This week, one possible concussion, and one confirmed concussion, bloody injury, broken finger, kid who wanted both ankles wrapped because he'd "already broken both of them" and of course, a fight broke out. And this was a scrimmage. I asked, "What do you do when a fight breaks out?" She answered, "Back away, shake my head, and try not to let the testosterone splash on me."
Of course, during football season, since it's a helmeted sport, girls' volleyball and cross country only get the athletic trainers when they call and ask, i.e., if there's an emergent situation or injury.
the game would have to be changed from its current form; American football is dangerous because of two things...tackles, and the nature of the rushing formations (where players just put their heads down and run straight into opposing players). Hitting another person who's moving in the opposite direction at a similar rate of speed isn't going to NOT generate some significant force, even with a weight limit...and the research on chronic traumatic encephalopathy indicates that the cumulative effect of hundreds or thousands of sub-concussive hits is as bad or worse than that of actual concussions.
ACL's, one in high school and the other knee in college. He now coaches HS track and wants nothing to do with football.
was supposed to play in college, but the pain from the second repair was too much and she had to quit. She would love to play still.
Did this always happen in kids sports, and I simply don't remember it because my own head got rattled so much, or what?
I played as a DL. It probably was the most rewarding experience in my life. Any sport you are taking a risk with your body. I knew the risk when playing Football but I accepted that.
pretty hard blows, especially in college!
One game in high school he ran for 472 yards and the coach took him out with over 5 minutes left in the game. The next day the coach called here at home and apologized for taking him out of the game, he said you're going to read about it in the paper. He said he should have known better, I agree. I guess he only needed a few more yards for a state record. He was all state first team and had all kinds of college offers, then in practice 3 days before the sectional title game he blew out his ACL. He went ahead and played in the sectional with a blown out knee. The next day he had surgery, but the college offers went away.
He ended up playing for a small college that didn't offer athletic scholarships. He made the starting roster the first year of college and was doing great. In his junior year he blew out the other knee and had to give up football. I asked him once when he was playing in college, how do you stand all those 300/400 pound guys tackling you? He said the bigger they are the softer they are, ha.
...supercedes the revenues a school makes off their football program is when you'll see changes. Unfortunately, in some areas high school sports is a big revenue generator and a dash of civic pride that has to be overcome. I think we'll see more and more schools downsize football as more studies show the long term affects of the traumatic injuries this sport creates...
No school system is going to allow that kind of liability to remain uncovered.
...I recall having to sign those for my kids but I would think that if the school can still be sued for wrongful death or injury if there's some kind of negligence involved. I would think a sharp lawyer could cut tons of holes through those riders...
One of my high school friends died in 1975 from a brain injury he received during a football practice. So your post is doubly cruel. I only hope and pray his family is not reading DU to see this.
... that this falls neatly in the category of "Don't like it? Don't do it..."
Don't like football? Fine, don't play it or watch it and leave that same choice to others instead of dictating what is "best" for them.
this comment my censure of you.
Have you no shame, Sir or Madam? At long last, have you no sense of decency?
... and march them out there?
It's voluntary and every player in the world knows that you can get injured playing virtually any sport.
So since there are benefits to playing football we should remove that choice because someone might get injured... even though in the end it is their decision "group dynamics" or not.
I have an idea. People should grow a spine and at the exact same moment take their noses out of other people's business.
the pseudo-Libertarian Sotf who referred to serious brain injuries as 'boo boos' and then doubled down on his pseudo-Libertarian logic when I called him or her on it.
But, since you mention it, I think there is a strong case to be made for banning tackle football in secondary schools, given the emerging evidence that it plays a causative role in traumatic brain injuries and chronic neuorlogical health issues in later life.
school sports like high-school football can be paraphrased thus:
"If you don't want to die, then don't play."
Speaking of 'wow'
used by right wingers to describe liberals. I've seen it used on DU by very low post count trolls.
a political radical (on the left) but have enough in common with Liberals that I would never diss them in such a fashion. I'm going to leave our little sub-thread up for thread integrity purposes, but am editing my other reference to it.
Just so the record is clear, I have absolute and utter contempt for Libertarian philosophy and ethics, as oxymoronic as those phrases may seem.
Thanks for the annotation. I'll be sure not to use the word in the future.
posts in this subthread.
I know it's somewhat outre to use the word and I only used it to exhibit my absolute contempt for Libertarian philosophy and ethics.
But thanks for flagging it. No disrespect was intended to the cognitively disabled.
the word means in a political context. I was using it to display contempt for Libertarians, not realizing that the term has been used elsewhere to denigrate liberals, which was most definitely not my intent.
The closest I would ever come to denigrating liberals (from my radical perspective) might be to refer to them, in good-natured exasperation, as 'damned liiberals'
Lots of research about mini concussions is driving a move to limit the number of hits sustained in HS ball and at the NFL level. Most HS teams enforce water breaks better than the used to. The NFL just made running with a lowered helmet a penalty.
Admittedly college ball, in all division s is behind the NFL and most HS leagues in terms of safety rules, though. This needs to be addresses, for sure.
I agree that we need to continue to find ways to protect our kids when they play, but athletics can be a powerfully positive force in a young person's life and I find the sometimes knew jerk reaction to simply ban the activity all together both an over action and, frankly, an over simplification made by people who personally don't enjoy or value the game. That's ok. Football specifically and athletics generally aren't for everyone and that diversity is what makes us better and stronger. But as a "football mom" who has researched safety and risks extensively, and has had to weigh those risks against the benefits (better academic focus, strong friendships, the ability to manage time, school, workouts, practice, I could go on, but I won't bore you!), football has been a net positive for my son.
when I played no one even cared about a concussion. Now, at least they have a process to test for them after a injury. But many players hide the symptoms so they can play.
Most football deaths are heat related or heart related, not contact related.
The heat ones can be solved if coaches follow the right process.
The hidden heart issues might be harder to solve.
People are and should be allowed to make their own decisions. Yesterday I saw a thread complaining about people mowing their lawns and using fertilizer and weed killer and how the noise was so distracting. And why not just let the grass grow? Well maybe some folks like to mow their yards, maybe some folks like the look of a well maintained lawn. But, oh no, if some people don't like a particular thing they want to slap controls on it or prevent it altogether because they feel they know what is best.
It's my guess that many of those complaining about the dangers of playing football, and who want to deny kids the opportunity to decide for themselves whether to participate (with their parents' approval, of course), fervently oppose anyone who wishes to deny a woman's right to make her own medical decisions. Oh, but that is different, they'll say. No it isn't. This is about the right to make one's own decisions in life providing those decisions fall within the boundaries of legality.
Should high school golf also be banned because, aside from placing kids in a "toxic" environment (fertilizers and weed killers and such), it
might also encourage them to grow up and want to have a nice golf-course looking lawn of their own, at which point it will require the use of mowers, weedeaters and blowers, oh my?
If one looks hard enough he can find a reason to ban almost anything. But this is not how we operate in this country. At least not yet.
Part of that OP, and the discussion which followed, was about the air pollution, carbon footprint, fertilizer run-off, and the incredible waste of water inherent in our obsession with the perfectly manicured lawn, as well as the noise and general obnoxiousness of living in a society where any sunny day is seen by many as an excuse for cranking up a two-stroke engine.
If you bother to read the thread, you might learn something about the environmental impact of "lawn maintenance." I know I did. I had no idea, for instance, that fully one third of all the water used in Texas was used to water people's lawns. Years from now, when the aquifers run dry and the glaciers are gone, people are going to be amazed at the short-sighted narcissism of this current generation of Americans. Or are you one of those folks who thinks global warming is a liberal hoax, and that natural resources, such as water and petroleum, are infinite?
We live in a society. We are all interconnected. "Live and let live" only works if there is at least a modicum of consideration for others, and if your "living" doesn't destroy the environment we all have to share. Or, in the case of serious and entirely avoidable sports injuries, if it doesn't raise the cost of health care insurance for all of us.
And BTW, I don't recall mentioning anything in my OP about banning anything, or "slapping controls" on it or "stopping it altogether." That's your own mis-characterization. I simply asked why Americans have such an obsession with their lawns. I thought the response from my fellow-DUers was thought provoking, informative, and at times pretty damn funny. Given that it now has close to 40 recs, and more than a 120 responses, most of them positive, I don't think I did DU any great disservice by starting this conversation.
I certainly don't appreciate one OP being turned into a straw man so you can discount serious issues being raised in another.
Yet somehow according to you I didn't bother to read your thread, nor do I know anything about lawn maintenance. And on top of that you question my beliefs on global warming. Why? Because I had the nerve to reference your thread.
I simply said "some people" would like to control or ban things they don't agree with. Unless your username is "some people" I was not speaking of you directly.
Straw man? Ha!
I get that you don't like lawns and from your tirade you probably don't like people who have lawns. But there is no need to ridicule them?
"Yesterday I saw a thread complaining about people mowing their lawns and using fertilizer and weed killer and how the noise was so distracting. And why not just let the grass grow? Well maybe some folks like to mow their yards.... But, oh no, if some people don't like a particular thing they want to slap controls on it or prevent it altogether because they feel they know what is best..."
That's me. That "thread complaining about people mowing their lawns..." was me. So yes, you did mention me. In fact, in this last post, immediately after saying you didn't mention me, you then admit you "referenced my thread." Jeez, make up your mind! And then you proceed to put a slew of words into my mouth, and ascribe to me positions I've never held. I never said anything about "slapping controls" on anything. So yeah, I noticed the reference to my OP, and your distortions, and I called you on it.
And as I said, it's about more than "not liking lawns." It's about the environmental impact of a facet of American life so common, so sacrosanct, that people like you get themselves all in a huff if you even try to bring it up.
I happen to believe that, in the context of global warming, we need to take a good hard look at ALL aspects of the American "lifestyle." Global climate change is probably the most significant threat we face today, and so it's about time we start examining the things we do personally and politically that contribute to it, especially things that are less than essential. I'm sure you've heard the phrase: "Think globally, act locally." Well, there's nothing more global than world wide climate change, and nothing more local than my own and my own neighbor's lawn.
BTW, I like lots of people who have lawns. I just wish some of them would take a minute to reflect on whether they need to be quite so compulsive about tending them. During WWII people were asked to conserve gas, to ask themselves "Is this trip really necessary?" In fact, they were asked to do less lawn care, and grow Victory Gardens instead. I'd love to see similar efforts catch on today, before every glacier melts and every south sea island is submerged. You disagree?
That's basically what I'm asking people to do here. To THINK about the impact their actions are having on the environment, which BTW includes the noise they make.
Sorry you seem to have such a problem with that.
I referenced the many complaints in the thread, not any one in particular. Nowhere in my post will you find your name. Sounds to me like you are just looking for a reason to be offended. Good luck with that.
Two general thoughts might help you on your way:
1. If you want to complain about someone's OP, or have a derogatory comment to make, you might consider making it in the OP itself, rather than making a vague and inaccurate reference in another thread;
2. When you do make such references, you might remember to think that the person who wrote the OP you're referencing might actually be there reading.
I have two fucked up knees but I enjoyed the game itself it was the locker room culture that made me quit. There's no such thing as sports without injury all of them have their risk. Just living we risk injury and death everyday.
risks of TBI from such frivolous pursuits.
have friends from high school I played with. It was a good experience for me.
coaching is pro ball level, training is a all year activity, and class work is minimized.
Football is a regional activity, most schools do not have football teams.
The most common sport, according to the survey, is basketball: 18,150 schools have a boys basketball team and 17,767 schools have a girls basketball team. Football has the most participants among all high school sports, with more than 1.1 million students playing at 14,000 schools.
So football is not dropping off.
your info is a little out of date, I'd say. That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is how certain you are of what you say, yet it's clear you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
At least in public schools, everywhere I have been, there have been football and sports programs, which are considered an integral part of public education.
Every public high school in my state has a football team.
Plus they have limited the number of "hits" a player can receive in practice. There are more water breaks. There are fewer full pads practices and a greater emphasis on cardio training and stretching than simply weight work.
Every kid takes a pre concussion test prior to practice, so there is a baseline for comparison purposes after a head injury and a player cannot return until they return to their baseline, which can be weeks after other concussion symptoms are gone.
I agree that it's different, but not in the way you seem to think.
We had our first alumni football game this year. While I didn't play it sure was fun seeing friends and neighbors out on the field having a blast and raising money for our junior teams (3-6th grade)
Oh, they'll watch it (until they realize the commercial interruptions never fucking stop). But they won't play it.
As it should be.
You can't scrap football, people will organize and play it somewhere. Banning it at HS would just cause it to be organized away from HS.
The politician who tries to do this would only succeed in committing political suicide. Deservedly.
How would you stop people organizing HS football away from the school, like they do other sports? You've as much chance to ban football as apple pie.
I'll kick my feet up tonight with millions of others and watch some football in honor of the bedwetters.
you might be surprised to hear what he or she has to say on the subject.
I guess you don't believe in science or the Scientific Method, judging by your contemptuous dismissal of the question.
but think people should be allowed to take those risks. Soccer is the same. Heading the ball causes long term damage to the brain, and knee injuries/broken bones are common.
This is the same mentality you could use to ban alcohol, as it is far more destructive than any sport. You feel that it's your choice, and that if others don't choose similarly, they should be deprived of that choice.
Too bad for you folks, we live in a free country.
by choice, peer presssure, societal prejudice or any other influence.
School should be a place where children learn. I pay property taxes to the State of California each year and I don't feel my tax dollars should be spent placing children at risk of traumatic brain injury.
Still haven't heard you say 'yay' or 'nay' to the Scientific Method and science. Maybe because you know all too well what medical science has to say about the dangers of scholastic contact sports.
That's what those little consent forms are for. My parents signed off on mine, but you aren't forced to make that choice.
You don't want to pay for this sport? Go talk to your representative. There are plenty of things I don't want to pay taxes for, them's the breaks.
Last edited Sun Aug 18, 2013, 04:45 PM - Edit history (1)
apprised them of my views. (The silver lining to all this NSA spying and snooping.)
So you have no problem with schools sponsoring activities that place children at risk of traumatic brain injuries? OK. Me, I have faith in the advance of science and scientific knowledge to influence behaviors and attitudes. Often the changes lag the advances in science by many years or decades -- witness global climate change -- but my hope is that society will put a halt to sports that injure students so badly. If not now, then maybe in 20-25 years from now.
and found them dangerous. Doesn't change the fact that people will still take the risk. I did, and if my children decide to take it, they will get my enthusiastic support.
This might concern you, but I'm also buying cars for my kids while they're in HS. Yes, this puts them at a far greater risk of death than football, but that's the way I roll.
There are many kids who drive themselves extremely hard to maintain an 4.0 average, join school sponsored clubs, take on every form of extra credit and do as much community work as time allows in an effort to earn admittance and/or a scholarship to an Ivy League school. For some of them the stress factor is as mentally damaging as football injuries are to high school players.
How do you propose we protect these kids? Surely not by banning education.
my comfort zone a bit and makes me think! (Something not to be underestimated in this age of diddling Iphones and mindless XBox vapidity).
I have long said that American higher education is badly in need of some latter-day Martin Luther to come along and tack up a new 95 Theses on the doors of academe. I think in regards to your question that I stand with Henri Giroux and other like-minded leftist education reformers who seek a complete and thorough overhaul of the entire educational apparatus. Without going into a lot of specifics, such leftist critiques of the educational system tend to situate it within a larger sub- and superstructural dialectic, such that most serious leftist proposals to reform American education predicate the proposal upon a simultaneous reform of the economic substructure and various other super-structural outgrowths. (Sorry to lapse into Marxist jargon, but figure this may resonate with you a little, given your screen name.)
Just out of curiosity, are you merely playing Devil's Advocate with your post, or do you have a proposal to handle the stressors caused by the modern American educational system? If so, maybe we should start our own thread and carry on the debate there.
Once again, though, thanks for the question. Very a propos and badly needed asking.
I was simply pointing out that along with the obvious dangers of sports participation, there are other activities, if you wish to call them that, which often receive little mention yet which have their own inherent dangers.
I have witnessed my own ninth-grade daughter (a sophomore this year) in tears because she received a B+ on a test rather than the A for which she had studied so hard.
As the US population expands the competition to gain acceptance to an elite school increases exponentially. In response we, as a society, have placed evermore burdensome and stressful demands on our kids in an attempt to differentiate the top 1/2 (1/4 maybe?) of 1 percent from the rest.
I do not know the answer to solving this problem. And now, on top of the stressful drive to be accepted by a Harvard or Yale or other similarly prestigious university, we create the problem of how to pay for it. We provide banks zero percent loans yet force college students who will become major contributing forces in our economy into loans that can eventually reach nearly 9 percent.
This is backwards.
Anyway, I appreciate your response and apologize for the last two sentences in my previous post. Upon rereading them I realize they sound rather harsh.
a teacher in the Los Angeles school system (without going through a formal credentialing program). Turned out to be a protracted bout of bureaucratic hoop-jumping that led nowhere but, in the process of jumping through the hoops, I 'observed' two high-school English classes. Each teacher told me after the class that he\she spent the vast majority of his or her time teaching to the various 'tests' the state now mandates. This was a sobering sentiment coming from two teachers who had conducted what to my admittedly untutored eye looked like great class sessions the days I observed.
I really feel for your daughter and for today's youth. Nothing I say will ease the sting for your daughter, but FWIW, there is life after high school and for the most part it's a vast improvement in just about every respect.
The American educational system sits atop an economic sub-structure where 1% control 40% of the wealth at the exact same time that 1 out of 5 American children experience at least one episode of hunger per month. So I don't think the solutions are going to be easy or simple and I don't think tinkering with things at the margins will really improve matters (hence my radical left-wing stance).
I did not take your final two sentences harshly but more as a wake-up call to me to get off my anti-football high horse and do some real thinking.
Great games on Friday and Saturday and can't wait for today's game!
My nephew plays freshman football in AZ and it will be my pleasure to go out to watch every game that he plays in.
There is no way in hell high schools will EVER get rid of football....no way in hell....anyone that thinks differently is delusional
He's entering the most fun period of his life. School, girls, sports, and video games all with few responsibilities.
Those were the days
One can have A sport, but the result would not be football.
not the best running or QB but they'll learn.
Nothing like going to the kids football games.
The evening he got his pads this year after practice he said "I can't wait, practice is going to be great tomorrow!"
Me "Why's that?"
"I get to hit people." LOL
The already have a non contact form of football we Americans call it soccer...we also call it boring.
Oh and both my kids have played 4 years of soccer...even when it's your own kids it still blows.
I'm OK watching high school, but those games full of 9-year-olds watching the ball roll around are ridic.
speed-skating, cycling, tennis, ..........
Like what you like, but hold the ignorance.
a good road race is always exciting. I love to watch and play golf, and who doesn't love Bball or Baseball?
Speed skating every four years I catch a race or two.
Gymnastics every four years or when my girl took it when she was 7-9.
I never said everyone found soccer boring, I said I find soccer boring. I try an try and watch it, but IMHO kind of like hockey all the sport (excitement) is taken out by rules that don't make sense.
Motocross is pretty exciting but I'm not sure it's really a non-contact sport.
Oops I just read what I'd posted...crap I didn't mean to make it sound like all of America found it boring, but that's how it reads. I apologize I can see now how you come to the conclusion of my ignorance on the subject now.
Speaking as a former mid distance runner and a track mom, ugh! I really had no appreciation for my mom's devoted attendance until my daughter started running.
On the bright side, she's in her first musical tomorrow and I'm genuinely looking forward to it.
Back on topic, my football playing son did suffer a concussion in a game when he was younger and it was pretty scary, I must admit. It was mild, thank goodness.
My daughter, on the other hand, banged her head with another students in music class and ended up vomiting for several hours. Where's the outrage there, I ask!?
on that last bit, just in case.
"Atlanta (CNN) -- A suburban Atlanta high school football player has died from injuries suffered while making a tackle during a scrimmage game, according to medical examiners.
Deantre Turman's death came Friday after he made a tackle during a pre-season game, said Mike Alsip, a forensic investigator for the Fulton County Medical Examiner's Office. The teenager broke his neck, Alsip said.
The accident happened at a school in the Atlanta suburb of College Park, Georgia, according to CNN affiliate WSB."
Life is dangerous, even when out walking.
Richard Petrak and friends were visiting South Bass Island on June 4, 2011 and docked at B Dock, part of the DeRivera Park in the village...Early that morning, he tripped on the sidewalk, broke his neck and died..."Yes, he had been drinking," attorney Tom DeBacco said.
Drinking and walking, a double whammy. Two activities to ban for the price of one.
can end in tragedy. But I assure you I am human.
Slow the players down.
I have designed artificial football and baseball fields. The baseball fields inckude sand added to the rubber pellets, to prevent the ball from bouncing unnaturally fast off the turf. It seems the same sand could slow down play on artificial turf ( which is becoming more common at the high school level). The same concept has been used fir years at demolition derbies, where they get everything good and muddy. Another option is to reduce cleat height...less speed and less ability for foot to stay planted while recieving a disabling hit.
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a football player.....