Antwaan Randle El regrets playing football, says game may disappear

[Carbo Loading]

Watched the first episode of this and Agree with....and was frankly shocked.
1. That coaches allowed it.
2. That parents allowed it.

I contrasted it with our practices and it was ..... whats more different then night an day.....whatever that is.
That would NEVER happen in our practices. And the egregious acts shown would never be allowed by any parent (many of us who love the game) In our football club.

All I can say is.....I guess it is "Texas" (nothing against the place....but they sure do love the football).

I think your being unfair to paint every peewee or youth league with the "Friday night Tykes" brush.

You are right I shouldn't paint all youth leagues with that brush.

I have lived in Texas for 3 years now, so that behavior is really part of the culture. Before that I lived in the Franklin, MA area and I know the leagues in that area do not have that behavior nor would tolerate it. My point I was trying to unsuccessfully make is when you watch those shows it should bother you enough so that you would question whether or not to put your kids on a football league especially at that young of an age. I think these shows are going to lead to lower and lower youth football participation rates which is what I think will be the major factor for football not "dying" but more like boxing as a niche sport. Although Texas will probably be the last state for it to fade.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

No helmet protects against spinal injury. And they aren't designed to.

Leather helmets do a far inferior job of protecting against fractured skulls. In fact, that has been the primary function of advanced football helmets, and they do a great job of protecting against them.

The ground, knees, elbows, etc are still hard and they still will be impacting heads. Leather helmets offer little protection against these impacts.

Leather helmets is a fun concept, but it's a bad answer.

 

[Hagios]

No helmet protects against spinal injury. And they aren't designed to.

Leather helmets do a far inferior job of protecting against fractured skulls. In fact, that has been the primary function of advanced football helmets, and they do a great job of protecting against them.

That is an assertion, not evidence.

I did a quick google and some researchers subjected old-fashioned leather helmets and modern helmets to shock tests and found they performed equally:

https://www.minnpost.com/second-opinion/2011/11/modern-football-helmets-no-better-leatherheads-protecting-against-concussions


edit: the article below does a good job discussing tradeoffs between concussion and fractures as helmet stiffness varies. The softer the helmet, the more it will give and the less likely you are to have concussion (or generally cause the brain to move around in the skull). But you are more likely to have the force reach your skull and cause a fracture. There is a lot of grey area between "rigid hard plastic" and "leather". For example, hockey and lacrosse helmets.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/21/sports/football/21helmets.html?pagewanted=all

edit 2: this has been a fun topic. I started googling "hockey skull fractures". Mats Zuccarello suffered one last season and another player did in 2013. They both came from shots (pucks, not hits) to the head. So it seems that hockey helmets do a good job protecting against skull fractures from checking. Football players are bigger and the angles are generally more severe, so it doesn't follow that hockey helmets would be great for football, but it's an interesting possibility. The debate isn't as simple as "current helmets vs. leather". There is an entire spectrum of rigidity to explore.

The ground, knees, elbows, etc are still hard and they still will be impacting heads. Leather helmets offer little protection against these impacts.

The ground is even harder in basketball. Knees and elbows are just as hard in soccer. If you're thinking about the end of football because of these reasons then you need to think about the end of many more sports.

 

[bakahump]

You are right I shouldn't paint all youth leagues with that brush.

I have lived in Texas for 3 years now, so that behavior is really part of the culture. Before that I lived in the Franklin, MA area and I know the leagues in that area do not have that behavior nor would tolerate it. My point I was trying to unsuccessfully make is when you watch those shows it should bother you enough so that you would question whether or not to put your kids on a football league especially at that young of an age. I think these shows are going to lead to lower and lower youth football participation rates which is what I think will be the major factor for football not "dying" but more like boxing as a niche sport. Although Texas will probably be the last state for it to fade.

Agreed.

And the point I was trying to make was that I WOULDNT (and many parents who do allow kids to play wouldnt) put them in that kind of league....and any parent who does should have THEIR head examined for Brain damage. (IMHO)
But my local club/league in maine?....or most probably the league you reference in Franklin?.....at this age.....sure I would (and do) let them play.

Is anyone wrong for not letting their kids play? Certainly not. Its their choice and if you feel its so unsafe they shouldnt play....then i get it. I actually think that this kind of thinking is making football safer. Its making leagues and coaches THINK about how they are being run and "forcing changes" for the better. its making Parents become involved. My wife has gone to a couple different clinics to help understand football and concussion protocols. And its why I coach.

Not saying its a perfect analogy.....but do any of you let your kids ride snowmobiles or 4 wheelers? In Maine, I guarantee more kids will die or be crippled this year riding a sled (with or without a helmet) then by football (again in Maine). Does that make it OK for kids to bash their brains out or splatter themselves all over a tree? No. But it goes back to risk vs reward and whats the hot button topic of the day and how we as parents AND COACHES need to keep those games as safe as possible. I would rather be a coach and involved parent on a football field then let my kids ride a motorized vehicle.

For example I know we spent at least 15-20 mins EVERY practice teaching the inherently safer 4 step tackling progression. We also chewed out and in some cases sat players who didnt use it in games. Are we some kind of heroes in the football coaching/club community? Do we love our kids more then the parents on that show? Surely not. But I might suggest we are trying to do this smarter. We are striving to make it safer and actively improving towards that end. Not every "brand of football" is sending them out there to ram their heads together as hard as humanly possible. When I cant be involved there will be a discussion with my kids to see if THEY are responsible enough to look out for their own best interests on a field. There will also be a long conversation about the risks as they rise through MS and HS (assuming they have the Talent and drive for that level).

 

[The Talented Allen Ripley]

This is purely anecdotal observation, but both my sons play youth football (8th and 4th grade), and this year there are only 22-23 kids on each of their teams. In past years, there have been at least 35 kids per team. I live in a town with a strong youth football culture (the HS team has been League champions 9 years running, winning 4 MA Super Bowls/Division titles in that span), and participation has never been an issue before. The only thing I can think of that might explain the drop in numbers is parental concern over concussions.

I can't say I'm not concerned myself, but my oldest doesn't get a lot of game time and certainly won't be playing beyond this year (no way he makes JV next year), so I can rationalize the decision to let him play. In his case, the positives outweigh the negatives. I'm more worried about my youngest, because he's a good athlete and plays a skill position (RB), so he's going to get hit. And if he ends up being a good player, how long will he want to stick with it? I'm silently hoping he gives it up on his own after a year, rather than us putting our foot down and telling him he can't play, but it may come to that. We didn't want to forbid him from playing this year, given that we've allowed his brother to play for 5 years now.

 

[dcmissle]

Sports Illustrated remains a national treasure:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/08/24/jordan-reed-washington-redskins-nfl-players-bigger-stronger-faster-injured

 

[Marciano490]

Eh, nobody here gets out alive. My kids can play whatever.

 

[snowmanny]

Eh, nobody here gets out alive. My kids can play whatever.

no matter how you struggle and strive

 

[dbn]

no matter how you struggle and strive

Marciano's kid is the best. Around. Nothing's gonna ever keep him down.

 

[Detts]

I picture Marciano's kids as Mongo with brains.

 

[Marciano490]

I picture Marciano's kids as Mongo with brains.

Unfortunately, I like them skinny broads. My odds of producing an NFL lineman are really slim.

 

[Boston Brawler]

I have three boys. Their mother and I have told the two old enough to understand (ages 8 and 6) that they will not be playing organized football. They play soccer, baseball, and basketball and are getting into swimming and golf.

We watch the Pats and love the NFL, but there's no way we would let them play. Thankfully their interest has been with the other sports.

I don't buy Randle-El's assessment that the NFL/football won't exist though. The NFL is a multi billion dollar industry on it's own, then you throw in all the colleges that depend on the revenue and name recognition, the fantasy sports and gambling. No way.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Isn't the concussion problem just as bad in Soccer? Or at least the ones sustained are worse.

 

[Average Reds]

Isn't the concussion problem just as bad in Soccer? Or at least the ones sustained are worse.

Not even close to being close.

 

[DJnVa]

Not even close to being close.

http://www.newsleader.com/story/sports/2015/06/25/concussions-soccer-football-wrestling/29268651/?cookies=&from=global

From link: On the same note, while soccer has fewer concussions per year when compared to football, the severity of concussions sustained in soccer is significantly higher.

"Recent studies show that soccer has surpassed football," said neurologist Peter A. Puzio from Augusta Health Neurology. "As soccer grows in popularity, so does the incidence of concussion. There's not a perfect a number because it all depends on the severity of each one, but there is a cumulative effect of concussions. One is bad, but it depends on the severity of the concussions."

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I guess it depends on how you want to define the problem but if you aren't going to let your get play football because of concussions, letting him play soccer seems pretty stupid.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Of course the solution in soccer is mostly to just ban heading which some youth leagues have already done to a certain age. If he's playing in a league that doesn't allow heading, it's probably pretty safe.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Girls Soccer leads all of HS sports by a significant amount http://usatodayhss.com/2017/new-study-shows-that-girls-soccer-has-higher-per-capita-rate-of-concussions-than-any-other-sport

 

[soxfan121]

Not even close to being close.

http://www.newsleader.com/story/sports/2015/06/25/concussions-soccer-football-wrestling/29268651/?cookies=&from=global

From link: On the same note, while soccer has fewer concussions per year when compared to football, the severity of concussions sustained in soccer is significantly higher.

"Recent studies show that soccer has surpassed football," said neurologist Peter A. Puzio from Augusta Health Neurology. "As soccer grows in popularity, so does the incidence of concussion. There's not a perfect a number because it all depends on the severity of each one, but there is a cumulative effect of concussions. One is bad, but it depends on the severity of the concussions."

That's an interesting link/read - thanks.

But AR is correct; while the severity of events in soccer may be "significantly" higher, the number of events is an one or two orders of magnitude fewer. Every single play in football likely results in some (minor) brain trauma. The cumulative effect for an offensive lineman, linebacker, strong safety, or running back is enormous, and it's not like other positions don't carry the same risk (just a couple fewer incidences and chances).

And soccer has a clear path to limiting or eliminating most of the risk, though it would be hard as hell to enforce and would drive Route 1 fans batshit: no more headers. Collisions would still happen, but the majority would be less fraught with risk of head trauma. (Also, long suspensions for elbow artists, but now we're into gritty detail of something that's never gonna actually happen.)

In football, there is no path to safety. There is no helmet technology or rules changes that can protect players. Unless it becomes flag football, there is going to be hard, helmet-to-impossibly-large-&-strong human contact on every play.

Most youth soccer organizations are moving toward or have outright banned heading for young players. The risk for children is still there - collisions happen - but non-professional youth soccer is a much lower risk activity for a kid than football.

 

[BigMike]

I do love football, but add me to the list of people who wouldn't let their son play if I had one. Although, man I'd love to go out and hit the tackling dummy and would go tomorrow if I could find someplace to do it, and even hit the sled. Of course I don't think my shoulder could survive a single collision.

Of course at the same time I see a ton of people who wouldn't let their kids play football instead throwing them out there on the lacrosse fields, where I guess injuries are limited because it is mostly small scrawny white kids knocking each other around

 

[SMU_Sox]

I had this debate over whether my oldest son could play or not and I came to the conclusion (after two years of saying no) that he could play this year and in high school.
I grew up not being allowed to play football (my parents are docs) because of concerns over injuries and head trauma. When I had kids I planned on not letting them play contact sports. I don't shelter my kids or am overprotective in other facets of their lives but here perhaps I am. I changed my mind for my oldest son this year because I think for him the benefits of playing football outweigh the risks multiplied by the probability of them occurring. The benefits of playing are different for each child. I would not let my youngest play (and thankfully he has 0 interest).
The benefits for my oldest playing are unique to him. He is the youngest kid in his class and has enough processing and other disorders to be classified as special needs. He unfortunately has social problems too from not being able to know boundaries and what is appropriate and his therapy while helpful with that is not a panacea. He is a big boy. He just turned 14 and is already 5'8" inches tall. He's going to be between 6 feet and 6'5" according to his height percentile chart. Unfortunately he has a serious weight problem tipping in at 272 pounds. In middle school he was relentlessly bullied. My ex and I keep track of bullying incidents for his therapist and the school (he had to get school restraining orders against multiple bullies). The poor kid was beaten up or attacked on a weekly basis. The perpetrators were all football players or the athletic popular crowd. His grades were atrocious. He was depressed and his anxiety, already an issue, became much worse. He would time leaving one classroom right before the bell rang so he could get to his next class in relatively empty hallways in order to avoid getting grabbed or punched. So what about those benefits? Well, by playing football and being on the team the bullying has stopped almost entirely. He's friends with some of the former bullies now. I've seen it first hand too. When he comes home after an hour break he happily does his homework! His attitude about school and grades has changed too. He's telling me when tests, projects, and essays are due and asking for help on them. He has lost five pounds in a month and a half and can walk with the family without quickly being out of breath. He's taking initiative with his daily chores around the house and really busting his ass to get them done well. He's even getting onto his little brother if he thinks he is slacking. This is night and day compared to the last two years. I can't believe how fast he has changed. This is my son when he can just be himself. I haven't seen him in almost two years now. I am overjoyed that he didn't lose what made him such a sweet kid before the bullying went from bad to out of control.
Am I still terrified that something bad will happen? Yes. I feel like I made a deal with the devil here and not just because my ex was involved. But to see him happy and having a positive attitude towards school is so monumental I think I made an OK choice.
Quick edit: This was a difficult choice to make and one that I firmly said no to for two years. I know some people will think I made a serious error in judgment and I can accept that. I still struggle with it myself.

 

[johnmd20]

Quick edit: This was a difficult choice to make and one that I firmly said no to for two years. I know some people will think I made a serious error in judgment and I can accept that. I still struggle with it myself.

Doesn't sound like it was that difficult, in hindsight, considering how well your son is doing right now. Seems like his entire world has done a 180 degree turn in the right direction.

And it's not like you stuck him in a coal mine for 12 hours a day. Congrats on getting things turned around, too, it's inspiring to hear.

 

[Average Reds]

http://www.newsleader.com/story/sports/2015/06/25/concussions-soccer-football-wrestling/29268651/?cookies=&from=global

From link: On the same note, while soccer has fewer concussions per year when compared to football, the severity of concussions sustained in soccer is significantly higher.

"Recent studies show that soccer has surpassed football," said neurologist Peter A. Puzio from Augusta Health Neurology. "As soccer grows in popularity, so does the incidence of concussion. There's not a perfect a number because it all depends on the severity of each one, but there is a cumulative effect of concussions. One is bad, but it depends on the severity of the concussions."

Girls Soccer leads all of HS sports by a significant amount http://usatodayhss.com/2017/new-study-shows-that-girls-soccer-has-higher-per-capita-rate-of-concussions-than-any-other-sport

I read through both articles and the fact is that they simply do not make the point that the headlines claim.

The first article claims that the severity of concussions in soccer is higher than football while mentioning in passing that the incidence of concussions is minuscule relative to football. (Of course, they also use statistics that are difficult to directly compare, but if you use their figures and make conservative assumptions, you find out that concussions in football are more frequent by a factor of approximately 35 to one or higher.)

The second article plays a different statistical game, claiming not that soccer causes more concussions, but that the "per capita rate" (which they define as concussions as a percentage of all injuries) is higher in girls soccer than it is in football. Which may be correct, but does not support the idea that concussions are a greater problem with girls soccer. Just that injuries in general are staggeringly frequent in football.

I am very aware of the problems with concussions in all sports, including girls soccer. And I do not mean to downplay those problems. But it does violence to reason to suggest that a sport that, according to the first study, produces documented concussions at a rate approximately 1/35 of football, has a "similar problem."

Edit: corrected the math to account for a dropped decimal point.

The figures are as follows: according to the first article, soccer produces documented concussions at a rate of 33 per 100,000 player outings. Later, it defines the data for football as "at least one player each game." If we presume that each team uses at least 40 players in every game, this means that the rate is "at least" 1 in 80. Which is approx 35+ times higher than soccer.

This does not even address the myriad qualitative differences between the two sports, such as the (unknown) rate of undocumented concussions and the tremendous damage caused by repeated trauma on a regular basis. (Sf121 noted this above.)

As I said, the two sports are not even close to being close.

 

[Average Reds]

I had this debate over whether my oldest son could play or not and I came to the conclusion (after two years of saying no) that he could play this year and in high school.
I grew up not being allowed to play football (my parents are docs) because of concerns over injuries and head trauma. When I had kids I planned on not letting them play contact sports. I don't shelter my kids or am overprotective in other facets of their lives but here perhaps I am. I changed my mind for my oldest son this year because I think for him the benefits of playing football outweigh the risks multiplied by the probability of them occurring. The benefits of playing are different for each child. I would not let my youngest play (and thankfully he has 0 interest).
The benefits for my oldest playing are unique to him. He is the youngest kid in his class and has enough processing and other disorders to be classified as special needs. He unfortunately has social problems too from not being able to know boundaries and what is appropriate and his therapy while helpful with that is not a panacea. He is a big boy. He just turned 14 and is already 5'8" inches tall. He's going to be between 6 feet and 6'5" according to his height percentile chart. Unfortunately he has a serious weight problem tipping in at 272 pounds. In middle school he was relentlessly bullied. My ex and I keep track of bullying incidents for his therapist and the school (he had to get school restraining orders against multiple bullies). The poor kid was beaten up or attacked on a weekly basis. The perpetrators were all football players or the athletic popular crowd. His grades were atrocious. He was depressed and his anxiety, already an issue, became much worse. He would time leaving one classroom right before the bell rang so he could get to his next class in relatively empty hallways in order to avoid getting grabbed or punched. So what about those benefits? Well, by playing football and being on the team the bullying has stopped almost entirely. He's friends with some of the former bullies now. I've seen it first hand too. When he comes home after an hour break he happily does his homework! His attitude about school and grades has changed too. He's telling me when tests, projects, and essays are due and asking for help on them. He has lost five pounds in a month and a half and can walk with the family without quickly being out of breath. He's taking initiative with his daily chores around the house and really busting his ass to get them done well. He's even getting onto his little brother if he thinks he is slacking. This is night and day compared to the last two years. I can't believe how fast he has changed. This is my son when he can just be himself. I haven't seen him in almost two years now. I am overjoyed that he didn't lose what made him such a sweet kid before the bullying went from bad to out of control.
Am I still terrified that something bad will happen? Yes. I feel like I made a deal with the devil here and not just because my ex was involved. But to see him happy and having a positive attitude towards school is so monumental I think I made an OK choice.
Quick edit: This was a difficult choice to make and one that I firmly said no to for two years. I know some people will think I made a serious error in judgment and I can accept that. I still struggle with it myself.

This is a very thoughtful post and I don't want you to perceive my previous comment(s) as questioning your decision.

I played youth football. If I had sons, I would probably let them play as well. But I'd be much, much more attentive to the risks of concussion. (Note: I had several while playing youth football. I never once even came out of the game. All I can say in my defense is that it was the 70s and we didn't know better.)

As an aside, I played soccer through college. I was also a springboard diver in college. The worst concussion I ever received was from the diving board in the summer between my junior and senior years, and I never dove competitively again.

The point is that decisions really cannot be made in isolation. So long as you are balancing the various factors and staying on top of it as a parent - and you clearly are - you should be confident that you are doing what is best for your son.

 

[Harry Hooper]

You have to raise an eyebrow on this Schefter item on Su'a Cravens not mentioning his concussion last year.

 

[fairlee76]

It's not the deaths.

We live in a talent economy. One's lot in life is impacted by one's brain and one's capacity for hard work. Would you want to roll the dice that your kid loses some IQ points, or worse comes to worst, depression/dementia? That risk is real for high school players, not just those who play in the NFL. Probably few kids are going to seriously screw themselves up. But I think you underestimate the awareness of brain injuries in today's society.

Yes to this. And the driving a car analogy put forth by an earlier poster does not work. Driving a car is a necessity in many parts of this country if kids want to get a job, have a social life, etc. There are plenty of other team sports that kids can play in lieu of football and as far as we know none of them carry the degree of brain-related risks associated with football.

And I don't have kids. But I would never let my dog run full speed into a wall 25-30 times a day which is what the research increasingly indicates happens in football at the collegiate and pro levels. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/10/19/offensive-play