
    • wavefunction 9y ago
      Also, I don't see too many 350lb corn-fed rugby players when I've watched compared to American football.
      • ghaff 9y ago
        No. But they are getting bigger which is a cause for concern with respect to injuries.
      • djKianoosh 9y ago
        You're looking at the evolution of the sport because of the equipment. If the players didnt wear so much protective gear they wouldnt have to be so big and fast and powerful, as described a few comments above. That said they cant all of a sudden change the gear but they can evolve the rules to adapt.
        • mcculley 9y ago
          Why wouldn't they be able to change the gear?
          • bluesroo 9y ago
            I'm not well-versed on the topic, but I'd guess that an abrupt change in protection could lead to more injuries in the short-term.
            • mcculley 9y ago
              Ah. That's a good point. I know nothing about football. I just assumed that they could make changes if motivated given the enormous amount of money it generates.
              • emodendroket 9y ago
                Changes are made regularly, often to encourage player safety. But I think you can only make a game so safe when it's predicated on tackling people.
        • Bud 9y ago
          This is incorrect. Football players actually wear substantially LESS padding now than in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. Just go look at the pads from those eras. Players are bigger, faster, and more powerful because that makes them better players. Not because equipment has evolved. It's the training of the athletes that has evolved.
          • alistairSH 9y ago
            Do they wear less protective gear, or is the gear just less bulky due to improvements in design?
        • NoPiece 9y ago
          You are right that it is the evolution of the sport, but I think it is driven by the increasing value (Billions of dollars at stake), more than the equipment.
      • desireco42 9y ago
        There are some but in sport agility is super important and technique as well. Mass helps but not as much as good tehnique.
      • rodgerd 9y ago
        That's because the biggest American football players, while having wonderful explosive power, would likely struggle with the endurance requirements of rugby.
    • ovulator 9y ago
      Rugby has the same problem with big hits and concussions occurring during them as American Football, but you are right in that it is illegal to block players without the ball in rugby and that is a pivotal part of American Football. In fact the disease most discussed and studied has been Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy or CTE. The position most likely (nearly 50%) to be affected are the linemen[1], not the guys leveling or receiving the bone crushing hits, but the guys doing the hum drum blocking on every play. The positions reporting the most concussions though are the guys who are doing the hitting and being hit, the guys with the ball and tackling him[2]. But these guys get the big hits rarely as players are subbed in and out and the ball is given to different players all the time. If they get a concussion it is obvious and are usually pulled from the game. Linemen on the other hand, are consistently in every play, and are blocking on every single play. They may be getting minor concussions every play, but not something noticeable enough to be pulled from the game. [1]https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/07/25/boston-university-study-cte-nfl-player-brains https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/07/25/boston-university-study-ct... [2]http://apps.frontline.org/concussion-watch/#positions_2015 http://apps.frontline.org/concussion-watch/#positions_2015
      • alistairSH 9y ago
        Thanks for that additional detail - I hadn't realized the CTE was so heavily concentrated among the linemen, though it does make sense.
      • Pxtl 9y ago
        > In fact the disease most discussed and studied has been Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy or CTE. The position most likely (nearly 50%) to be affected are the linemen[1], not the guys leveling or receiving the bone crushing hits, but the guys doing the hum drum blocking on every play. This actually means there might be hope. The game could be modified to reduce the impact on the linemen. Reduce the distance the defense has to back off from the line of scrimmage, maybe even right down to zero or even a straight-up scrum. No lead-up to that first hit, they start out in contact. No lunge forward to close the gap between offence and defense. Same gameplay happens - two lines of men trying to break through/protect the QB, but without that initial impact because they're already in a wrestling position.
  • komali2 9y ago
    This is how I feel about boxing vs MMA. Boxing gloves are huge and massively padded, meaning you take hit after hit after hit, bouncing your brain around like a ball. MMA gloves are only padded enough to maybe prevent you from breaking your knuckles, and maybe prevent your knuckles from breaking someone's jaw. If you threw the kind of punches people throw in boxing with MMA gloves on, you'd wreck your hands. That one is safer than the other has been discussed before: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mixed-martial-arts-safer-than-boxing-study_us_563ce23be4b0411d3070c8d6 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mixed-martial-arts-safer... https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/science/which-is-more-dangerous-mma-or-boxing.html?mcubz=1 https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/science/which-is-more-dan...
    • jklinger410 9y ago
      Every knockout is a concussion, and likely brain damage. It may be relatively safer than Boxing but you can't keep striking and knockouts and think it's too much better.
    • kasey_junk 9y ago
      The issue with those studies is that they don't really account for more modern views about brain injuries. We know that boxers suffer "serious" head trauma more frequently but lots of modern research suggests small repeated head trauma is as dangerous. Incidents of cte for instance in soccer maybe accounted for by heading drills. Which is why talks about concussions isn't enough. I'd still expect MMA to be safer in this regard than boxing but there is enough head banging events in things like gaurd practice that don't occur during normal boxing practice that I wouldn't be shocked to learn MMA has as serious a problem with CTE as boxing.
    • scott_s 9y ago
      > If you threw the kind of punches people throw in boxing with MMA gloves on, you'd wreck your hands. MMA fighters often wreck their hands during fights. They are in no way pulling their punches; they throw as hard as they can, just as boxers do. I find it plausible that MMA fights tend to end with less concussions and serious head trauma than boxing. But I doubt it's significantly safer. That ignores training, where fighters spend much more time, and still receive many, many sub-concussive hits. I have trained BJJ for over 13 years. During that time, I have also trained MMA. I have helped training partners for MMA matches. I have cornered training partners for MMA matches. I follow professional MMA. But I am finding myself more and more unable to justify even paying attention to it because of the evidence that even repeated sub-concussive hits cause brain damage.
  • unethical_ban 9y ago
    Another reason rugby tackles are different: The goal is to stop the player. The difference between one meter and another is minimal. In football, inches matter for the downs. So the hits are blowouts to stop people as soon as possible.
    • lancewiggs 9y ago
      There are many many more tackles in rugby and the repeated inches do matter. Great defensive teams like the All Blacks fight for every inch.
      • mfringel 9y ago
        In rugby, except for a couple of lines on the field, one inch doesn't strictly matter more than another, within the bounds of the rules. In american football, one inch anywhere on the field can make the difference between four more downs or having to kick the ball away.
        • thesehands 9y ago
          Rugby also has the method of tackling baked into the rules. If you tried to tackle in rugby in the same way as a block in NFL you'd immediately be penalised and could see yourself off the field. A typical rugby tackle almost by its definition in the rules will cede a metre or so to the attacking player as they are brought down to set up the ruck. IIRC Pete Carroll of the seahawks has taken advice from rugby professionals to help the d with their method of tackling
          • jnordwick 9y ago
            Reference? I always like to see these cross pollination stories, but I need a source on this one. The rugby way of tackling is the same as the way you are taught in Pop Warner and the way you do angle tackle drills, I thought.
  • Isamu 9y ago
    > 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 harder. Unintended consequences of trying to reduce harm.
    • cavanasm 9y ago
      I'm not so sure about this. If you look historically, in game deaths seem very common in early football. As the game has gotten better pads, players have also been getting much MUCH bigger, which is increasing risk, but we haven't seen regular documented deaths during games like in the 1890s~1930s every few years. Now we get lots of deaths due to outside issues though (lots of car accidents and shootings on that list in recent years; lots of recent suicides on the NFL list just above too). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_football_players_who_died_during_their_careers#College https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_football_play... EDIT: I realize we're talking long term vs short term, but I wasn't able to find pre-compiled data comparing timelines of major advances in football pads and injury rates.
    • amiramir 9y ago
      This phenomenon is known as Risk Compensation[1]. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
    • mcguire 9y ago
      It's likely that protection has improved the situation. http://time.com/3387798/football-deaths/ http://time.com/3387798/football-deaths/ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9406E5DC143EE033A25752C2A9679D946897D6CF&legacy=true http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9406E5DC143EE...
    • QuotedForTruth 9y ago
      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.
  • toss1 9y ago
    Interesting watching that video of rugby hits, noticing the legs. Perhaps it's just selection, but I'm wondering if it is rules requiring tackling above the waist, but it seems like every hit on that vid caused no leg injury; no knees got bend backwards, or jammed sideways, and they seemed to invariably fall with bent knees (which is protective as the leg can rotate with the force rather than tear ligaments). The hands, however, seemed to be often at risk. Is this the case? If so, was the rule ever changed for improved safety, or just ~always that way?
    • duncanawoods 9y ago
      Those are not very typical tackles. Tackling by controlling legs is common but not flashy high impact events and tend to allow the player to pass the ball mid-tackle. Legs generally seemed to sort themselves out in the normal case. Main risks I experienced as a tackler would be getting a boot to the face or shoulder impact. Main risk as a tacklee is what you land on - head, shoulders but you usually have quite a bit of control in the situation so its your responsibility to land safely and ensure you keep possession for the play to keep moving. A tackle is rarely surprising. Outcomes tend to be much worse for collisions with > 2 players when players are more likely to get inverted or things bent out of shape or landed on.
      • toss1 9y ago
        very informative - thx!
  • emodendroket 9y ago
    They started using that stuff because people were sustaining spectacular injuries (like cracking their heads open). I'm not sure it is so simple.
    • mcguire 9y ago
      "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/ http://time.com/3387798/football-deaths/
  • agumonkey 9y ago
    Reminds me of roads without trees on the side. People drive faster with guardrails and accident are as bad if not worse than before.
  • amiramir 9y ago
    Rugby has also included head injury assessments (HIA) into its laws. They sports governing body introduced HIAs in 2012 and they have been getting more stringent over the years. At he elite level a player who is suspected of having taken a significant knock to the head can be substituted off the field for 10 minutes to be assessed by a doctor. The referee, assistant referees, sideline medics or the television match official can make the get the player off the field and to the medic. Players almost always want to play on after a knock so the decision is left to officials who may have seen or heard a head impact. If a player fails the assessment then they do not return to the field and further tests will be performed after the match. If the player passes then the substitution is reversed. If an incident is missed during a game then an assessment can be ordered after reviewing a recording of the game. The laws of rugby also include clauses about contact with the head, tipping a player onto their head, or knocking a jumping player in such a way as to make them land on their head. Rugby players are getting bigger and faster and the hits are getting commensurately more energetic. Rugby is trying to keep players safe. Whether these measures help remains to be seen but I think the governing bodies take player safety pretty seriously. One interesting stat that I heard is that one of the things that seems to be inversely correlated with head injury is neck strength so we may see more players training their already powerful necks.
    • ancientworldnow 9y ago
      The NFL actually has very similar rules involving suspected head injuries though in practice they seem arbitrarily enforced - especially if it involves a key player.
      • deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
    • girvo 9y ago
      Even at club rugby level all of the players do neck muscle training! Even back in 2008 they were. Rugby is still dangerous, of course, but the governing bodies do take safety pretty seriously and reasonably openly, at least compared to the NFL. Besides, I prefer watching a huge perfectly executed tackle in union than I do watching two people run into each other without even attempting to get arms around them to bring them to the ground (I have issues with Leagues shoulder charges for the same reason)
  • geebee 9y ago
    Sounds like you know a bit about this - any chance you could weigh in on my question above? Does tackling serve a different strategic purpose in rugby vs American football (ie., not giving up an inch can be a big deal in US football), and could this also be partially responsible for the brain rattling quality of tackling?
    • abraae 9y ago
      Sounds plausible. In rugby a goal is to always keep the ball in possession. When you are tackled, you try and feed the ball back to your own side, who are (ideally) close behind you in support. So yeah - yardage gain is somewhat meaningless for its own sake in rugby, as long as you maintain possession. If you maintain possession, the other team can never score, and you eventually will. So the player's thoughts as they are tackled are less about preserving yardage and more about ensuring you'll end up in a position where you can feed the ball back to your teammates to maintain possession. Maybe that means less impact in the tackle.
      • pbhjpbhj 9y ago
        >Maybe that means less impact in the tackle. In rugby if you run at someone they'll step sideways and you'll go past. In American football that I've seen they run right at each other, on purpose. You can't hammer straight at someone flat out and still be able to adjust your trajectory to account for a side-step. (Though Union is getting more like League now in the silly, endless, rucking which is TBH more like NFL). In NFL they have plays of average ~4s, adding up to ~11 minutes across a 3½hr game time with regular changes of players using a massive team [see my other post for source]. In Rugby Union (UK) it's longer plays adding up to 45 minutes of ball-in-play across 90 minutes game duration (80 + 10 mins of half-time) with 15 players on pitch per team and up to 8 subs. Bulk and running speed/stamina tend to oppose each other.
        • gbacon 9y ago
          In the open field, American football players will attempt to sidestep or “juke” defenders. Between the tackles and other close quarters situations, running “north and south” or “downhill” is the best strategy. From early ages, coaches will discourage running backs behind the line of scrimmage juking, stutter stepping, wiggling their heads, and otherwise not gaining yardage by shouting “Quit dancin’ and hit the hole!”
  • briankelly 9y ago
    People always point to rugby when this topic comes up, but there is no conclusive evidence that it is any safer. In fact, this study found that the risk of concussion in rugby was far higher (4.13 concussions per 1,000 athletic exposure hours vs 0.53 for American football) by pooling data from 13 previous studies: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-concussion-youth-sports-idUSKBN0TZ2RE20151216 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-concussion-youth-sp... Of course there are always flaws, limitations, and contradictory evidence in these studies, but at least it is more worthwile than the eyeball test.
    • abraae 9y ago
      The key factor in that report though is that it concludes that "Concussion rates highest for kids in rugby, hockey and football". I'd guess its likely that American football as played in the NFL is a very different game to the one played by kids, and there might be virtually no correlation of actual risks. Rugby is also very different between kids and professionals of course - my 5 yr old plays ripper rugby which involves no contact tackling but instead ripping a velcro tag off the opposing player. Great fun to watch!
      • briankelly 9y ago
        Even if there is no correlation of risks between the youth and professional levels of play (and I don't doubt that), parents steering their kids towards away from rugby, hockey, and football will eventually hemorrhage market share for those professional leagues in favor of safer sports. We have flag football in the US for younger kids, sounds roughly analogous to ripper rugby.
        • jnordwick 9y ago
          There is also flag football for adults! They often have different leagues from no and partial contact up to 8-on-8 full contact (this is still flag and no tackle).
  • elicash 9y ago
    This is why I don't put a cover on my iPhone. Never dropped it.
  • jMyles 9y ago
    The same is true of MMA and hand-wraps. Ostensibly introduced to protect fighters' hands, they are actually just a threat to their heads.
  • bad_hairpiece 9y ago
    Rugby is a contact sport; football is a collision sport.
• samdung 9y ago
  This article is about american football. Not the actual 'foot'ball.
  • damnfine 9y ago
    You got downvoted, likely becayse americians all know a pedantic asshole who repeats this ad nasuem. However, it should serve to point out how US centric a lot of our assumptions are conversing on HN.
  • umanwizard 9y ago
    No shit. It's an article in an American publication; it stands to reason that it'd be written in American English.
• 6stringmerc 9y ago
  Personally, I applaud his candor and backing it up by leaving association with the sport as we know it. I have shared the change of mentality from "Oh wow!" big-hit, Bill Romanowski/Ronnie Lott type viciousness to, well, cringing. Not to shy away from MMA or Boxing or Hockey - trauma is trauma - but the change feels like something I've witnessed in my lifetime. With a personal twist, I've never been able to play due to handicap, and now, decades later, some who did play are suffering effects similar to my injuries. It's uncanny how brutal that sport actually can be to the body - especially young, growing bodies and minds. I don't like watching rock heroes of mine dying, nor sports heroes like Junior Seau - but they can help change culture. When people won't let their kids play a sport, its days are numbered, save for some communities that will probably see it as a ticket out for a long time. Oh, I almost forgot my idea/essay I put forward a while ago about re-engineering the equipment for the modern physics of the athleticism (speed + force): https://thelacesout.com/how-us-football-can-improve-player-safety-entertainment-via-technology-40fb97757e01 https://thelacesout.com/how-us-football-can-improve-player-s...
  • Jesus_Jones 9y ago
    I'm about in the same position. As a middle aged guy, the past 10 years I have watched more and more nfl football, and I'm becoming increasingly leary. I hate seeing a big hit. Take that part out and I can continue to watch. But it's hard to see how they can take the hitting out, it's such a part of the game.
    • dpeck 9y ago
      Big hits in general aren't what is causing the long term injury. CTE seems to disproportionately effect linemen that seldom experience a "big hit" but hundreds of small impacts every day during practice and play. The brain injury is most concerning, rules can adjust and technology gets better to mitigate the larger impacts, and outside of outlier catastrophic events I think many who have played will trade worn out joints and broken fingers for the experience of playing the greatest of team sports at the sub division 1* level but the mental harm is something entirely different and seems unlikely to be able to be fixed with it being anything like the gridiron football that's been played to this point. *Caveat on level because D1 and above you're making all sorts of sacrifices and trade offs that aren't something those outside of it can appreciate or even understand.
• kejaed 9y ago
  An investigative piece was released yesterday from the Hamilton Spectator in Ontario where McMaster University researchers studied the brains of 20 living former Canadian Football League players. It didn't turn out particularly well. "Study shows ‘disastrous’ damage in brains of retired CFL players" http://3downnation.com/2017/08/30/study-shows-disastrous-damage-brains-retired-cfl-players/ http://3downnation.com/2017/08/30/study-shows-disastrous-dam...
  • Pxtl 9y ago
    Oof. There are CFL players with day-jobs. These aren't NFL quadzillionaires.
    • nck4222 9y ago
      The average career of an NFL player is something like 2 years. The vast majority of people who play in the NFL go and get day jobs when their career is done. Most don't save any of their playing money.
  • jjuel 9y ago
    I didn't see anywhere if these were just randomly selected players or players who volunteered because they thought something was wrong. I know there was another study where they found a shockingly high percentage of the people studied had issues. However, in that study it was all volunteers who suspected something was wrong. Well that doesn't mean that high of a percentage of players actually have issues just the ones who suspect issues actually have issues. The studies need a little more work before I believe that every person playing football has a brain worse than a non-football player.
    • code_duck 9y ago
      I'm sure you could find that if you found the study rather than an article about it (though I'm not sure if there is a scientific journal paper attached to this or where or how it will be published). The article says they compared to "healthy control subjects of similar ages". Presumably, what they are controlling the for is the occupation of being a football player, since that is the entire point of the study. Also this part "Noseworthy was asked if there’s any chance the players’ results aren’t connected to football. “No, this is football,” he said. “That’s the common denominator.”"
• rm_-rf_slash 9y ago
  Football is America's gladiator sport. For all the fun, the money, the excitement, the money, the drama, the bombast, the cheerleaders, and even the money, we should remind ourselves that American football is a very violent sport rife with injury and long term disability, and our participation as passive spectators and consumers makes us just as responsible for the incentive structure that harms so many young men for the rest of their lives. And yet we can't stop. Football is practically an addiction in this country, and I don't think there is one serious proposal that could reduce the size and scope of injuries and brain trauma in particular, and allows the game to continue in its current familiar form. So we tuck the problem under the rug and pretend it doesn't exist until moments of faux anguish pierce our veil of doped-up depravity. Sorry if this post comes across as depressing and masochistic. After all, I am a Bills fan.
  • Jesus_Jones 9y ago
    Is violent sport an inherent part of a country's psychic makeup? Mexico has wrestling? What about Bermuda?
    • cmurf 9y ago
      I think violence is an inherent part of being a primate. It needs some kind of outlet, be it preemptive wars of choice or civil wars, as the animal gets a bit smarter then there are gladiator games, still pretty vicious but structured, and the smarter ape man gets the more structure and skill and preserving the life of the sportsman the rules get. It's the spectators that drive the structuring every bit as much as the owners. The more debased the spectators are, the more violence persists in the sport. So yeah blame the owners for knowing about football's lifelong consequences before and after the discovery of CTE, but that it persists is squarely on the spectators who keep paying for it.
  • NegativeLatency 9y ago
    Is rugby safer? I'd actually be interested in watching rugby on tv. Never been a fan of football due to all the stopping and setting up plays, makes the game move too slowly to be interesting.
• TheMagicHorsey 9y ago
  What about the sponsorship of daredevil sports like free climbing, wing suits, etc., by consumer companies like GoPro and Redbull. I feel that we are supporting these companies with our purchases, and then they in turn create social media spectacles by giving these people an incentive to do dangerous stunts. Recently a wingsuit daredevil died while livestreaming on Facebook, watched by his young daughter and wife. It was a horrific event. Of course, his broken body was festooned with the banners of various energy drinks and other bullshit. What a wonderful time we live in. Are we not all entertained?
  • criddell 9y ago
    I think one difference is that we don't have free climbing and wing suit programs in middle schools. It's one thing if you are an adult and are being paid to participate, it's another when you are a kid and playing is your ticket to a college education. I'm in Texas so my view on football is warped, but the intensity that kids play football with is nuts.
    • specialist 9y ago
      Grew up a football fanatic. Older me now thinks mixing scholastics and athletics is nuts. I remain unclear why tax payers are subsidizing professional sports by funding their farm system. And their stadiums. And their monopolies. I now favor a european style club system over any intramural sports. Government and sports should not mix.
      • deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  • ep103 9y ago
    I don't think that's a fair comparison. I love motorcycling, and the Isle of Man TT is probably the craziest spectacle I watch every year. And every year, at least one person dies in the race. A lot of the mechanics and race shops that build bikes for that race talk about whether or not they're doing a good thing. And as dangerous and awful as the above is, I wouldn't change the TT for anything. But I also wouldn't watch it, if it was a commercialized race with large corporate backing. I guess what I'm trying to get at, is there's a difference between letting people take dangerous risks in pursuit of something they love and giving them the means to do so, and exploiting people and pushing them to continue taking dangerous risks for spectacle and profit. Its a fine line to tread, but while typing this, I think I'm realizing that its easily discernible. In the first category, if there is a safer way of doing something, without neutering the fundamental nature of the activity, the community will embrace it. Just look at the armor improvements of motorcycling over the years. Or the quality of wingsuits and rescue equipment. In the second category though, other considerations start to take effect, like overall viewership numbers and team profits.
• dogruck 9y ago
  I think the headline is much stronger than the story. Cunningham's professional life is still deeply intertwined with football: > At first, Cunningham told ESPN executives that he was leaving to spend more time with his sons, ages 3 and 5, and because of his workload as a film and television producer. He was a producer for “Undefeated,” a documentary about an urban high school football team, and has a string of projects lined up. I'd guess the truth is closer to "he decided to leave ESPN for several reasons, and his concerns over the brain damage was one of those reasons -- but not the biggest reason."
  • ethmarch 9y ago
    “Those are two of the issues,” Cunningham said. He waited weeks before he revealed the third. “The big one was my ethical concerns.”
    • lern_too_spel 9y ago
      The confusing part for me is his continued involvement in a documentary that glorifies the sport. As far as abetting the brain injury entertainment industry, that participation seems little different from his former announcer participation.
• kpwags 9y ago
  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 in a minority, but I'd have no issue if the NHL eliminates fighting altogether), and the big hits aren't why I watch...I enjoy the stick work, the dangling and skills getting to the net. I can also appreciate that the NHL does seem to be doing a better job at cracking down on the dirty hits. I also play hockey (in a non-check beer league) and am very aware about the risks. I'm also an adult who is old and mature enough to accept these risks. I don't know how much that can be said for the elementary/middle/high school kids playing sports like hockey and football.
  • aaron-lebo 9y ago
    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 Foxconn, and I'll still use an Apple computer. People make sacrifices all the time, if someone wants to willingly do it as a professional, why not?
    • Bud 9y ago
      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.
      • eropple 9y ago
        Hell--high school players need to be paid fair market value. Which, in many parts of the country, is not a trivial amount.
• chasd00 9y ago
  Big hits and injuries aren't new to American Football. Some of hardest hits ever, as judged by other players, can only be seen in old black and white footage. After a lifetime of being front and center to the game he's only now walking away? If any analyst, or anyone, should be walking away from a sport it should be boxing. In boxing giving your opponent a concussion and rendering them unconscious is a decisive victory and the most important statistic for ranking.
• addicted 9y ago
  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 severely punishing the players for accepting a jersey from a relative (and at the same time refusing to ban coaches who systematically engaged in illegal activities). But throw in the brain trauma stuff and it's impossible to excuse an academic institution doing this anymore (especially since they also get tax benefits as well).
  • eropple 9y ago
    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.
    • le-mark 9y ago
      Plus, only elite NFL players get the million dollar contracts, the rest are at league minimum, which many silicon valley devs surpass.
      • eropple 9y ago
        I wouldn't say "many" Valley developers make more than $465,000 (rookie minimum) and I definitely wouldn't say that "many" Valley developers make more than $775,000 (a four-year veteran minimum). However, the earning potential certainly is stretched out. Practice squad, players, however, make about $120,000 per season, which is certainly in the ballpark.
        • le-mark 9y ago
          Oops, I should've verified, last I remember the league minimum was on the order of $250k. Apologies!
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• JustSomeNobody 9y ago
  I don't watch football for three reasons: 1) The focus on "hitting" instead of proper tackling. 2) The encouragement of obesity for linemen. 3) It's morphed into some sort of live action video game with graphics and sound effects. It used to be fun to watch, but now I just worry about the future of all the players and can't watch it.
• technologyvault 9y ago
  As much as I loved playing football and now love watching, the risk/reward balance seems to be moving so much towards too much risk. The backup plan for my five boys, for now, is to have them become really solid kickers so they can be part of the sport without having the risk of head, neck, knee, and other injuries I've had to deal with over the years.
• stillhere 9y ago
  I wonder how this compares to UFC, boxing, etc?
• tunesmith 9y ago
  I feel like I've seen another slow switch, in that injury news is being emphasized more. I'm not sure that the rate of injury is climbing, but it seems like the tone of press coverage is increasing. I also wonder how much of a season's outcome can be attributed to injury luck. Like am I basically watching a tournament that is more about when what injury will happen to who, than it is about actual skill, strategy, and tactics?
• dmalvarado 9y ago
  “I don’t feel that my being part of covering the National Football League is perpetuating danger,” (Al Michaels) said in a phone interview. “If it’s not me, somebody else is going to do this." Wow. The drug dealer's response.
• CalChris 9y ago
  My cousin played O line for Missouri. He loves football and I love my cuz. He's a college ref and was NFL chain crew for the Rams. I can't talk to him about this. Total denial. He's even mad that parents are voting with their feet by not sending their children into Pop Warner leagues.
  • scruple 9y ago
    I come from a CFB family, of sorts. My brother was special teams for a D1 school. One of my cousins was a DE for Clemson. Another two cousins played ball for a D3 school. This is all spanning from the mid 90s to the late 00s. Of them, my brother and the two that played at the D3 school are still hardcore CFB and NFL fans but they do openly discuss the CTE issues and are not thrilled at the idea of their own children playing. My cousin who went to Clemson, though, is still a hardcore fan and is in total denial. Out of the four of them, he got the closest to going pro and I imagine that has something to do with it.
• lasermike026 9y ago
  REDESIGN THE SPORT! Geewiz, everyone is standing around with their mouths open. Change the rules and goals of the game to get the desired results. The problem with football is too many concussions. Stop concussions and save the game.
  • lasermike026 9y ago
    Here's a start. http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2015/12/we-should-radically-change-the-way-we-play-football.html http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2015/12/we-should-radically-chan...
• koolba 9y ago
  I love watching football and each year I look forward to the start of football season. It's amazing game to watch and when played by great players, exceedingly entertaining and exciting. I'm not blind to the research about what it does to the players brains but my reaction is the reverse of what I'm reading from most in this thread: I'm watching more football than ever. I think it's only a matter of time till the game is either neutered to nothingness or banned entirely and I selfishly want to enjoy every last minute that I can. There's a sibling comment referring to as "America's gladiator sport". I think that's particularly apt. Deep down we feel dirty watching it but we also don't want to turn it off.
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  • WesleyLivesay 9y ago
    I think in general more people would be okay with it as "America's gladiator sport" if people were not starting to play it at the age of 12.
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• brandonmenc 9y ago
  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.
  • Goronmon 9y ago
    And if the worst damage comes from positions like lineman and linebackers repeatedly hitting their heads on every down during the course of normal play, how do any of those changes fix that problem?
    • brandonmenc 9y ago
      > tweak the other rules a bit Forced rotations, etc.
• alistproducer2 9y ago
  I'm in my second year of not watching/supporting the NFL for just this reason. Add the that the treatment of Colin Kaepernick and I'm not sure I'll look back. I'd be lying if I said I won't watch the super bowl, but my days of watching endless hours and going to games are likely over unless and until they make the players take off that ridiculous armor.
  • DanCarvajal 9y ago
    Same here, fall now has so much more time for activities!
• kendallpark 9y ago
  It's become increasingly popular to dismiss football as this barbaric, gladiatorial sport. Maybe it is. But it's a damn fun one. The problem with football is that people love football. Not just watching football, but playing football. I played for seven years, had three surgeries, and no doubt dropped some IQ points rattling my skull on the line. If I could go back in time, I'd do it all over again. We need to do something to save this sport. I don't really care if the NFL dies or if the NCAA loses its cash cow. I don't care about losing football as entertainment. I want my kids to also have the opportunity to play the sport I love and I want it to be safer for them.
• pwthornton 9y ago
  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. 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. 3). Put padding on the outside of helmets and maybe shoulder pads. Current helmets are not doing nearly a good enough job of slowing down energy. They are designed to protect against fractures, but future football equipment should be designed to slow down impacts. 4) Make neutral zone a few yards long. Much of the worst blows happen to linemen who fire off into each other, particularly on running plays. While big hits get the most notice, it is actually those who are suffering routine head blows that are at the most risk. 5) Ban the quarterback sneak and any other similar play where linemen dive into each other in short yardage situations. 6) Ban players for unsafe hits. 15-yard penalties are not nearly enough for something that could cause someone to die very young. 7) Ban players for PEDs. Steroids and HGH permanently alter your physiology. PEDs are making players unnaturally big, strong and fast. Suspensions are not enough, because even if a player stops doing them, he may have made himself unnaturally big, strong and fast. 8) Allow defensive backs to hand check and other ways of playing defense that don't revolve around big hits. The passing game has exploded in the NFL, partly because it's so hard to defend against receivers. Receivers get more separation these days. Allowing hand checking closes separation and would limit the amount of passing.
  • cratermoon 9y ago
    > Ban players for PEDs .... Suspensions are not enough, because even if a player stops doing them, he may have made himself unnaturally big, strong and fast. This is really insightful. I don't know much about HGH but I know steroid use is something that a guy can do for a while, gain muscle and size, and stop, and yes, some of that size will go away, but there's a base that will never go away. That's a fact a lot of folks don't know, that steroids have permanent effects. The sport may catch a guy cycling and suspend him for a few games or a season, but it doesn't matter. He's already gotten growth that he can then build on without PEDs, and gotten an advantage over guys who never use steroids.
• JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  I recently caught up with an old acquaintance. We interned together many years ago. He was on the college football team then, and quite proud of it. It hasn't been that long; he isn't that old. Yet at the end of a lunch (at which we had nothing to drink) he forgot four times in a row that we had already paid the cheque. He complained of a recent lay-off. He believes he was targeted for forgetting appointments and missing details. This shocked me--he used to have a far better memory than I did. Maybe I'm overfitting. But I can't help but imagine that if his school, one of the top in our country, hadn't let him destroy himself under their watch, we'd still have a sharp, productive young man with us.
  • jjuel 9y ago
    For every one of those there are others who are still functioning at a very high level. I played in Junior High, High School, and a couple years in college. I have yet to see any ill effects. The problem with the science behind it is they never take other factors into account. Who knows if someone had some genetic cause that may have exacerbated the effects of hits in football.
    • freehunter 9y ago
      >The problem with the science behind it is they never take other factors into account. Yeah you know science, never controlling for other factors.
    • InclinedPlane 9y ago
      The science is very clearcut and unambiguous. If you think otherwise you're delusional. Both boxing and football are very bad for your brain long term. Some people escape the worst symptoms, but enough are injured on a regular basis to make it a very serious public health concern.
• frankydp 9y ago
  I am patiently waiting for the first bellwether Ivy league school to drop football with brain injury being the reason. I think the demise of college and then professional football would cascade after that, still a decade or two but it would be inevitable and possibly faster than people expect.
  • heartbreak 9y ago
    Yale cutting football has 0 chance whatsoever of convincing a single SEC school to cut football. The SEC would be around sponsoring football even if every other conference was shuttered. Edit: Okay maybe Vanderbilt would leave.
    • frankydp 9y ago
      I agree. But, I was mostly suggesting that the social pressure that would result from the Ivy schools dropping for cause would snowball. The effects may be the most obvious at the lowest age groups, even more than now. I think that wave of decisions to not play or allow play, would march right up the recruiting pipeline. I am in the Southeast and my county has no Middle school football, already. The only feeders for HS ball in my area is private leagues.
• SirensOfTitan 9y ago
  I grew up in Pittsburgh watching Steelers football. My dad died a couple years ago and it helps me feel close to him. He played football in college at a D1 program, but luckily didn't incur any brain trauma and was incredibly sharp until his last moments. With that, I just can't stomach the damage this sport does to its players, all while the NFL continues to try to sweep the issue under the rug. I think I should stop watching and implicitly supporting this sport until something is done. And sure, players are probably aware of the damage they can do to themselves; however, humans are bad at evaluating long term risks. I'd bet that many players either consciously determine that 'it won't happen to them,' or they ignore the risks in search of a big salary.
• MBCook 9y ago
  I honestly don't understand how football is still legal. I know it's popular but how can you see the evidence we've found and think people should still be allowed to play?
• nvusuvu 9y ago
  I, too, experienced this. But following football in the South is a quasi-religion and you can get ostracized for being a non-believer.
• jimjimjim 9y ago
  Other parts of the world change the rules of their 'person holding ball and running' games to make them safer for players. Rubgy union, rugby league, aussie rules. All have had rule changes over the years to make them safer. And these are in countries with universal health care and without a 'sue everybody' culture.
• hockeybias 9y ago
  As a lot of you probably know, the European style of hockey - as opposed to the North American 'Dump and Chase' (and Clobber into the end boards) style is a very entertaining brand of hockey to watch. A lot of people disagree with me, but I believe that the chippy, dangerous stuff could be legislated out of the NHL if the league implemented truly stiff fines and penalties that would discourage coaches from putting chippy players on the ice and discourage GMs from signing chippy players. Hit the owners in he pocketbook and things will change. that is what I believe. Having said that, I feel that as long as Bettman and the NHL owners feel that the chippy stuff puts butts in the seats it will be part of the NHL. I perceive that the players do not have as much respect for each other and the game as they did years ago. This is not an original thought of mine and has been drummed into my head a bit over the years. It does seem to me that some of the most dangerous hits would not occur if the players respected one another more. That is just a perception of mine. Any thoughts? I know serious hockey fans in Minnesota who have grown fond of the girls (high school) and womens (NCAA) rules that do not allow checking. I personally like good, solid, clean checks that separate the opponent from the puck.
• bkohlmann 9y ago
  “And you’re going to have to make a decision about which direction you want to go.” He raised his hand and pointed. “If you go that way you can be somebody. You will have to make compromises and you will have to turn your back on your friends. But you will be a member of the club and you will get promoted and you will get good assignments.” Then Boyd raised his other hand and pointed another direction. “Or you can go that way and you can do something — something for your country and for your Air Force and for yourself. If you decide you want to do something, you may not get promoted and you may not get the good assignments and you certainly will not be a favorite of your superiors. But you won’t have to compromise yourself. You will be true to your friends and to yourself. And your work might make a difference. To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. That’s when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do? Which way will you go?” -Robert Coram, The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War
• Balgair 9y ago
  There seems to be a lot of comments about the dangers and how many people will not play nor let their friends and family play football again. I thought I should chime in. I have had 3 major concussions in my lifetime where I blacked-out for some period of time, maybe, not counting the other ones where I did not lose consciousness or notice the hits as badly. I still love those contact sports but have quit them too. I'll detail some of the issues that I had with concussions and what it felt like to have them (names and places have been changed to protect the guilty/innocent). I only played rugby in college and wrestled in HS, so my experiences with concussions are not football related. However, I think you should read this article first before going on into the wall of text below as that writer is much better than I am: http://www.gq.com/story/the-concussion-diaries-high-school-football-cte http://www.gq.com/story/the-concussion-diaries-high-school-f... So, I guess that’s what happened to me too. Zac’s issues with body image, his sleeping problems, the drug addictions and the dependency. These are the reasons that I don’t ever mess with stuff. Because I know that I will end up like Zac, and that’ll just make it all so much worse. It all fits for me. Yeah, the good little scientist in me says that there can be a million and one reasons why that is all crap, genetics, development, those little flies to be batted about in your mind, annoying you. That self-doubt of a mosquito. But yeah, it all fits. Occams razor and all that jazz.
  • Balgair 9y ago
    One was in high school when a wrestling-mate punched me in the back of the head with his elbow while I was down. We were doing drills in the Mulituse room, the one next to the band rooms, on the mats. I was wearing an ungodly amount of clothes to cut weight. It was near the end of practice. I was sprawled out on the mat and my partner's job was to not let me up and make a 1 point escape. I just sat there until I could see a move out, as he was a much better wrestler than I was. He tried everything including putting his finger up my butt, a favorite move of his that I had expected I would have to endure, to get me to move at all so he could get a move to make. Near the end of the drill session, and I didn’t anticipate this, he just got on top of me and slammed his elbow into the back of my head, as he was so frustrated, and just said ‘Fuck you /u/Balgair!’. Thing is about these concussions, you remember weird things, and not all of it. I usually remembered the first few seconds to minutes afterwards, but then blanks fill it all out, like a floater in your eye, but in your mind. Not static, just, Nothing, and not even emotions too, just calmness at the nothingness. I hope that is what death is like, that it is calm too. So I remembered the first few seconds after the hit. I now know that it was a concussion, it didn’t hurt at all. In fact the only sensation I remember is a chill shiver all the way from my crown of my head down into my lower back, taking about 3 seconds to complete. I don’t remember if I could hear or see or talk in those seconds. Just that shiver of warmth and chill all at once. Then I remember that we were doing spawrl drills, all of us boys in all those sweat pants and sweaters. I remember in that sodium orange arc-lamp lighting of the room, "John" yelling at us to do thing, as he was the student-leader that day. I remember trying to do the drills, and then not being able to. I remember that John was yelling at us all and then yelling at me to do it. And I remember the shame that I felt when John made us do more because I wasn’t doing them up to John's standards. I think we had to do another 1/3rd more. Then it all just goes blank. I think I have written about this before, but memory is hard. I’ll tell it again though, as another witnessing is probably good too as I don’t think that all the stories will match up 100%. The other time was actually with John too. I think we both got concussions real bad that day. John is a goofy foot. So, when we were doing pipe drills, he was falling the other way from most of the people next to him, like me. A pipe drill is when the other guy has your leg between his legs and has his arms wrapped around your thigh. Then that guys tries to take you down to the mat and pin you. So, typically, you use leverage and then try to swing the guy you are holding onto down. You go to the same side usually, as the foot you are holding, so if you hold the right leg, you then will swing the guy towards that side, so he falls on his back to the right side. Now, John being a lefty, had the opposite led being held, and that meant that he fell to the left and not the right like everyone else. That meant he fell into me. Specifically on this particular drill, his head fell into my head. I only remember the sound that it made, like a pulse of lightening. Just a really low, loud, crack. Maybe like a sheet of metal being thrown into a flat-bed. Then it’s just vignettes, or gifs, loops in my memory that I, to this day, just space out inside of. The chronology is shaky now, again, just different, files?, in my mind that are near that time period. You can put them in whatever order you want. I remember having my head in my hand, face down, I don’t know if I was sitting or standing, I was the one that was screaming, but I wasn’t telling myself to scream. I was listening to my voice scream, I wasn’t in control of myself, maybe my amygdala was, who knows. I don’t remember any sights or feelings outside of my hands and face and my hearing. Just numb otherwise. I remember sitting in the littler back room, I was back on the wall and legs bent upwards. I remember my fingers tingling really bad, like if you let them fall asleep on you for a hour. I remember spots in my vision, all purple and yellow, blue and brown, like a tye-dye shirt. Again, I felt like I was not me, like I was just watching a movie in theater of my eyes and my hands were these gloves of tingle sensations over whomever was remembering these things. I remember telling Coach about all this, like I wasn’t me, and he said ‘Get over it.’ It was so mean, so hateful, but I was numb and not talking, someone else was being talked to and doing the talking. I remember, really vaguely, the other coaches whispering, but I had no sight then. I knew they were talking about me and John, but I’ll never know what they said. I remember telling Coach I wanted to go to the nurse, who was literally the next door down from us, again, no vision in this memory. I remember Coach relenting and sounding exasperated, and I remember tasting vomit but not knowing if it was me or what had happened or why I tasted vomit, I remember finding it interesting that I tasted vomit and nothing more than interest. I remember the trainer, she was a smaller Asian woman, in a blue windbreaker and a white shirt, her black hair pulled back into a pony-tail. She was very tired of talking to me, like we had been talking for a while. She was looking up at Coach, so that means I must have been seated, though I don’t remember feeling like I was. There were noises of people playing and thumping basketballs in the other rooms. I remember she said to Coach ‘he has to go to a hospital’ and that Coach was angry about that, not concerned or worried, but just angry that I had to leave and that I got to skip out on practice, like that I should be punished for this whole affair, not that I should be going to a hospital and be treated like a baby. I remember pulling up to the hospital, in the darkness, the lights were shining up onto the hospital from lights in the ground, giving it a strange glow. I do not remember who drove me there or anything about the hospital at all in any way. I remember going out, some days later, to a Mexican place near Orinda. All I remember was walking into that place with Mom and Dad, but not my siblings. I remember telling myself that I was not going to eat anything so that I could cut weight. I remember a really big sombrero on the wall outside the place. I remember telling Mom years later that I don’t even remember that week or much of that month. I lost 25lbs in water weight later that week in order to make weight for a tournament. I failed at that, but that is yet another story.
• ben_jones 9y ago
  We need to acknowledge as a society that we're ok with young men giving themselves brain trauma for our enjoyment. That's the truth. Denying it, pretending like we care or that it disgusts us, is just furthering the problem. In aggregate (US citizens) have spoken.
• harry8 9y ago
  The NFL is going to be sued out of existence. There'll be a replacement league with different rules focusing on player protection in the aftermath. It will take a long time because football holds such a key place in the culture that it continues to be largely exempt from negligence law but when the tide turns it will be a tsunami.
• Havoc 9y ago
  Repeated hits to the head are not good for the head after all. Surprise!
• at-fates-hands 9y ago
  The documentary on PBS? That just opened a lot of eyes to the dangers of concussions. You know who else is at an incredibly high risk? Guys who skateboard and do freestyle BMX: http://www.espn.com/action/story/_/id/15614274/bmx-legend-dave-mirra-diagnosed-cte http://www.espn.com/action/story/_/id/15614274/bmx-legend-da... Doctors say late BMX legend Dave Mirra had CTE BMX icon Dave Mirra, who died in February, suffered from the type of chronic brain damage that has shown up in the brains of dozens of football players, a University of Toronto neuropathologist has concluded. Multiple neuropathologists confirmed the diagnosis. Now think of all the skateboarders who DO NOT ride with helmets and eat shit on the pavement all the time. It's only a matter of time before that industry is awash in guys who have CTE. Football and hockey? Just the tip of the iceberg man. . . .
• vcool07 9y ago
  Just out of curiosity, if the sport is so violent/unsafe for kids, why not ban it for under 18 players ? Or is it that, only a small subsection of the american population find it violent/unsafe and the rest are completely fine with it ? I find it difficult to understand how parents could allow their children to play a sport knowing it might cause permanent brain damage to his/her kid. Maybe we're missing something in this debate ?
• johan_larson 9y ago
  Boxing used to be one of the top US sports early in the 20th century. But it faded away, mostly. In the same way, football could start fading away. There are already some early signs, with parents starting to push their kids toward flag football rather than tackle. http://www.cracked.com/blog/i-quit-watching-nfl-and-why-you-will-too/ http://www.cracked.com/blog/i-quit-watching-nfl-and-why-you-...