[2006alum]

Somewhat on topic given how much concussions affect football and have affected some of our players in recent years (Hayley Hodson in WVB, Toni Kokenis and Anna Wilson in WBB, and Luck in the NFL all come to mind), but a really sobering piece in the New Yorker about a neuroscientist's own experience recovering from a very mild concussion suffered as a result of whiplast during a fender-bender. If his experience is representative, even a mild concussion can result in noticeable side effects six months later, and the first symptoms of a concussion may not appear for 2 or 3 days. That's scary in sports, given how players sometimes are expected to get up and keep playing immediately (see Luck, who finished the game during which he sustained the concussion). Hodson had an intense blog post this summer about how she felt like she'd lost so much of the past year to post-concussion consequences and how she continues to struggle to do certain activities.

I really do wonder when the tipping point is going to come for this in college sports. I'm uncomfortable with the argument that NFL players know what they're getting into and are getting paid enough to address the consequences down the road, but at least it's plausible. Colleges don't pay players and the idea that an 18-year-old can fully understanding the lifelong risks he or she is accepting is pretty doubtful. Yet we gleefully watch them line up to take hits (to each other, to the floorboards, etc.) every weekend.

Anyway, just food for thought.

[2006alum]

Somewhat on topic given how much concussions affect football and have affected some of our players in recent years (Hayley Hodson in WVB, Toni Kokenis and Anna Wilson in WBB, and Luck in the NFL all come to mind), but a really sobering piece in the New Yorker about a neuroscientist's own experience recovering from a very mild concussion suffered as a result of whiplast during a fender-bender. If his experience is representative, even a mild concussion can result in noticeable side effects six months later, and the first symptoms of a concussion may not appear for 2 or 3 days. That's scary in sports, given how players sometimes are expected to get up and keep playing immediately (see Luck, who finished the game during which he sustained the concussion). Hodson had an intense blog post this summer about how she felt like she'd lost so much of the past year to post-concussion consequences and how she continues to struggle to do certain activities.

I really do wonder when the tipping point is going to come for this in college sports. I'm uncomfortable with the argument that NFL players know what they're getting into and are getting paid enough to address the consequences down the road, but at least it's plausible. Colleges don't pay players and the idea that an 18-year-old can fully understanding the lifelong risks he or she is accepting is pretty doubtful. Yet we gleefully watch them line up to take hits (to each other, to the floorboards, etc.) every weekend.

Anyway, just food for thought.

[akiddoc]

Head trauma is part of life. You cannot eliminate it. Eliminating all college sports might reduce the incidence, but what a dreary world that would be. Eliminating sports would cause all kinds of deleterious effects for the individual and for our culture. I vote to eliminate boxing if a sport is to be eliminated - the purpose of the sport is to cause brain injury. I am also for eliminating tackle football for kids prior to high school. There is new evidence coming out that reduction in cognitive decline could be achieved there.

Otherwise, the idea that eliminating college sports is for the good or logical is misplaced. Kids are doing these sports long before they get to college. Girls who do high school sports are more likely to go to college and about a third less likely to get pregnant before age 18. Boys are somewhat more likely to go to college and earn more after school if they do sports. There are life lessons to be learned doing sports that are hard to come by elsewhere. Let's not lose sight of the big picture because concussions are scary.

[akiddoc]

Head trauma is part of life. You cannot eliminate it. Eliminating all college sports might reduce the incidence, but what a dreary world that would be. Eliminating sports would cause all kinds of deleterious effects for the individual and for our culture. I vote to eliminate boxing if a sport is to be eliminated - the purpose of the sport is to cause brain injury. I am also for eliminating tackle football for kids prior to high school. There is new evidence coming out that reduction in cognitive decline could be achieved there.

Otherwise, the idea that eliminating college sports is for the good or logical is misplaced. Kids are doing these sports long before they get to college. Girls who do high school sports are more likely to go to college and about a third less likely to get pregnant before age 18. Boys are somewhat more likely to go to college and earn more after school if they do sports. There are life lessons to be learned doing sports that are hard to come by elsewhere. Let's not lose sight of the big picture because concussions are scary.

[2006alum]

I think you may have inferred a conclusion that wasn't in my post, and for a reason: I wasn't suggesting we should eliminate college sports. Far less drastic could be changes in the rules of sports like football, better use of protective gear in sports like basketball and volleyball, altering how much contact is employed before college (as you mentioned), etc. But there's an inherent tension in pursuing an education (which necessarily uses your brain) and playing a sport that could detrimentally alter your ability to obtain and use that education. I don't think the answer is "head trauma is part of life," and therefore nothing should be done.

And while I obviously am a brobdingnagian fan of college sports, note that the "dreary world" you speak of is most of the rest of the world - the brobdingnagian emphasis on intercollegiate athletics is a uniquely American phenomenon. Other countries' universities do not pay their sports coaches millions of dollars a year or view sports as a way to generate money for the university. Yet students still attend, college life is rich and meaningful, and alums have great pride in their alma maters. And those universities don't profit at the expense of their students' potential life-long injuries. There is something predatory about this that I do find troubling.

My preference would simply be that this be taken more seriously - not that we drop all college sports. It seems like the consequences are too serious and too debilitating not to.

[2006alum]

I think you may have inferred a conclusion that wasn't in my post, and for a reason: I wasn't suggesting we should eliminate college sports. Far less drastic could be changes in the rules of sports like football, better use of protective gear in sports like basketball and volleyball, altering how much contact is employed before college (as you mentioned), etc. But there's an inherent tension in pursuing an education (which necessarily uses your brain) and playing a sport that could detrimentally alter your ability to obtain and use that education. I don't think the answer is "head trauma is part of life," and therefore nothing should be done.

And while I obviously am a brobdingnagian fan of college sports, note that the "dreary world" you speak of is most of the rest of the world - the brobdingnagian emphasis on intercollegiate athletics is a uniquely American phenomenon. Other countries' universities do not pay their sports coaches millions of dollars a year or view sports as a way to generate money for the university. Yet students still attend, college life is rich and meaningful, and alums have great pride in their alma maters. And those universities don't profit at the expense of their students' potential life-long injuries. There is something predatory about this that I do find troubling.

My preference would simply be that this be taken more seriously - not that we drop all college sports. It seems like the consequences are too serious and too debilitating not to.

[Mick]

Head trauma is part of life. You cannot eliminate it. Eliminating all college sports might reduce the incidence, but what a dreary world that would be. Eliminating sports would cause all kinds of deleterious effects for the individual and for our culture. I vote to eliminate boxing if a sport is to be eliminated - the purpose of the sport is to cause brain injury. I am also for eliminating tackle football for kids prior to high school. There is new evidence coming out that reduction in cognitive decline could be achieved there.

Otherwise, the idea that eliminating college sports is for the good or logical is misplaced. Kids are doing these sports long before they get to college. Girls who do high school sports are more likely to go to college and about a third less likely to get pregnant before age 18. Boys are somewhat more likely to go to college and earn more after school if they do sports. There are life lessons to be learned doing sports that are hard to come by elsewhere. Let's not lose sight of the big picture because concussions are scary.

No, you can't eliminate head trauma.  I will tell you this, after watching my son's concussion (playing catcher, head bouncing off home plate in a collision with a runner), I resolved that I would point my sons to non-contact sports.  That eliminated not just football, but wrestling, karate, soccer, basketball...

[Mick]

Head trauma is part of life. You cannot eliminate it. Eliminating all college sports might reduce the incidence, but what a dreary world that would be. Eliminating sports would cause all kinds of deleterious effects for the individual and for our culture. I vote to eliminate boxing if a sport is to be eliminated - the purpose of the sport is to cause brain injury. I am also for eliminating tackle football for kids prior to high school. There is new evidence coming out that reduction in cognitive decline could be achieved there.

Otherwise, the idea that eliminating college sports is for the good or logical is misplaced. Kids are doing these sports long before they get to college. Girls who do high school sports are more likely to go to college and about a third less likely to get pregnant before age 18. Boys are somewhat more likely to go to college and earn more after school if they do sports. There are life lessons to be learned doing sports that are hard to come by elsewhere. Let's not lose sight of the big picture because concussions are scary.

No, you can't eliminate head trauma.  I will tell you this, after watching my son's concussion (playing catcher, head bouncing off home plate in a collision with a runner), I resolved that I would point my sons to non-contact sports.  That eliminated not just football, but wrestling, karate, soccer, basketball...

[TRD]

This won't be a popular post/reply but IMNSHO Stanford won't have a football team within 20 yrs.

The groundswell of data, evidence and understanding of CTE and head trauma will make it  unconscionable to field a team --- I'm sorry to say.

I expect Stanford  and Northwestern to be one of the first teams to end football.

[TRD]

This won't be a popular post/reply but IMNSHO Stanford won't have a football team within 20 yrs.

The groundswell of data, evidence and understanding of CTE and head trauma will make it  unconscionable to field a team --- I'm sorry to say.

I expect Stanford  and Northwestern to be one of the first teams to end football.

[dabigv13]

The EtOH at college does far more damage to young brains than head trauma.

Humans (particularly 18 to 22 year old males) make decisions which are deleterious to their health every day. I agree that we should make things as safe as possible, but getting rid of football would be immensely tragic, and I imagine would involve lawyers not ethicists.

[dabigv13]

The EtOH at college does far more damage to young brains than head trauma.

Humans (particularly 18 to 22 year old males) make decisions which are deleterious to their health every day. I agree that we should make things as safe as possible, but getting rid of football would be immensely tragic, and I imagine would involve lawyers not ethicists.

[DC 86]

I expect Stanford  and Northwestern to be one of the first teams to end football.

To the contrary, I expect Stanford (and other schools such as Northwestern) to be at the forefront of making the game safer so that football won't end. Sophisticated helmet technology, other advances in equipment, superior protocols based on more accurate measurement and better treatment of head injuries, implementation of rugby style tackling, etc.

Besides its enormous cultural relevance, football is big business, so you can bet that enormous resources will be invested in order to make the game sustainable. I would hope and expect that Stanford will be a leader for many advances in making the game safer so that football will continue to be viable.

[DC 86]

I expect Stanford  and Northwestern to be one of the first teams to end football.

To the contrary, I expect Stanford (and other schools such as Northwestern) to be at the forefront of making the game safer so that football won't end. Sophisticated helmet technology, other advances in equipment, superior protocols based on more accurate measurement and better treatment of head injuries, implementation of rugby style tackling, etc.

Besides its enormous cultural relevance, football is big business, so you can bet that enormous resources will be invested in order to make the game sustainable. I would hope and expect that Stanford will be a leader for many advances in making the game safer so that football will continue to be viable.

[TreesAndBirds]

Info on technology that might allow CTE to be diagnosed while person still alive ( not just at autopsy).

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/20...868860001/

[TreesAndBirds]

Info on technology that might allow CTE to be diagnosed while person still alive ( not just at autopsy).

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/20...868860001/

[Mick]

The EtOH at college does far more damage to young brains than head trauma.

Humans (particularly 18 to 22 year old males) make decisions which are deleterious to their health every day. I agree that we should make things as safe as possible, but getting rid of football would be immensely tragic, and I imagine would involve lawyers not ethicists.

Judging from divorce rates of young marrieds, I'd have to agree...

[Mick]

The EtOH at college does far more damage to young brains than head trauma.

Humans (particularly 18 to 22 year old males) make decisions which are deleterious to their health every day. I agree that we should make things as safe as possible, but getting rid of football would be immensely tragic, and I imagine would involve lawyers not ethicists.

Judging from divorce rates of young marrieds, I'd have to agree...

[Mick]

[quote author=TRD link=topic=18156.msg214966#msg214966 date=1511708914]

I expect Stanford  and Northwestern to be one of the first teams to end football.

To the contrary, I expect Stanford (and other schools such as Northwestern) to be at the forefront of making the game safer so that football won't end. Sophisticated helmet technology, other advances in equipment, superior protocols based on more accurate measurement and better treatment of head injuries, implementation of rugby style tackling, etc.

Besides its enormous cultural relevance, football is big business, so you can bet that enormous resources will be invested in order to make the game sustainable. I would hope and expect that Stanford will be a leader for many advances in making the game safer so that football will continue to be viable.
[/quote]

Harvard, Yale and Princeton did it once before.  I imagine Stanford and Northwestern could do it as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-...d9d70af7ca

[Mick]

[quote author=TRD link=topic=18156.msg214966#msg214966 date=1511708914]

I expect Stanford  and Northwestern to be one of the first teams to end football.

To the contrary, I expect Stanford (and other schools such as Northwestern) to be at the forefront of making the game safer so that football won't end. Sophisticated helmet technology, other advances in equipment, superior protocols based on more accurate measurement and better treatment of head injuries, implementation of rugby style tackling, etc.

Besides its enormous cultural relevance, football is big business, so you can bet that enormous resources will be invested in order to make the game sustainable. I would hope and expect that Stanford will be a leader for many advances in making the game safer so that football will continue to be viable.
[/quote]

Harvard, Yale and Princeton did it once before.  I imagine Stanford and Northwestern could do it as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-...d9d70af7ca

[TRD]

This is a train that will not be derailed unless they radically change football rules.

[TRD]

This is a train that will not be derailed unless they radically change football rules.

[Leftcoast]

The EtOH at college does far more damage to young brains than head trauma.

EtOH = Ethanol poisoning/alcoholism I presume?

I guess they are both non-mission critical and voluntary activities that are part of campus life.  The difference is football is officially sanctioned, marketed and recruited by the university while alcohol consumption is monitored and discouraged albeit with limited effectiveness.  (My hypocrisy here is causing laughter among those who knew me on campus.)

I'd feel better about my fandom if I knew everything reasonably possible was being done to limit brain trauma to the modern day gladiators I cheer for each Fall weekend.  Hopefully Stanford is playing its part.

[Leftcoast]

The EtOH at college does far more damage to young brains than head trauma.

EtOH = Ethanol poisoning/alcoholism I presume?

I guess they are both non-mission critical and voluntary activities that are part of campus life.  The difference is football is officially sanctioned, marketed and recruited by the university while alcohol consumption is monitored and discouraged albeit with limited effectiveness.  (My hypocrisy here is causing laughter among those who knew me on campus.)

I'd feel better about my fandom if I knew everything reasonably possible was being done to limit brain trauma to the modern day gladiators I cheer for each Fall weekend.  Hopefully Stanford is playing its part.

[M T]

When I was looking up my grandfather's football info, I ran across an 1897 death of a football player attributed to concussion.  As a result of that death, within a couple of weeks, the Georgia legislature banned football at various institutions, but the bill was vetoed by the governor.  Still, the Georgia teams disbanded.

This lead me to this set of articles covering the various brain trauma problems and the sequence of purported solutions for football for more than a century:  Brain Injury History in Football  (click on the link at the bottom of each page to follow through the series).

I would guess history supports these ideas --

• A single high-profile tragedy will more likely precipitate immediate changes that years of tragedies to relatively unheralded individuals
  
• head trauma has always been a part of football.  The game continues because those in positions of power can believe/claim that new equipment/rules will solve the problem well enough (in 1897, it apparently was thought that enough hair would prevent/reduce injuries!)
  
• Football is doomed due to its bringing significant chance of permanent injury while being unnecessary to education
  
• Football isn't going to end anytime soon (say, 120 years) just because people die
  

Related links
In 1905, the fourth year of his [Teddy Roosevelt]  presidency, 18 players died and 159 suffered severe injuries.

http://news.blog.myajc.com/2015/10/29/11...most-died/

The process & some rule changes in 1898

...[Football] is "productive of the greatest variety of surgical injuries to every part of the body," and that the effect of such injuries is life long in a large proportion of cases.  This is a phase of the subject which is seldom regarded except  by the medical profession.  Unless a player is so badly hurt that he cannot enter the field again during the season, the injury is generally dismissed by both the young man himself and the public as a mere trifle, while really he may suffer for the effects always, and more severely as he passes on from middle life into old age

  Macon Telegraph, Nov 21, 1897

The arguments of professionalism vs amateurism were also evoked in 1897.

[M T]

When I was looking up my grandfather's football info, I ran across an 1897 death of a football player attributed to concussion.  As a result of that death, within a couple of weeks, the Georgia legislature banned football at various institutions, but the bill was vetoed by the governor.  Still, the Georgia teams disbanded.

This lead me to this set of articles covering the various brain trauma problems and the sequence of purported solutions for football for more than a century:  Brain Injury History in Football  (click on the link at the bottom of each page to follow through the series).

I would guess history supports these ideas --

• A single high-profile tragedy will more likely precipitate immediate changes that years of tragedies to relatively unheralded individuals
  
• head trauma has always been a part of football.  The game continues because those in positions of power can believe/claim that new equipment/rules will solve the problem well enough (in 1897, it apparently was thought that enough hair would prevent/reduce injuries!)
  
• Football is doomed due to its bringing significant chance of permanent injury while being unnecessary to education
  
• Football isn't going to end anytime soon (say, 120 years) just because people die
  

Related links
In 1905, the fourth year of his [Teddy Roosevelt]  presidency, 18 players died and 159 suffered severe injuries.

http://news.blog.myajc.com/2015/10/29/11...most-died/

The process & some rule changes in 1898

...[Football] is "productive of the greatest variety of surgical injuries to every part of the body," and that the effect of such injuries is life long in a large proportion of cases.  This is a phase of the subject which is seldom regarded except  by the medical profession.  Unless a player is so badly hurt that he cannot enter the field again during the season, the injury is generally dismissed by both the young man himself and the public as a mere trifle, while really he may suffer for the effects always, and more severely as he passes on from middle life into old age

  Macon Telegraph, Nov 21, 1897

The arguments of professionalism vs amateurism were also evoked in 1897.