Making Football A Safer Game

Quote: AcesAndEights

I played high school football for 3 years, albeit at a tiny school. We were in the smallest classification of sports is Idaho (1A, which was <250 total enrollment grades 9-12), and played 8-man football (5 on the line, 3 in the backfield). Our total roster was about 20 guys each year.

I mention the details because I was going to say that I never witnessed a concussion during all 3 years of my playing, but given that we were very small, the level of athleticism was pretty low. I tend to believe that the bigger and faster the players get, the more the risk of concussion. I don't know if that's been conclusively proven, but it seems obvious based on intuition. One of my teammates did suffer a neck injury that put him in a neck brace and out for the rest of the season, but there was no permanent damage and he's fine to this day.

I really enjoyed my time playing football - it taught me a lot about teamwork, hard work, respecting authority, dealing with adversity, etc. I would hope it would never be outlawed at the HS level where life-threatening injuries are rare and probably no more common than in other sports.

It does all you say but as recent events show too many I. The USA just get emotional at tragedy. All it will take is one bad injury or god forbid death and people will say, "this is so dangerous, THEY ARE JUST KIDS!" And that will be that. School boards will ban it.

Just look at how many things we used to joke about really happened.

Players who don't attempt to wrap the opponent up are the danger. Launching yourself like a missile is dangerous. But also the "undefended reciever" rule is dangerous. In hockey, players who don't keep their heads up get levelled.... By allowing players some protection, you are making it worse when they expect protection they don't have. You see it in junior hockey where players are less accustomed to the hitting game... the fancy Dans normally need a few big hits to be reminded to skate smart. Similarly in football, get players learning to take and receive hits early, when the potential damage is far less. The protection of young players probably will be more dangerous when they graduate to more physical games later on.

One kid getting badly injured at 14 is sad, but a dozen adults being badly injured at 25+ is far worse. Teach good techniques younger.

Quote: AZDuffman

It does all you say but as recent events show too many I. The USA just get emotional at tragedy. All it will take is one bad injury or god forbid death and people will say, "this is so dangerous, THEY ARE JUST KIDS!" And that will be that. School boards will ban it.

Just look at how many things we used to joke about really happened.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/09/29/2375925/concussion-deaths-have-changed.html

This article describes how two deaths from brain injuries in 2008 have changed the way concussions (or even potential concussions) are treated. They do a better job of evaluating injuries. Interestingly, they note how techniques haven't changed but they were apparently not taught as well for a period of time but they are trying to do a better job with that now.

The emphasis of the "blow up"--that violent hit that leaves you a bit in awe when you see it--seems to have led to more people wanting to make those kinds of hits without regard to safety or the fact that missing the tackle hurts their team. I saw the same thing in ice hockey, where hitting was banned until kids were 12...hitting became a big deal instead of just being learned along the way ("we get to hit next year" was often heard). In both sports, football and hockey, missed/errant hits--someone trying to blow someone up--end up hurting a team through penalty or complete misses allowing scoring opportunities.

As to the "defenseless receiver"--maybe that should be a penalty against the quarterback for getting a teammate lit up!! Everything can't be fixed by penalties, but stuff like "down by contact",etc. definitions changing could emphasize tackling over hitting. The players could still hit hard--just in a way that produced the right outcome.

Quote: RonC

The emphasis of the "blow up"--that violent hit that leaves you a bit in awe when you see it--seems to have led to more people wanting to make those kinds of hits without regard to safety or the fact that missing the tackle hurts their team. I saw the same thing in ice hockey, where hitting was banned until kids were 12...hitting became a big deal instead of just being learned along the way ("we get to hit next year" was often heard). In both sports, football and hockey, missed/errant hits--someone trying to blow someone up--end up hurting a team through penalty or complete misses allowing scoring opportunities.

Therien lies part of the problem. TV makes a big point to show big hits. Fans love it. So players do as much as possible to not just tackle, but to knock the guy into next week. But even when the aim is not to try to hurt the guy the hit can be big. I remember in the 1990s when Rod Woodson went to sack Warren Moon. It was a clean hit, but what happened was Moon moved in a way where both guys were stretched out and it was a major collision. So major that "Sprots Illistrated" used the still as the cover of that years "greatest hits" tape promothin. Rod made clean but hard contact with Moon, then Moon made clean and hard contact with the ground. It was a hit where you knew there was a concussion before the doctor got there.

So that becomes the issue. People will keep saying, "Even when they don't hit dirty you can get hurt---we have to ban this game!" Seriously, watch for it.

On kids, I think some contact sports are good, but you have to divide them by weight and size not age. Most so for boys, you really need to learn how to take contact like that. May be ciche, but it builds charachter. It makes you less afraid of life. I was always a small, scrawny, runt and thus never interested or encouraged to any of that. I wish I was a little.

How do the head injury rates compare to similar sports that do not require headgear (Australian Rules Football, Rugby)? Are those games slower? Is tackling to the ground not a major part of the game?

I am all for safety, but I think the amount and effectiveness of the injury protection systems being used in the NFL is actually leading to more serious injuries, since players are immunized from the smaller bumps and nicks, and the associated pain that slows them down. When you can wear this gear and run full speed into a brick wall, and walk away unscathed 99 out of 100 times, it encourages players to forgo techniques that will cut down on injury to themselves and the player they are hitting.

There's violence in sports, then there's VIOLENCE in sports.

Referee stabs player during disputed call, but it gets worse:

Quote:

As the confrontation became physical and Dos Santos refused to leave the field, Da Silva allegedly produced a knife and stabbed the player, who died while being taken to hospital.

Reports said that outraged spectators responded by running on to the field and stoning Da Silva, before severing his head and sticking it on a stake in the middle of the field.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jul/07/brazilian-referee-decapitated-stabs-player

Weight limits are the only way and may not help contact injuries, but will probably eliminate drug use and encouraged obesity. If I had kids, I would just self-ban them from football and not care what the rest did though. It's a stupid sport to be in if you don't get the glory IMO and teaches half the kids bad lessons of giving much more than you get to benefit someone else.