Concussions: What can be Done?

Submitted by WSU to Blue on

Sorry in advance for the extremely lengthy post, just my attempt at creating some “rigorous debate”.  But honestly, what more can the NFL/refs do to prevent concussions?

To say nothing has changed I feel is an absolutely inaccurate depiction of the situation. Check out any game from decades past and you’ll see 30 downs where a player gets  nearly decapitated and nobody bats an eye.  The NFL has come a long way from where they were when it comes to taking steps towards protecting players. Some hits are obviously malicious, but they assess penalties, fines, review plays after the game, and suspend players for weeks if need-be. The pads are as good as they can be, and there are jobs that are dedicated to researching and improving equipment when possible.

We would need to upgrade pads/safety equipment far beyond what we know/ are capable of doing right now, and proposing something like "take pads away" would never be taken seriously. If you ask me, the raise in concussions isn't necessarily about the player/safety relations (players are more informed than ever, causing many to retire early) but rather the increased level of athleticism, power, finesse, and speed at all positions.

Everyone has a "proper" way to tackle until you're faced with a 240 pound monster that runs a 4.4 barreling towards you.  Simply put, in the words of Mike Tyson, “Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”.  When it’s someone’s job to physically impose their will in order to stop you, these things will happen, and as long as you’re watching, it nullifies the need to take action because they’re still making $$$.

To my knowledge, there has been an emphasis throughout little league, and developmental teams to educate children about concussions from the start which should pay dividends to our up-and-coming athletes that could make it to the NFL.  Nonetheless, we’re still years away from seeing something like that pay off.  And as I’m sure you’re aware, the NFL has effectively gotten rid of kickoff returns, and could do away with them completely in the near future in the name of player safety.

SO, with all that being said, I present the question again:  With this becoming a major concern, what more can be done?  Do we allow the NFL to start by taking away kickoffs, and eventually tinker with the game enough to make it almost unrecognizable? Do we allow these hits to continue and just inform athletes that by playing the sport they could possibly be digging their own grave?  Do we assess targeting penalties similar to college football?  Because some coaches/ upper managment don't always make decisions with a players longevity in mind, I think if someone lobbied for a third party medical staff for teams, rather than one that works on behalf of the team, it could help so that there’s no incentive to rush players back on the field.  And as much as some people may disagree, I feel like the NFL is making an effort to protect players (and their wallets since the NFL has been under a barrage of lawsuits from former players) more so than years past, but it is nowhere near where it needs to be.  What are your thoughts?

WSU to Blue

September 9th, 2016 at 4:22 PM ^

We can try and do something like soccer, just in football fashion, where targeting penalties are assesed, penalties carry over to the next game, and if you get two you get ejected and have to miss a game.  But in the same breath, that would probably bring about new problems like flopping. 

bluebyyou

September 9th, 2016 at 4:55 PM ^

That's a good way of eliminating football.  The game will die if the head injury issue is not resolved.

Maybe the NFL has this, which I believe is now part of college football, but why not have a booth review of each play.  If head to head contact is made and not called, and it is obvious that the contact was intentional, let the booth call the penalty.  The way Newton was hit last night and penalties not called suggests the NFL has bigger problems than not knowing the Ideal Gas Law exists.

FLwolvfan22

September 9th, 2016 at 5:05 PM ^

But there are great many out there with an agenda to take the manliness out of the sport that most guys in the US watch. They're making hay with the concussion issue. Guess they'll have to go after MMA next and it will come down to "you choose to get your head beatin' in (somewhat) that's your business, sign a waiver and get out there and play.

bluebyyou

September 9th, 2016 at 5:30 PM ^

Based on studies that show that you don't need head to head contact to get  CTE suggests you are right with one exception.  If a drug can be developed that alleviates what happens in the brain, you have a plan B.  I believe Harvard is working on such a product.

wolverine1987

September 9th, 2016 at 6:08 PM ^

But ultimately you are right. there comes a time when we should say "we've done what we can to make the game as safe as we can, but we've reached the limit. Now it's up to you and future people to decide for themselves if the risks outweigh the rewards." And that is totally and completely fine. It's time to start treating adults as adults--we are allowed to risk our brain health if we want to, and that goes for everyone. The people who say on this blog "I feel guilty watching football now," are ridiculous. I wouldn't feel a twinge of guilt watching competitive skydiving, not should anyone. The same for motorcycle racing or any other potentially dangerous sport. 

kalamazoo

September 9th, 2016 at 11:24 PM ^

Understand where you're coming from, but should also take into account that college football players, similar to the military, come from families with lesser than the median income when you consider their aggregate standing.

So they have less access to knowledge on the risks and less likely to be interested in avoiding the risks even if they have the knowledge, since it is a scholarship and money to help them along.

So I actually agree with most of what you wrote, but we should provide a dose of compassion and plenty of materials (including past nflers who had brain issues) to fully ensure their families are on board with fans watching them potentially damage their brains for the rest of their lives.

It's not like most of us help football players with their medical bills to receive the best care possible...finding some way to best repair the brain. Once someone is injured or retired, I wish them well, and they slowly fade from mind. And then I pay to watch the next guy potentially hurt himself. So agree, but with compassion, and hope we can reduce injuries...especially long term neurological effects from concussions.

Christicks

September 9th, 2016 at 5:07 PM ^

Why do we ignore freedom of choice? You can choose to make millions of dollars and risk your body or you can choose not to and be 100% healthy. OR you could choose to create a new, safer sport and risk trying to attain a sizeable fan base. Why is the answer always to regulate other people's decisions?

Erik_in_Dayton

September 9th, 2016 at 5:58 PM ^

Are that many people really talking about banning football? And are our choices really "always" being taken away? You can do a hell of a lot of things in the U.S. that are destructive to yourself and others.

Honest question: would you draw any line at all? Why not allow gladiatorial games? People would make incredible amounts of money.

bluebyyou

September 9th, 2016 at 6:13 PM ^

If you thought that someone like Denard Robinson might have an abbreviated lifespan with years of suffering because of his activities on the gridiron, would you think it is worth playing football?  

Ultimately, if no solution is found one of two events will occur that will change things.  If enough parents say no to football, the game may die in high schools due to lack of participation.  The bigger concern I have is on the legal side of the ledger.  A few large dollar judgments and the cost of insuring against risk may become prohibitive.

wolverine1987

September 9th, 2016 at 9:29 PM ^

Or should be. NO ONE else should have a say in it. Though you've set up a false choice. It is far, far, from certain that Denard or anyone over a normal percentage of players will have an appreviated lifespan. We have 80 years of experience showing us that as far as we know right now, abbreviated lifespans are not happening from football at rates any different from the general population. 

Sopwith

September 9th, 2016 at 6:29 PM ^

of having any workplace safety standards at all? As long as risks are disclosed, should all workplaces simply be "at your own risk?" Coal mines? Oil rigs? Chemical plants? Or isn't it reasonable to expect that employers and employees work together to implement workplace safety rules promulgated by regulatory authorities to at least a minimal standard?

UM Fan from Sydney

September 9th, 2016 at 5:49 PM ^

Thank you. This has been my argument forever. Football is a contact sport. It is also dangerous. As you stated, people know what they are getting into when playing. If you don't want the risk of health issues, then do not play. It is as simple as that. No one is being forced to play.

Brick in The Wave

September 9th, 2016 at 4:27 PM ^

Football is an impact sport not a contact sport.  I know this won't be popular but for arguments sake maybe the only way to make football safer is to take away the pads and helmets, then at least you wouldnt have players using their bodies as weapons.

 

 

WSU to Blue

September 9th, 2016 at 4:42 PM ^

That's why it more than likely wouldnt be successful if we tried to turn football into rugby.  Its already been done.

Also, concussions happen at a good clip in rugby as well and get swept under the rug because it's the least of their worries.  Dont believe me?  Look up the dude who had to get his nutsack stapled shut and made it back in the game by the second half.

PopeLando

September 9th, 2016 at 5:02 PM ^

Every time I see someone propose taking away pads and helmets as a way of improving safety, I want to scream.

Football players DIED at a decent clip early in the 1900s; they died often enough that people were seriously considering banning the sport.

Sure, football pads and helmets protect the one doing the hitting. But damned if you haven't missed the point: pads and helmets were implemented to protect the one being hit.

MGoManBall

September 9th, 2016 at 4:29 PM ^

In previous studies, it was shown that in woman's college soccer, there were about 6.3 concussions per 10,000 exposures vs 6.1 per 10,000 in football.

Woman's soccer players get more concussions than men playing football.

As long as there are sports, there will be concussions. There is obviously more knowledge than ever on the subject and people are doing what they can to minimize the damage... but what else can you do?

Sac Fly

September 9th, 2016 at 4:44 PM ^

That study is basing their numbers off of reported concussions. There's no number to go by, obviously, but if you took the number of unreported concussions in football it would astronomically higher.

I was listening to Mark Schlereth a few months ago on the radio and he said he lost consciousness in every game he ever played in and was never diagnosed with a concussion.

WSU to Blue

September 9th, 2016 at 4:35 PM ^

Football is a contact sport and can be considered one of the last "gladiator" sports there is.  Unfortunately, with new information coming out about its dangers it makes me think it wont be around (at least not as we know it) too much longer unless something is done to ensure safety.  I think eventually nobody is going to want to play football at the highest level, for any money, while knowing they have to swallow 50 different pills in the morning just to get out of bed....at age 35.

Billy Seamonster

September 9th, 2016 at 5:01 PM ^

I highly disagree with you that nobody will want to play. People that are able to make another career out of something else will quit football. But in reality some guys have no other way to get paid. Even some guys have said to the effect"I don't care. This is the only way I can support my family."