5 ms·
Your premise is wrong. It sounds as if it should be right, but the framing is awry The players are not really aware of the health risks, furthermore they are y
by clort 9y ago
Your premise is wrong. It sounds as if it should be right, but the framing is awry
The players are not really aware of the health risks, furthermore they are young and foolish and impressionable and are following the path of glamour which has been sold to them as youngsters.
The sports organization is aware of the risks and are using the players to make vast sums for themselves, they are pushing the glamourous path and they are not supporting the discarded players. They are ignoring the debt to society incurred generating their profit and that is not good unless you think that their tax payments should cover it (do they? I don't know..)
- katastic 9y agoIf the NAACP was selling sex trafficking to cheer leaders to profit from them, we'd care. But because we're destroying the brains and bodies of males with illusions of fame and fortunem and brainwashing them into thinking they're "heroes" and "warriors", it's all the young adult boys fault--even though they're still trying to find their place in the world and the brain clearly still develops until at least 25-years old. And if a major college was teaching students that global warming is false and the Earth was 3,000 years old, and that coal and lead were good for the lungs, the public would be outraged. Don't brainwash out kids! But again... brainwashing football players... they must be jocks... so to hell with them. They "chose" their lives and their eventual crippling diseases. ... But did they? "Disposable male" culture, indeed.
- msingle 9y agoI think you meant NCAA (not NAACP)
- dang 9y agoYour last several comments all break the HN guidelines by being uncivil and/or unsubstantive and/or flamebait. We've warned you about this before. If you keep doing this, we're going to ban your account. We do appreciate your substantive posts but you're damaging the site with these other ones, which are not at all the kind of internet forum HN is trying to be. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
- FLUX-YOU 9y ago>The players are not really aware of the health risks, furthermore they are young and foolish and impressionable and are following the path of glamour which has been sold to them as youngsters. I think a great deal of them would still choose to play despite knowing the risks. There are likely neighborhoods where people raise families that are less safe than playing in the NFL. And I'm sorry, but 25 year olds are not "young and impressionable" any more, so I don't buy that defense. These are adults making adult decisions: http://www.footballperspective.com/2016-av-adjusted-team-age-overall/ http://www.footballperspective.com/2016-av-adjusted-team-age... What I would buy as a defense is that NFL has a serious amount of propaganda and actively works to suppress medical knowledge which can fool anyone, child or adult. It is a very similar kind of propaganda for selling military careers by associating it with video games to high schoolers except that you can actually join the US military at 17 with parental consent.
- dhimes 9y agoAnd 17-18 yo is the age of accepting a football scholarship to an NCAA school.
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago> a great deal of them would still choose to play despite knowing the risks Good, then this is easy: let's tell them, and make it their choice.
- azernik 9y agoThis particular thread was about the NCAA, which does recruit players at 17-18 (just entering college).