metzelaars_lives Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 (edited) The straw man is part of your arguement too. How can we confirm that the "demons" these guys suffer is all CTE. How many guys suffer because they are lost without football? I would never say CTE isn't real. I'm just saying we can never quantify cause and effect so simply. I don't even have an argument. I am saying that I think it's good that parents are aware of the risks in playing football. There are risks. I would let my kid play football. Some people wouldn't. I certainly would not hold anything against someone who wouldn't let their kid play. I just think it's important that people are made aware of the risks so that they can make their own educated decisions. I can't imagine that's a controversial opinion to have. Let me ask you this- do you think that linebacker from San Francisco, Borland, is a "wuss?" Do you think there is something dishonorable in his decision to retire after a year because he decided playing football wasn't worth the potential risk? Also, I would agree with you that part of a lot of former players' depression probably has to do with them being lost without the limelight of their playing career. But for a lot of players it goes way beyond depression to more cognitive effects and in those cases, there is no debate as to the cause and effect correlation. Edited December 7, 2015 by metzelaars_lives
UBBullsfan Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 (edited) I'm not saying there's not risks. I'm just saying that technology and rule changes will diminish those risks. If I had kids, I would let them play. If the Bills let me audition for the team, I would play (pretending my skills were 100x what they really are) Edited December 7, 2015 by UBBullsfan
Just in Atlanta Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 I love false equivalencies. It's a pretty accurate analogy to our newfound obsession with safety, actually.
DriveFor1Outta5 Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 (edited) I don't even have an argument. I am saying that I think it's good that parents are aware of the risks in playing football. There are risks. I would let my kid play football. Some people wouldn't. I certainly would not hold anything against someone who wouldn't let their kid play. I just think it's important that people are made aware of the risks so that they can make their own educated decisions. I can't imagine that's a controversial opinion to have. Let me ask you this- do you think that linebacker from San Francisco, Borland, is a "wuss?" Do you think there is something dishonorable in his decision to retire after a year because he decided playing football wasn't worth the potential risk? Also, I would agree with you that part of a lot of former players' depression probably has to do with them being lost without the limelight of their playing career. But for a lot of players it goes way beyond depression to more cognitive effects and in those cases, there is no debate as to the cause and effect correlation. Borland isn't a wuss. He's a smart guy that made a choice that works in his life. He made $1 million dollars, and left the game. An intelligent person guy can establish a great future with that in the bank. It's funny how he didn't think about this during college. I don't know the whole story. How many concussions did he have in the NFL? If he had a few it was a wise choice. If not it's hard to believe he had his heart in it. Edited December 7, 2015 by DriveFor1Outta5
dayman Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 (edited) I'm a skinny-fat white dude with no speed or strength and my wife is of similar athletic ability in women-terms. My kid has no real reason to play football unless he really wants to...when the time comes...he'll be playing baseball/basketball/tennis/golf/[insert-other-sport]...and he'll enjoy watching football on the weekends with me. If he asks to play football...he can play. But it won't be presented to him as something he necessarily aught to try. (I played btw...all through childhood...it was fun and an experience that shaped me in part but there are plenty of substitutes for what I got out of it). Edited December 7, 2015 by dayman
BADOLBILZ Posted December 7, 2015 Posted December 7, 2015 That's pretty misleading. That is referring to head trauma that requires immediate care. Cyclists are wearing a soft helmet and higher off the ground. Also riding over concrete or asphalt and often collide with cars. CTE is a degenerative condition over time. A cyclist may have one bad accident but a football player will have thousands of small ones. This is not apples to apples at all. But this isn't a discussion about concussions. It's a discussion about CTE. And in cycling, plowing your head into the ground is an exception, while in football, getting a blow to the head even a minor one like happens between lineman on almost every play, is part of the game. Cycling is a very jarring sport. Your premise is right......football is more violent than almost all other sports......but if you are worried about jarring your brain then stay off a bike.
metzelaars_lives Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 live in bubble wrap its awesome Curious- who said that you should live your life in bubble wrap or that it's awesome to do so?
boyst Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 movies coming out, ok sure. the guy who discovered CTE is also gonna say what? Honestly, this is just hilarious.
dayman Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 movies coming out, ok sure. the guy who discovered CTE is also gonna say what? Honestly, this is just hilarious. Honestly, this thing is glorifying a guy who proved that repeated head knocking leads to a ****ed up head. So that guy is probably going to say..."duh."
Nitro Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 CTE is a risk if you tackle with your head. I know many guys (over 50 years of age) who played and suffer no effects. I remember the change in tackling styles when I was in High school in the early 1970s. Jack Tatum, Mel Blount and Doug Plank were made famous for big hits that made the NFL highlights. Younger guys would emulate them. Little did they know. A friend of mine, Dave Duerson, played at Notre Dame and in the NFL mostly with the Bears. He learned as a rookie, he needed to blast guys. Tackling was not enough. He was a smart guy but made a bad choice to try to be the next Doug Plank. Dave took his own life and CTE is to blame. I let my son play and taught him proper tackling. His coaches in school reinforced this and I was grateful. My boy suffered no injuries and enjoyed his time playing.
Observer Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 What about all the new rules, procedures, etc? My issue is that "football" as a whole is being vilified but the game of today is totally different from the way it was when most of these players with CTE played the game. What if all of these new rules, protocols, equipment, and coaching changes significant reduce concussions across the board? Is football still evil then? Also, we now have full knowledge and awareness of concussions. That makes a world of difference. The concussion protocol helps for people with multiple concussions. But it still doesn't address the CTE issue of all the small hits hurting the brain. The protocol only ensures concussed people don't come back too soon. Cycling is a very jarring sport. Your premise is right......football is more violent than almost all other sports......but if you are worried about jarring your brain then stay off a bike. As I stated, there are certainly dangers in all aspects of you life, but you football is a game where hitting your head is part of the game. If brain shaking was the problem, why isn't gymnastics filled with concussions? It is a respectable decision to not let your kid play, but by supporting the game you are just screwing over someone else's kid. CTE is associated with repeated head blows. I've not seen a lot of gymnasts consistently bashing their heads on the pommel horse.
UBBullsfan Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 The concussion protocol helps for people with multiple concussions. But it still doesn't address the CTE issue of all the small hits hurting the brain. The protocol only ensures concussed people don't come back too soon. As I stated, there are certainly dangers in all aspects of you life, but you football is a game where hitting your head is part of the game. Small hits causing CTE is still speculation. Nothing conclusive yet.
Observer Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 Small hits causing CTE is still speculation. Nothing conclusive yet. And smoking doesn't cause cancer. Better to encourage kids to play soccer, basketball, lacrosse, or if he's not an athlete, baseball. Youth tackle football will be extinct in 40 years.
DriveFor1Outta5 Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) Post like these from football fans kind of confuse me. My logic is along the lines that some guys suffer from playing and others don't. The world is a dangerous place, and as we age our past starts to impact us all physically. Football players are no different. I'm just confused by all the football fans who say they'd never let their child play the game. For those of you feel football is solely responsible for ruining so many lives how do you watch the games with a clear conscience? You wouldn't let your child play, yet you root for the Bills while the players will suffer in the future. If you believe football is so destructive isn't it morally wrong to be watching? Edited December 8, 2015 by DriveFor1Outta5
Observer Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 Post like these from football fans kind of confuse me. My logic is along the lines that some guys suffer from playing and others don't. The world is a dangerous place, and as we age our past starts to impact us all physically. Football players are no different. I'm just confused by all the football fans who say they'd never let their child play the game. For those who you feel football is solely responsible for ruining so many lives how do you watch the games with a clear conscience? You wouldn't let your child play, yet you root for the Bills while the players will suffer in the future. If you believe football is so destructive isn't it morally wrong to be watching? I eat wings even though they are not good for me. Life is not simple. But I put my kid's health above other things. Just happens to be a priority.
Chuck Schick Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 And smoking doesn't cause cancer. Better to encourage kids to play soccer, basketball, lacrosse, or if he's not an athlete, baseball. Youth tackle football will be extinct in 40 years. To stick with your cancer analogy, playing soccer or lacrosse rather than football would be like chewing Copenhagen instead of smoking Marlboros. Those sports may not quite have the concussion notoriety as football dies, but they are in the same neighborhood. All football needs is someone to either invent some type of helmet/harness/??? that will drastically reduce concussions and this will all be forgotten. There's way too much money on the line for it to just fade away.
dulles Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) The number one sport for concussions is not football, it is cycling: http://www.traumaticbraininjury.net/move-over-football-cycling-is-the-biggest-cause-of-sports-related-tbi/ Yet we never hear about people saying they won't let their kids ride bicycles... The problem with your statement is that it seems like you didn't read the article. The article clearly states that the problem with cycling are because 1) more people ride bike than play football, 2) football players wear helmets, whereas there is a high correlation between head trauma and a failure to properly utilize helmets, 3) motor vehicles greatly increase the risk of injury in cycling accidents. Last I checked, the vehicles only come onto the football field after the football player has been knocked out. One other observation that doesn't come from the article: there is growing concern that CTE and similar conditions which stem from TBIs are severely aggravated by repetitive impact to the head, regardless if the result is diagnosed as a concussion. There is no way that cycling produces a proportionate amount of repetitive impact on the head. I don't think cycling is going to be the next big target - soccer will be. The repetitive practice of heading will be targeted by the doctors, lawyers, and activists, just as soon as football (and possibly hockey) are addressed (ie, changed dramatically). To stick with your cancer analogy, playing soccer or lacrosse rather than football would be like chewing Copenhagen instead of smoking Marlboros. Those sports may not quite have the concussion notoriety as football dies, but they are in the same neighborhood. All football needs is someone to either invent some type of helmet/harness/??? that will drastically reduce concussions and this will all be forgotten. There's way too much money on the line for it to just fade away. Chuck...I think you got it right. Those sports aren't free of risk, but the attention is on the biggest culprit right now. Post like these from football fans kind of confuse me. My logic is along the lines that some guys suffer from playing and others don't. The world is a dangerous place, and as we age our past starts to impact us all physically. Football players are no different. I'm just confused by all the football fans who say they'd never let their child play the game. For those who you feel football is solely responsible for ruining so many lives how do you watch the games with a clear conscience? You wouldn't let your child play, yet you root for the Bills while the players will suffer in the future. If you believe football is so destructive isn't it morally wrong to be watching? I agree that it raises an ethical dilemma. I'm not comfortable watching many of the same hits that I used to cheer. I cringe whenever I see a bad hit or a knee get torn up. The problem at this point is that we don't really know the full extent of the problem. Is this a real problem without a solution other than "killing" football? Is this just over-blown media hype? We don't completely know yet. In the meantime, I'm a little too used to watching, so I continue to enjoy the games with my four sons. I try to increase their awareness of the ethical dilemma so they can make an educated decision for themselves as they become grown men. I plan to watch the Concussion movie with them at some point. Edited December 8, 2015 by dulles
DriveFor1Outta5 Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 I eat wings even though they are not good for me. Life is not simple. But I put my kid's health above other things. Just happens to be a priority. So you don't let your kid eat wings?
dulles Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 So you don't let your kid eat wings? ^^^Best post of the thread! I'm pretty sure you shouldn't answer that in public. CPS calls that neglecting the welfare of a child in WNY.
Recommended Posts