RSS Feed
PDF NOW DISCOUNTED 50%. FIND OUT WHAT YOU MISSED BEFORE THE SEASON.
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy print version.
STILL AVAILABLE
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy print version.
30 Sep 2009
Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Alan Schwarz does his usual great work, detailing the results of an NFL-commissioned study on concussions.
15 comments, Last at 07 Oct 2009, 3:10am by DeltaWhiskey
Most Recent FO Features
» 2011 Defeats
Who had the most Defeats in 2012? Well, nearly setting the all-time sack record puts you in a pretty good position to claim that crown.
Comments
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
I miss Elliot "no evidence of worsening injury or chronic cumulative effects" Pellman.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
On the same day Florida announces Tebow will probably play against LSU two weeks after his concussion.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
I know this is one of the gorillas in the NFL room but isn't this a bit of a well...duh. Massively stong and fast men smacking the crap out of each other for six months of the year for ten years (or so) might cause head trauma the results of which can be deleterious in later life. What next, boxing can cause brain damage as scientists notice that the participants hit each other in the head.
I suppose the important part of all of this is that league and the union start making changes to protect players better.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
I suppose the important part of all of this is that league and the union start making changes to protect players better.
As long as those changes take into account that fact that fans (or at least me) aren't going to spend hundreds of dollars a year supporting glorified flag football. Better Helmets? Great. Extending the newer rules aimed at protecting the QB to other players? Boring. NFL players are extremely well compensated for the risks they take.
There is a reason people don't watch the Pro Bowl (well.. several reasons but you get my point).
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Compensation has no relevance to this conversation and it's not your right to bring it up. It's a deplorable response to defend the nature of something both you and I love, where no defense is necessary.
I want very much for safety measurements to not affect the quality of the game. The only sport or recreational hobby that I am even remotely interested in. That's pretty much the extent of my involvement as a fan. It's the prerogative of the players to take the risk, waive the precautions or demand (in corporate) due diligence in safety. I don't see you having any right to question or challenge that.
As for whether the results of this study are, "duh," it's the very resistance to any data that may pose a moral imperative to shake up the status quo that makes this kind of research very necessary and not "duh" in the slightest. There is a lot of resistance to it, from players, the league, and bloodthirsty fans.
That's not a rhetorical exaggeration; anyone so quick to bring up the question of whether men's brains being squashed during an average career of 4 years of getting paid, with about half of them netting a yearly salary ranging from the high hundred thousands to a couple million (four years and a couple million! You call that extremely well compensated!) -- to bring that up all out of concern for how it might affect the aesthetic appeal to what you most likely receive for free, is exemplary of it.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
[quote]Compensation has no relevance to this conversation and it's not your right to bring it up.[/quote]
In our society people that do dangerous work are provided compensation, generally called hazard pay, to offset the risks they take doing their job. My point was simply that the players are aware of the risks and well compensated for taking them, they are not the victims that they are made out to be. Compensation and risk disclosure are very relevant when talking about dangerous jobs. There is NO moral imperative to shake up anything, this is not the first study of it's kind, it's not ground breaking in the slightest. The players know they can suffer serious injuries (including brain injuries) and have known for a long time.
I never claimed the league did not have the right to change the rules to protect the players. I said I would not watch it if they turned it into glorified flag football.
I do have a monetary stake in the NFL. I buy merchandise, I purchase Sunday ticket, my taxes have subsidized my teams stadium, and my government has provided the NFL with an Anti-Trust exemption. Even people who watch the games on cable provide the NFL with revenue. Part of your cable bill goes to the channels that broadcast NFL games which pay the NFL for the right to do so. My opinion should matter to the NFL and the NFLPA because it's people like me that make Football the multi billion dollar industry it is.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Who's making them out to be victims? You initiated a defense against an imaginary adversary. You made the unsolicited claim that they are extremely well compensated for their risk.
I did contend that it's not extreme -- contracts are not guaranteed, and injury settlements are meager compared to bonuses -- but I don't contend that they are well compensated. It's not central to my point.
My point is that regardless of the compensation, and regardless of whether its enough (and yes I would agree with you that there is a collateral value to the risk and there is a limit to the compensation due on account of risk) you're supporting using it as a surrogate for actual precautionary measures. That's baloney.
From the article:
The N.F.L. has long denied the existence of reliable data about cognitive decline among its players. These numbers would become the league’s first public affirmation of any connection, though the league pointed to limitations of this study.
The league already is questioning the validity of its own commissioned study!
Ted Johnson claimed to have suffered over 100 concussions in his career. He claims Belichick pressured him into playing three days after suffering one, for an exhibition game. He said he had a strained relationship with his coach and didn't object out of fear of being cut and losing his $1.1m salary.
Your claim about the extent to which the players are aware of the risks of concussions is very questionable. There is a lot of misinformation, bias, pressure, and macho culture to inhibit widespread and comprehensive understanding of the athletes. Two former players have killed their families and themselves, and damage from concussions is a suspected antecedent. The link is no where close to established, I won't pretend it is. But if the full range of potential consequences extends that far, any claim that the risks are well known is downright laughable.
I don't really understand your need to refute my supporting details such as my speculation that you watched the game for free or whether there is a moral imperative (mentioned because of the league's resistance to the study's conclusions); the point is I think you have no place to judge whether compensation adequately covers the risks taken as a substitute to aesthetically-detrimental safety measures and I think you're thinking of yourself first, when it affects you in a manner beyond inconsequential. It is selfish and in very poor taste to do so.
I may be completely reading you wrong, it may not be the stance you intended to take, but it's the stance your words took, whether you took the time to consider their implications or not. It was very bad form.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
While I see your point, there is a larger issue here. Players are playing football for many years before they sniff any NFL dollars. What's the average age of an NFL rookie 22/23? You might play 4 years in high school and another 4 years of college football without getting paid a cent to bang your head into another guys head. Your NFL career mightn't even last that long if you are done by 30. So to me money doesn't have much to do with it at all.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
The rookie minimum is $310,000, they're not getting paid peanuts. It just seems small compared to what stars make.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Why don't you go sacrifice permanent stability and lack of chronic, sustained pain for six figures then.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Well I don't have the athletic ability for anyone to want to watch that. If I did I can't say for sure whether I would or not.
The NFL is dangerous, the players know that, the league knows that, the fans know it. Players are well compensated for the abuse they subject their bodies to. No one forces them to play.
The game has to stay entertaining for them to make their large salaries, plus many of the players even enjoy the violence. So every precaution should be made to keep players healthy while keeping the game entertaining.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Obviously, the central question here is "are NFL players fairly compensated for the risks they take?"
Certainly the Tom Bradys of the world seem to be; however, the real issue is whether the majority of later round draft choices, who while making nice money if the salary is sustained over a long-term, may or may not be fairly compensated for the short term risk they take.
I don't know enough about the average career of these guys, the risk they are truly placed in, and other factors to comment.
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
Everyone would love to see helmets or equipment that could completely protect players but until we start to see futuristic suits made of D30 or similar we may be disapointed. I suppose one change I wouldn't object to would be increasing the number of players dressed for a game so that players who have suffered possible brain injuries can be sat down without leaving the team short of players. If the NFL is serious about trying to limit brain trauma then having spare players on the bench for brain injuries makes sense. Maybe they can only be used in a similar way to emergency 3rd QBs and the injured player can't return.
When research has demonstrated that repeated traumas following quickly after minor concussions can cause serious damage it is a grisly spectacle watching two players who have knocked each other literally senseless both come back to play the game. It happened in the Bears/ Steelers game with Greg Olsen and the Steelers SS, both players were just lying prone on the field struggling to move for at least a couple of minutes yet both came back into the game and were involved in plenty of other collisions. I don't see how you can be knocked silly and not have suffered bruising to the brain they should both have been sat down. It wouldn't happen to more than a couple of players per game (if that) and might mitigate serious injuries.
But yeah no one wants to see the game made boring. Part of me does wonder what effect taking the pads and helmets away would make, would there be quite so many lights out hits when they aren't encased in armour?
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
This is the article:
Consussions suck -> better helmets
Dementia sucks -> retirement funds
what did I miss?
Re: Study Indicates Higher Rate Of Dementia
As is oft cited, correlation does not equal causation, and I'm not sure this study even established correlation. It is not surprising that the NFL is quick to point out the flaws of this study, it makes good business sense to do so.
Interestingly, while the NFL runs from addressing this issue, the military has embraced the issue and is giving serious consideration to the effects, both long and short term, to mild traumatic brain injury (concussion).
Post new comment