The Atlantic - Latest Comments in I Have To Admit

Re: I Have To Admit

bonk — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:49:47 -0000

This article caused bells to ring for something I read a while back re: traffic signs; that is, the more traffic signs on a road, the less drivers tend to pay attention. And so paradoxically, driving may be even less safe due to heavy regulation and constant instructions and warnings than it would be on just a blank road. Gladwell alludes to something like this when he mentions that better safety equipment (better helmets) might just make the players even more reckless.

So I'm wondering: would a return to leather helmets and no pads result in more (and more severe) or fewer injuries in the long term? And in the context of this article specifically, if injury levels were similar between no-pads and heavy-pads football, wouldn't the slower speeds and less-reckless hits of men playing without pads result in much lower levels of concussions and other brain injuries over time?

Just a thought; I've done no research whatsoever on this.

Re: I Have To Admit

MikeJ — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:30:39 -0000

At my son's high school in California this past weekend, a sophomore was hit hard in a football game and sustained a brain injury. He is still in a coma and may die. At some point we should ask why we allow this.

Re: I Have To Admit

msb — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:17:21 -0000

The work of actors, dancers, singers and other performers gives me huge pleasure, and I am willing to give them time and (ticket) money in repayment. (And performers get great pleasure from their work and those who care for themselves wisely just get better as they age - take Judi Dench, Meryl Streep and Maddy Pryor as examples.)

But football players are giving - whether voluntarily or pressured by economic factors - too much for me to accept. Pro players are sacrificing 15 years of life expectancy and even longer periods spent in pain and debility, if they survive to 55.

I loved football when I was a girl, but I can't watch it now. Nobody should suffer and die prematurely to entertain me.

Re: I Have To Admit

tavella — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:23:54 -0000

The New Yorker is the only magazine that I'd miss in the whole damn industry. Never a week without a solid article about something, and several times a year there's an article like Grann's Willingham article or this Gladwell one that seriously shakes up your view of the world, and often the national conversation.

Re: I Have To Admit

Geenius_at_Wrok — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 21:07:37 -0000

I've never been a big sports fan, but a few years I got into fantasy sports. I started with football (I've always thought that, despite the violence of the game, there was something really intelligent and elegant about a well-coordinated play), then moved into baseball and focused on that for several years. This year I came back to football, and it just isn't fun, largely because it seems like the players are all fat, slow and playing with injuries. So little of the game seems to be about athleticism anymore, and so much of it about simply being monstrously huge. (I have the same complaint against basketball, which I can't enjoy at all -- it's just a bunch of oversize mutants creating traffic jams on courts too small for them and throwing tantrums when they get called on their most egregious fouls.) And now it turns out that the epidemic hugeness is causing not only a ridiculous number of injuries but long-term brain damage as well.

I have two Rules of Gaming:

1. Play a game only with people who take it approximately as seriously as you do.

2. When the game stops being fun, it's time to stop playing.

Invoking rule No. 2, I don't think the Enemies of Reason will be playing again next year. (The Heroes of the Revolution, my fantasy baseball team, will continue to take the field until the World Series and the start of the Christmas shopping season finally cross over one another. In another words, at least another year or two.)

Re: I Have To Admit

Horton — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:42:05 -0000

I've been a huge college football fan my whole life (nearly 40 years now). But football is looking more and more like eating meat to me. I absolutely love meat. But I've seen the way animals are treated, and because of this I can't contribute to their torture. I'll eat meat if it doesn't cause animals to be killed (e.g. if it's cooked anyway and its consumption won't cause purchase of more meat).

Football probably will be the same for me. I'll watch if no one knows I'm watching so as to avoid contributing to ratings and the like. That way I'm not contributing to the suffering of the subjects who bring me pleasure.

And it seems to me that the arguments for indulging in both will be parallel: "I love it so much that I can't give it up." "It's part of my culture." "We've always done it in my family/group of friends."

Anyway, I don't normally preach my vegetarianism because I know it won't change behavior. But it strikes me that there is an interesting parallel between meat and football--alas, two things I love dearly.

Re: I Have To Admit

Juaquin Murrieta — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:21:26 -0000

Oh man, keith, do I ever get it.

You're talking about excellence. What is it worth? What will you give for it? For me, it was law, not football (I am a congenital uncoordinate), and at a certain point, when I was just about your age, I had to make a choice. I had the credentials, and I had the smarts. So, do I go for it? (What is "it" anyway? Fame? Money?) Or what?

In my field, as in football, the price of excellence is very very high. I listened to the Sonia Sotomayor hearings, and I could not but be impressed at her amazing, unbelievable intelligence. Incredible. She listens to the questions, pauses, and then takes the questioner down, decisively, devastatingly.

But. She has no private life. She was married once, but is now divorced. She has no children. Everything has gone to the law. I'm impressed, intimidated (that could have been me) but ultimately, No.

We all make choices. I could have been on the Supreme Court. You could have been in the NFL. Instead, we chose what we chose.

Like you, I respect your opinion. Like you, I chose not to immolate myself on any altar, be it football or law.

Re: I Have To Admit

keith — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:36:37 -0000

My comment about my inner depression was slightly toungue and cheek. I am 34, married, have kids and live a relatively happy life. But I don't think I am alone, in saying that when I watch football, baseball or basketball there is this inner feeling of, "man, why couldn't I have been that good, why couldn't I do that?". All I am saying.

Your point about spending your latter years in a state of dementia, or crippled, a shell of your former self is certainly valid. Honestly, it causes me to pause and really ponder the question. As you said, not talking spiritually more about the here and now it really makes me think. It seems we see the same thing, obviously through a different lense. Speaking the here and now, nobody is ever promised the "latter years" and I hope to live to be the age that you are and still have my wits about me. At the same time nobody is guaranteed a long healthy life(regardless of profession), so yeah, I would not have a problem if I were winding down a career in the NFL, having spent the last 12 years doing the thing I love most, and have loved since I was a kid. Your perspective seems to be that a life in the NFL means instant dementia, and a life of misery. Sure the chances are much much greater than the average profession, but that is not to say that there aren't plenty of former NFL players that have lived long, productive lives after football. There are, and with life comes chances.

Again, I can't stress enough how much I respect the opinion you hold. It is certainly reasonable, valid and common. For me, personally, I have always had a soft spot with the act of self sacrifice, whether it be for country, community, or yes art and entertainment. The person willing to disregard their own health, rather it be to save others, defend their country, or for the roar of the crowd has always appealed to me. Probably why when I fugured out in High School that I was never going to play rb for the Cowboys, pitch for the Rangers, play pg for the Mavericks or take a punch like Ali I joined the Army. I figured the chances of making that team was better than my chances of making any other. Surely you don't feel the same about soldiers and PTSD, because they are defending our country. I am guessing you don't begrudge their choice to serve, even though they have a higher risk of dementia and PTSD in their latter years. Obviously their is a more nobel quality about risking your life for others, rather than for miliions of dollars and bringing millions of people to their feet in joy and applause. I guess all I am saying is I see a certain nobility in all of it.

Re: I Have To Admit

toddbbq — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:53:56 -0000

TNC and KarenZ

To clarify, I didn't mean that you or Gladwell were saying that either implicitly or explicitly. The gist of what I meant was that the players know what they're signing up for that when they enter the league.

I also think that slightly widening the field and using 10 instead of 11 players could lead to fewer injuries though. I don't think it would be a hard sell to the league either, as it would likely lead to an increase in scoring. And as someone noted below, the NFL "union" is the one of the most ineffectual labor organizations on the planet.

Re: I Have To Admit

Juaquin Murrieta — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:36:25 -0000

keith, I'm 64 years old. I don't know how old you are.

If you, at whatever age you are, are willing to die early, or become demented at 50, for the sake of being a great football player, who am I to argue? I'd like to suggest, though, that from my perspective as a (relatively) old man, that from here, it doesn't look like it's worth it.

I don't want, here, to address spirituality, or the afterlife. I just want to talk about life here and now, the life we all understand. When you are my age, the ability to know who you are and where you are and to know who your wife is and who your children and grandchildren are assumes a great importance, and your status or achievements as an athlete back in the day seems to recede in importance.

That is not at all to say that my perspective is more important or more valid than yours. If you are willing to sacrifice 20 years of awareness to running "4.3 40, was 6'2 215 and could run the ball like Adrian Peterson" then who am I to say? If that's worth it to you.

"I am sure that a lot of my inner depression is due to the fact that I never was good enough or big enough to do the things I grew up loving the most, for a living."

Again, I don't know how old you are. But it might just be time for you to grow past this particular position. Your call, of course.

Re: I Have To Admit

Ta-Nehisi Coates — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:31:15 -0000

I don't think anyone's asking for your sympathy. The post stated how I feel--not how you should feel.

Re: I Have To Admit

Ta-Nehisi Coates — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:30:16 -0000

yeah, this. it's not an either/or.

Re: I Have To Admit

KarenZ — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:08:08 -0000

I don't think Gladwell was suggesting that we should necessarily feel sympathy for the players. If that was all, he could have left out dogfighting. Rather, he was asking football lovers (like me)to face the question: am I really any better than Michael Vick's buddies who paid big bucks to cheer while watching two dogs fight to the death?

Re: I Have To Admit

toddbbq — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:59:14 -0000

I think you all have conflated the issue a bit. Forcing or encouraging kids to play Pop Warner is not the same as consensual adults playing in college or in the pros, as you've noted. But we've played football in this country for over 100 years, and in the old days, the equipment wasn't nearly as sophisticated as it is today. Obviously, today's game is a lot faster and the players are a lot bigger and speedier, which leads to all the violent collisions. I think they may have to change the rules a bit in the future-widening the field a bit would be a good place to start IMO. Moreover, most football careers end after high school. I'd like to see a study on after effects of kids who have long-term injuries from HS football. I have a suspicion that it's not as bad as some of us think it is. I'd wager that nearly as many people have injuries like a bad knee or ankle that was hurt from basketball or some other sport.

FWIW, if I ever have a son, I'm not letting him anywhere near a football field. Baseball makes the most sense to me-the chances of long term physical injury are minimal, and if you do ever get to play professionally, the contracts are guaranteed and worth much more money.

Re: I Have To Admit

keith — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:51:18 -0000

tressa-

HA! Touche on the gladiator point, pun intended...

I understand completely, and as adults we have a responsibilty to ensure the safety of our kids. But I have to say, any coach teaching how to tackle with ones head, or spearing, needs to be fired. There is a method to the madness that is football, and sure there is an increased chance of hits to the head in football compared to just plain rough housing, thus the reason for helmets. But rarely in pop warner or any football that takes place prior to say 7th grade, is the hitting that can cause real damage taking place. Youth football is supposed to be where the fundamentals are taught, proper tackling, wrapping up, using shoulders. Push blocking with hands to the chest to use leverage to direct a player in a certain direction. Running with the ball, head up(not down like a battering ram) to see the field. Falling to the ground and rolling to pop back up to avoind being driven into the ground.

Its funny, my mom would not let me play Pop Warner(or Tiger League as it was known in my town) as a youngster out of fear of injury. Hell, I had to beg to play Little League. But she could care less if I was outside playing backyard fball with a bunch of kids and no pads on. The irony is she let me play in 7th grade, exactly when the kids I grew up with started growing muscles and hair under their arms and were able to do real damage. Anyway, I just don't or didn't see the kind of hitting described in the Gladwell article taking place in Pop Warner. Adult football and Kid football are just two different animals.

That being said, parents(like me) are well whithin their rights to make sure their kids aren't playing battering ram, no holds barred football.

Re: I Have To Admit

logicat — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:46:36 -0000

There was a fantastic piece in SI some years (maybe even 15-20, I don't remember) about boxing. It was about journeymen boxers who travel from state to state (if one state hikes their license after a particularly bad beating, they just move to another) basically getting beaten up for a living. The idea being that the contenders and the up-and-comers all need these guys to beat up on as they come up so that they can pad their records to the 20-0 mark they need to hit the big time. The journeymen are deliberately chosen because they are not as good as the guys they fight, they are meant to lose, and they do lose, because they are not in the same class as the young hotshots. They typically compile lifetime records of dozens of losses and very few victories. I dunno if anyone else recalls the piece, but it was chilling. I love boxing, always have, always will. My earliest memory is watching Ali-Frazier III on TV with my family (I was 5) and I could name all the heavyweight champions starting form John L. Sullivan the way normal kids learn state capitals, and to this day I watch all the big fights I can. But, as much as I love it, there is no question but that there is something morally very questionable about the industry. Same goes for football, I think.

Re: I Have To Admit

tressea — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:19:54 -0000

keith-- I absolutely agree with you, and I am not at all suggesting that we force kids to stay inside and engage in contact-free sports. Kids SHOULD be out running, jumping, climbing, wrestling, etc. But, I think that "normal" play and roughhousing is fundamentally different than the kind that occurs in football practice or football games. In the first, kids may bump their heads sporadically, but they're not usually actively hitting things WITH their heads. In the second, that happens CONSTANTLY and, more importantly, it's encouraged... it's part of what it takes to be good at that sport.

So, warrior culture? Sure. But even the Spartans weren't going around knocking their heads into things. That's the genius of using spears. :)

Re: I Have To Admit

BGGB — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:16:05 -0000

Agree.

Every time I see a guy get knocked silly, or see two linemen bash heads at the snap, I simply think to myself, "early onset dementia"...

For years I've thought similar things whenever a RB gets hit. "He'll have trouble walking by the age of 40..."

Re: I Have To Admit

keith — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:05:40 -0000

I just read the article, and I don't belittle anyone who feels squeamish about big hits in football. And I am talking strictly adult football here. I think we owe it to youngster to do everything possible to make the sport as safe as possible.

That being said, reading this gave me the opposite effect. I can't help but to have a deeper appreciation for what these guys put themselves through. I have always known that a life of football takes a toll on the human body, and brain. I like to think of my self as a relatively smart person, who values life and wants to live a long and happy one at that. But if I could run a 4.3 40, was 6'2 215 and could run the ball like Adrian Peterson, I would absolutely trade lives with the guy. Hell if I were 6'6 320 and could pass block like Flozell I would trade with him in a heart beat, even after reading that article. I can't tell you why, sure "the money, the money" would be the common refrain. But I would do it for considerably less than what those guys make. I love the sport, and sports in general and sure the money and the fame is great. But I can't help to think that alot of those guys do it for the spirit of competition and gratification of physical dominance. I am sure that alot of my inner depression is due to the fact that I never was good enough or big enough to do the things I grew up loving the most, for a living.

Re: I Have To Admit

Hill Rat — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:51:27 -0000

There are some rugby players that are 7s specialists, but you see a lot of players from both codes (Union & League) playing 7s. I'm guessing that with the advent of rugby in the Olympics you will begin to see more players specializing in 7s.

Re: I Have To Admit

keith — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:43:24 -0000

Parents forcing kids to play a sport, like football or boxing is wrong. But you can't tell me it's because American society fawning over the big time athlete is what solely drives kids(specifically boys) to want to play football. Little boys, whether its cops and robbers, cowboys and indians, knuckles, back yard football have always played such games. There has always been a need to be the alpha male, or kid as long as the human species has existed. We, and again specifically boys, have always been a comptetive species. More often than not that has manifested itself in a physical nature. Simply banning the NFL, or not showing games on tv will not prevent a high percentage of little boys from wanting to show how much better they are than other boys, physically.

It just seems that every culture in hisory has had a warrior, gladiator aspect in its male culture that started in young boys since the dawn of time. At least we have progressed to the point to at least put pads and helmets on. And who knows, we may as a species continue to move and evolve to a completely violent-less society. I think its hard to just ignore our own make up as males. In other words, sure not everyone pursues and lives a life of physicality. But as youngsters, running, throwing, and hitting seem to be the natural first step in showing ones prowess of other boys.

Re: I Have To Admit

Byrk — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:19:10 -0000

It's funny, because my school was state champions of Washington State but we took the opposite approach. You learned to tackle by hitting a guy with a blocking pad in front and pads on the ground to cushion the fall. The other tackling drill was pick a hole which is a lot about technique and less about jarring hits. Some coaches do the line two guys up and have them run straight at each other drills, but our coach felt that you learned nothing from that and players just got hurt. I've noticed with coaches that do the big hitting drills, it's more to get their thrills in than to teach players anything. We focused on hitting guys square, wrapping up and team tackling.

The thing was when game day came, we were always far more hungry to hit than the other team. We'd swarm to the ball much better than other teams, and other coaches would always remark on how well we team tackled. I think a lot of this was due to not having nagging injuries from hitting practice.

The point being that the above method probably isn't helping at high school and may actively hurt your team. If your team has a lot of injuries from practice then it's doing something wrong.

Re: I Have To Admit

peorgietirebiter — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:12:59 -0000

I had the same reaction watching Jones steamroll the d-back. It was an absolutely clean play, just helmet to turf. It made me shudder to think about the old astro turf and hitters like Jack Tatum. It was like cement.

Re: I Have To Admit

Juba — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:04:19 -0000

Exactly, its not about the full grown behemoths at the top of the Ponzi Scheme, its about the young tots being seduced at the entry level.

Re: I Have To Admit

Juba — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:57:24 -0000

Gotta admit all the discussion about the concussions went out the window when I saw Ed Reed lay out Knowshon Moreno. Then again I still get hyped about bullfights in Spain, so I guess I'll be doing time in Purgatory