Studies show brain damage after 1 season highschool football

[salm]

It would be interesting to see if American Football players are more or less healthy than the average person. Sure, the sport comes with a certain risk, but on the other hand there are gazillions of people who are unhealthy due to a lack of sports and bad food choices.
If the Football players turn out to be signifacantly more healthy than the normal person I´d say fuck it and invest resources in improving the health of the general public instead of investing in less problematic football training methods.

[salm]

Some kids do drugs because it's FUN. Some kids steal shit because it's FUN. "Fun" does not define whether or not an activity is safe or in the best interests of the person doing it.

Of course it defines if the activity is in the best interest of the person doing it. As is safety, morality and a whole bunch of other things. But FUN is definately a real part of the equation.

[Frank the Tank]

Had you actually bothered to read, you will have noticed that the people here are concerned with the physical well being of football players.

Bullshit... dragon's first comment was a snide comment asking if this is why football players are such jerks. Then Napoleon jumped in with his "shit all over small towns" snark.

None of us want to see young people develop permanent brain damage. Not the least reason for which is because said brain damage tends to decrease impulse control and make football players into progressively bigger douche-canoes the longer they play.

Yes, clearly this comment is ALL about concern for young people, and not about insulting football players.

But there are direct reasons as well. Like thinking football players are people who should not be harmed with permanent brain damage because the adults who should be protecting them and ensuring their safety while engaged in "fun" activities are hip-deep in greed, nostalgia, and denial.

Yes, you've made it clear that you view football players as individuals, and not as a "douche-canoe" stereotype you can rail against. Your concern is noted, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with misplaced angst and jealousy that they're fucking the girls you desperately wanted to fuck in high school, and a deep desire to go to your 20th high school reunion and discover the star quarterback is now fat and living on welfare.

SNIP

Honestly, dude, I'm still unclear what point you're trying to make. If your point was to provide additional evidence that you're butthurt and angry at how you were treated by "football players" in high school, then you've done an admirable job. Your tale of high school woe and angst sounds like something straight out of a John Hughes movie: "douchebag varsity QB bullies the cameraman to keep him from getting a letter." We could call it "The Karate Kid" or "The Letterman" or something like that.

[Frank the Tank]

Some kids do drugs because it's FUN. Some kids steal shit because it's FUN. "Fun" does not define whether or not an activity is safe or in the best interests of the person doing it.

I am glad you had your fun - hell, it's not like I haven't engaged hobbies and games that have significant inherent risk myself. I understand the appeal of teamwork, physical effort, and some controlled violence even if I'm not myself into football. However, what motivates the young men who are players is not the same thing motivating the adults who are profiting from what the players do.

There are a lot of things humans do that are fun AND dangerous. Skydiving, rock climbing, unprotected sex, drinking sugared soft drinks, just to name a few. The idea that we should ban anything that is dangerous (which seems to be the implication many are making) is simply asinine, and I have a difficult time believing that a group of people who claim to be as intelligent as this crowd tells themselves they are is so ridiculous as to promote that viewpoint. Thus leaving me with the conclusion that, although on the surface the commentary is about "protecting young people," it's pretty clear that this is just a "bash the jocks" fest by a bunch of dorks who are still upset about their high school experience. Which is more than a little bit pathetic...

[TheFeniX]

It would be interesting to see if American Football players are more or less healthy than the average person. Sure, the sport comes with a certain risk, but on the other hand there are gazillions of people who are unhealthy due to a lack of sports and bad food choices.
If the Football players turn out to be signifacantly more healthy than the normal person I´d say fuck it and invest resources in improving the health of the general public instead of investing in less problematic football training methods.

Well, 9 in 10 report the game kicking their asses.

That said, high school (and younger) football players are probably in better health than the average kid. They are exercising after-all. The question is are we exposing them to undue risk of multiple concussions or other health problems before they're even old enough to make that decision themselves.

Honestly, dude, I'm still unclear what point you're trying to make. If your point was to provide additional evidence that you're butthurt and angry at how you were treated by "football players" in high school, then you've done an admirable job. Your tale of high school woe and angst sounds like something straight out of a John Hughes movie: "douchebag varsity QB bullies the cameraman to keep him from getting a letter." We could call it "The Karate Kid" or "The Letterman" or something like that.

Honestly, the whole thing was ridiculously cliche, which is why at first I thought they were fucking with me. Then I realized they were serious and I had to stop myself from laughing. Kind of like my experience with your performance in this thread.

There are a lot of things humans do that are fun AND dangerous. Skydiving, rock climbing, unprotected sex, drinking sugared soft drinks, just to name a few. The idea that we should ban anything that is dangerous (which seems to be the implication many are making) is simply asinine, and I have a difficult time believing that a group of people who claim to be as intelligent as this crowd tells themselves they are is so ridiculous as to promote that viewpoint. Thus leaving me with the conclusion that, although on the surface the commentary is about "protecting young people," it's pretty clear that this is just a "bash the jocks" fest by a bunch of dorks who are still upset about their high school experience. Which is more than a little bit pathetic...

Yes, those are the calls: band ANYTHING dangerous. You heard it here. Remember kids: SUGAR WATER is DANGEROUS. Sugar killing people has everything to do with the inherent dangers of sugar, and not that people drink way to much of the shit. Holy shit, how do you remember to breathe?

Here's a point: skydiving and rock climbing may be dangerous, but when you do them correctly, you don't get hurt. Driving a damn car is the most dangerous activity you'll do on a daily basis. Once again: driving doesn't harm you if done right. Having a Coke once in a while isn't going to harm you. Just the act of playing football is causing brain trauma in kids. Please tell me how to play football without hitting someone.

[Frank the Tank]

Here's a point: skydiving and rock climbing may be dangerous, but when you do them correctly, you don't get hurt. Driving a damn car is the most dangerous activity you'll do on a daily basis. Once again: driving doesn't harm you if done right. Having a Coke once in a while isn't going to harm you. Just the act of playing football is causing brain trauma in kids. Please tell me how to play football without hitting someone.

Just so I'm clear, you're actually advocating for banning anything that is dangerous by design? In other words, football, rugby, aussie rules football, karate, boxing, MMA, TV shows like Jackass, heading the ball in soccer, anal sex, self-mutilation, tattoos, binge drinking, overeating, etc. (I'm not sure where cheerleading falls into that category, but you mentioned you have some issue with cheer, so clearly that must be banned too), must all be banned, outlawed, criminalized, and its practitioners made into pariahs.

Your high school experience must have been really traumatic if you're trying to take everybody's fun away as a result...

Honestly, the whole thing was ridiculously cliche, which is why at first I thought they were fucking with me. Then I realized they were serious and I had to stop myself from laughing. Kind of like my experience with your performance in this thread.

You responded to me, remember? I was in the thread before you were, and then you came in with your entire "football players were mean to me!" angst. Bubba, I get that you feel safe and protected here surrounded by like-minded fellows who all agree with you that kids who played sports in high school are the devil, but outside of this echo chamber, you sound like the douchebags you're claiming that evil, high school quarterback was to you.

[salm]

Well, 9 in 10 report the game kicking their asses.

9 out of 10, wow. That seems to be only professional players in the top league but still, that doesn´t make the sport look very healthy indeed...

[TheFeniX]

Just so I'm clear, you're actually advocating for banning anything that is dangerous by design? In other words, football, rugby, aussie rules football, karate, boxing, MMA, TV shows like Jackass, heading the ball in soccer, anal sex, self-mutilation, tattoos, binge drinking, overeating, etc. (I'm not sure where cheerleading falls into that category, but you mentioned you have some issue with cheer, so clearly that must be banned too), must all be banned, outlawed, criminalized, and its practitioners made into pariahs.

How is anal sex dangerous? Karate is not dangerous by design, not in the way football is. Face contact is almost always banned and the point is never to knock your opponent out.

Boxing has a pretty clear connection to brain trauma while MMA does not. Although, it's a young sport, so it's hard to tell what the long-term effects might be. That said, I have no issue discouraging kids from engaging in combat sports where the primary goal is to hit someone in the head. So, Ju-Jitsu, wrestling, and the rest are fine because, while you can get hurt, that isn't the point.

But none of your ranting matters because the difference is that people who aren't legal adults should be protected from themselves until they are old enough to give informed consent on if the risk is worth the reward. I never even mentioned banning it, but don't let that get in the way of you somehow thinking tattoos and anal sex are dangerous. Your "YOU WANT TO BAN FUN" comment does not move me because adults have a vested interest in curbing fun for the protection of children.

Your high school experience must have been really traumatic if you're trying to take everybody's fun away as a result...

You're still on about this?

[Napoleon the Clown]

Did Frank miss that link about a kid getting maimed by a cannon and his town being pissed off at him for maybe ruining their game? There's some evidence they give more a shit about football games than they do about the well-being of students. Or there's how often the teams are well-funded even if everything else at a school has no money going toward it.

So yeah, I think it's safe to say that there's an excessive value placed on football in much of this country. I take issue mostly with funding being diverted from important shit so that a handful of students can end up playing professionally. Hell, almost none of them even get a scholarship to play in college. The return is not there. If they wanna play football why can't they gather donations to get it going instead of stealing all the money from the programs that do something other than injure most of the participants? As far as I'm concerned, high school sports teams should be fully self-sufficient.

[Frank the Tank]

How is anal sex dangerous?

Probably in the same way cheerleading is dangerous (your claim, not mine). Accidents can happen; prolapses, bleeding, permanent damage.

Karate is not dangerous by design, not in the way football is. Face contact is almost always banned and the point is never to knock your opponent out.

Really, a sport where you hit and kick people isn't dangerous? Okay...

Boxing has a pretty clear connection to brain trauma while MMA does not. Although, it's a young sport, so it's hard to tell what the long-term effects might be.

MMA isn't dangerous, even though people hit and kick other people in the head?

That said, I have no issue discouraging kids from engaging in combat sports where the primary goal is to hit someone in the head. So, Ju-Jitsu, wrestling, and the rest are fine because, while you can get hurt, that isn't the point.

Interesting... you're okay with karate and MMA (sports where people do try to hit and kick each other in the head) because in your fantasy world, that never actually happens. But football and boxing and cheerleading (I'm still waiting for you to explain that one) should be banned because of the potential for head trauma. And wrestling, jiu-jitsu, soccer, etc., where people can and do suffer serious, debilitating, sometimes life-threatening injuries, are okay?

Seriously, dude... your arguments are completely inconsistent and seem based more on the sports you don't happen to hate than any objective measurement of "dangerous."

[Frank the Tank]

Did Frank miss that link about a kid getting maimed by a cannon and his town being pissed off at him for maybe ruining their game? There's some evidence they give more a shit about football games than they do about the well-being of students. Or there's how often the teams are well-funded even if everything else at a school has no money going toward it.

So yeah, I think it's safe to say that there's an excessive value placed on football in much of this country. I take issue mostly with funding being diverted from important shit so that a handful of students can end up playing professionally. Hell, almost none of them even get a scholarship to play in college. The return is not there. If they wanna play football why can't they gather donations to get it going instead of stealing all the money from the programs that do something other than injure most of the participants? As far as I'm concerned, high school sports teams should be fully self-sufficient.

Wait, I'm confused... here I was told by Alyrium that all of you are concerned about the safety of children... but here you're telling me that you don't give two shits about player safety and your issue is money?

So why the fuck are you commenting in a brain damage thread if you don't give a shit about brain damage?
And why the fuck is Alyrium claiming that you do care about brain damage when you're telling me you don't?

[SCRawl]

The issue seems to be whether or not football at any level can be played without an unacceptable* level of risk of permanent significant* brain injury to its players. If it can, fine, fill your boots. If it can't, then we shouldn't be promoting the game in our schools and other institutions. If kids want to play it on their own time, that's between them and their parents, and boys will be boys. If adults want to play it, they're adults, they can do anything they like as long as it's within the law. They should be competent enough to know the risks and can make an informed decision.

There is a strong tradition of organized school football in the US (and other places), but if the result of it is that unacceptable* level of risk, then no, schools can't be allowed to do it.

*...This calls into question what "unacceptable" and "significant" are. Other than that they aren't just synonyms for "non-negligible", I don't know where they get pegged.

[Jub]

Hey Frank, one request, don't ignore my posts in the future just because you can't reply with a glib one liner about nerds hating sports. In fairness you you, you we're probably so eager to shout nerd that my you missed my reply to you, so here it is again:

Seriously, guys... you are positively dripping with scorn for the "jerks" who want to play "FOOTBAAWL," when to anybody outside of this echo chamber you all sound like stereotypical angry nerd virgins from Revenge of the Nerds.

I played high school football; want to know why? Because it was FUN. It didn't get me any girls, or better grades, or college scholarships, but I had a lot of fun during fall quarter during high school. I played soccer in spring quarter, again because it was FUN.

I suspect that very little of the nonsense you guys are talking about - toughening up young men, or town pride, or any of the other reasons you're giving that drip of jealousy masked by scorn and derision - is the primary motivation for most high school football players. You all need to watch a little less Varsity Blues and let people enjoy their teen years without being so angry that yours were unpleasant.

I myself am a sports fan, and if you look at the NFL thread currently running you'll see that others here are too. So I don't know where you get off saying that we're all just sports hating nerds.

Now onto the actually issues, the one currently being discussed is that playing even one season of full contact football at a relatively low level causes brain injuries on top of the bad knees, destroyed backs, and other physical problems that can arise from playing the game in high school. I for one think that maybe schools ought to focus on education and that we shouldn't be letting minors risk permanent brain damage playing a game.

One thing getting in the way of schools stepping back and taking a look at the issue seriously is that football culture in the US is a fucking monster. Seriously, some schools would rather cut band and art classes than take away funding from the football team and the NCAA is even worse pocketing millions while not allowing star college players to make a living off their athletic abilities. It's time the US takes a long hard look at their obsession with football and examines the long terms costs of this seemingly innocent game.

For the record, in case it changes anything. I'm more of a hockey fan, and while hockey isn't perfect, we're looking at ways to make the gamer safer and house level teams don't allow hitting period, while the more skilled leagues place a big emphasis on safe hitting. The the CHL major junior level one of my teams prospects - Cole Cassels of the OHL's Oshawa Generals and a draft pick of the Vancouver Canucks if you must know - was suspended ten games (roughly a 6th of his season) for a hit to the head and not only does he miss league games, he's also going to miss international world junior games as well, and I'm fine with this. If we can have an exciting sport while minimizing the long term physical impact these games have on the players I'm willing to accept a lot of changes and suspensions to my teams players to make that happen.

Now before you call me a nerd, for disagreeing with you (and be warned that if you do so without producing an argument I will report your posts as trolling) here are a few extra things about me that I didn't include in the post above. First I played sports, specifically ice hockey, in high school and stopped playing the sport only due to time constraints with the job I got post high school and the expense of keeping my equipment upgraded and paying rink/league fees. I enjoyed laying the game, and I still enjoy watching the sport at nearly every level. Second I was in army cadets, which in my nation is a youth leadership program with a military theme for ages 12 to 18, I was fit I had to stop when it got in the way of hockey, but it lead to me having a high level of fitness and a developed social group in high school.

Why mention these two activities? Because they show that I'm exactly the type of person who should unconditionally support sports, especially at the youth level, but I don't. I think that if a sport is found to be unduly harmful to our youth, we have the responsibility to find a different way to introduce the same challenges of skill, teamwork, and physicality without the risk. To use hockey as an example, we could remove hitting and bare knuckle fighting from the game and have it become a game where skill and positioning matter more than strength and size. It would fundamentally alter the game at all levels, but if this change saves people a lifetime of pain and suffering I'll take the change to my favorite sport. Football could be changed simply by making it a two hand touch or flag game with any tackling called as an unnecessary roughness penalty. This would be a change, but the NFL has already taken steps to protect the QB and receivers from hits with heavy on field penalties, so this would simply be another change in that same direction.

-----

Wait, I'm confused... here I was told by Alyrium that all of you are concerned about the safety of children... but here you're telling me that you don't give two shits about player safety and your issue is money?

Hey moron, Alyrium doesn't speak for all of us. People can have multiple reasons for disliking something, in this case some people dislike the health risks of the sport while others dislike the effect on the education of students at schools where an undue amount of emphasis has been placed on football programs. Not everybody in this thread has to be in lock step agreement with one another to think you're a tool.

[LaCroix]

Karate is not dangerous by design, not in the way football is. Face contact is almost always banned and the point is never to knock your opponent out.

Really, a sport where you hit and kick people isn't dangerous? Okay...

You just proved to have absolutely no idea about martial arts - pro tip : The styles don't punch or kick with full power, but stop after a light contact in sparrings. That is called light contact or semi contact, and all martial arts is taught that way - no real hitting - if you can't pull your punches and kicks at the last moment, you show your ineptitude to train at this level and will need remedial training to catch up. Thus - we train at full speed, but never actually hit each other (ecxept for rare accidents, where we hit us more than lightly because we fucked up.)

In such tournaments, knocking out the opponent is a foul. It might even get you banned from the club if you make a habit out of it.

Full contact fighting, for example some karate styles is taught in special schools, and usually only to adults. They are an oddity among almost all martial arts clubs.

[TheFeniX]

Probably in the same way cheerleading is dangerous (your claim, not mine). Accidents can happen; prolapses, bleeding, permanent damage.

Hey look, you're a fucking moron. But that's no surprise to anyone.

Football players aren’t the only jocks with a concussion problem.

Cheerleading is by far the most dangerous role for female athletes, yet girls who suffer concussions often don’t recognize that they’re injured, a new study found.

The study of junior and senior high-school cheerleaders found that 37 percent had symptoms of a concussion but failed to report them.

The research, published in the Journal of Pediatrics, noted a sharp increase of hospital emergency visits by cheerleaders, from 4,954 in 1980 to 26,786 in 2007.

The study noted that cheerleading accounts for 66 percent of catastrophic sports injuries — the kind that shorten lives or result in permanent disability or long-term medical conditions — among girls.

Some 6 percent of all cheerleaders’ injuries are concussions, which are defined as “traumatically induced alterations in mental status” caused by damage to the head.

Cheerleaders are frequently allowed to return to the game after an injury, because doctors rely on them to evaluate themselves.

But — since girls often don’t appreciate their injuries or just want to get back to the game — they should be given neurocognitive testing, researchers concluded.

If a grown woman wants to land on her head, and get right back into the game/competition: more power to her. But middle-school girls should not be given that kind of decision making power.

You keep comparing accidents to damage accrued during normal play. Cheer is in the "accident" area, which is why I ignored it except for one quip. But it's relevant because, due to lack of safety and the lengths group will go off to impress viewers/win competitions, means girls are working harder and being thrown higher, so when the mistakes happen: they are more serious. They need to dial it back.

You see many crippled karate practitioners around who weren't involved in some freak accident? So destroyed from years of just practicing the art, they can barely lift their kids and/or wake up feeling like Hell? No. If only we knew how many football players wake up feeling like Hell or how one year of football causes brain matter changes. Dang. If only someone besides you and your rock-solid "lol nerds just hated high school" argument were to come into this thread and post some evidence... whelp, I've got to get back to destroying 'merica because nofun.

[Frank the Tank]

FeniX - To SCRawl's point, why don't you come up with some definition of "unacceptable risk" and then we can continue arguing from there. At this point in time you're all over the fucking place and I don't feel like chasing you down until you decide to come up with a consistent argument about what sports are bannable and which are not, and your original argument was pretty much "football players suck," so there's really no point in continuing.

LaCroix - thanks for the lesson on martial arts.

Jub - I didn't respond to you because I didn't disagree with anything you said. Now either follow through on your threat and report me for "trolling" or go fuck yourself.

[Simon_Jester]

Uh, the initial argument was not "football players suck;" it was "football players should not be forced to suffer unnecessary injuries that can damage their brains just because they're teenagers caught up in a macho culture by older men trying to live out vicarious fantasies of their own glory days."

[Broomstick]

Some kids do drugs because it's FUN. Some kids steal shit because it's FUN. "Fun" does not define whether or not an activity is safe or in the best interests of the person doing it.

I am glad you had your fun - hell, it's not like I haven't engaged hobbies and games that have significant inherent risk myself. I understand the appeal of teamwork, physical effort, and some controlled violence even if I'm not myself into football. However, what motivates the young men who are players is not the same thing motivating the adults who are profiting from what the players do.

There are a lot of things humans do that are fun AND dangerous. Skydiving, rock climbing, unprotected sex, drinking sugared soft drinks, just to name a few. The idea that we should ban anything that is dangerous (which seems to be the implication many are making) is simply asinine, and I have a difficult time believing that a group of people who claim to be as intelligent as this crowd tells themselves they are is so ridiculous as to promote that viewpoint. Thus leaving me with the conclusion that, although on the surface the commentary is about "protecting young people," it's pretty clear that this is just a "bash the jocks" fest by a bunch of dorks who are still upset about their high school experience. Which is more than a little bit pathetic...

Defensive much?

If there could be found a way to prevent brain damage from playing normal football I'd be all for it. If, however, brain damage has become the normal outcome of playing football, even if a brief period, there is something seriously wrong with the sport.

Boxing is an even more violent sport, but rules were put into place first to prevent deaths, then to reduce the damage to the players. Boxing is still a brutal contest, but it's my impression it's less deadly and damaging than it used to be.

Football is, if anything MORE dangerous than it used to be. Sure, back in the days of no helmets, or simple leather helmets, there were deaths and injuries but it wasn't as common to use the human skull and neck as a battering ram, either. We've reduced the acute injuries but not the cumulative injuries.

I fully defend the right of adults to make informed decisions regarding the risks they take - but PeeWee, PopWarner, and even high school students are not adults, and apparently there has been a generation or two of NFL players that weren't fully informed of the risks they were running. I think that's a serious problem with the sport.

[Broomstick]

Interesting... you're okay with karate and MMA (sports where people do try to hit and kick each other in the head) because in your fantasy world, that never actually happens. But football and boxing and cheerleading (I'm still waiting for you to explain that one) should be banned because of the potential for head trauma.

In recent years cheerleading has become more and more athletic and gymnastic. It's not just dance moves and pom-poms anymore. Throws, falls, flips, and human pyramids are becoming common. This has resulted in accidents that result in head trauma or spinal damage much more often than in the past.

[Frank the Tank]

Uh, the initial argument was not "football players suck;" it was "football players should not be forced to suffer unnecessary injuries that can damage their brains just because they're teenagers caught up in a macho culture by older men trying to live out vicarious fantasies of their own glory days."

Don't be disingenuous. The initial argument was

Maybe that explains why so many football players are jerks.

The article simply said that head impacts cause brain damage. The first person who said anything remotely like what you're claiming was the "initial argument" was Broomstick right before you commented.

If you want to say that your argument was the above, that's fine, but don't try to retconn dragon, Bass, and Napoleon's comments, which said nothing like what you're claiming above.

snip

Fair enough - I was a bit harsh and painted everybody's comments with a broad brush and my apologies for that. That being said, let's not all pretend that every individual's comments here are actually about "concern for the players." Yours may be, and perhaps Simon's and a few other people's, but not everybody.

[Broomstick]

It would be interesting to see if American Football players are more or less healthy than the average person. Sure, the sport comes with a certain risk, but on the other hand there are gazillions of people who are unhealthy due to a lack of sports and bad food choices.
If the Football players turn out to be signifacantly more healthy than the normal person I´d say fuck it and invest resources in improving the health of the general public instead of investing in less problematic football training methods.

During their playing years on average yes, they're more fit and healthy - you can't play at a competitive level without being stronger and fitter than average, that's one of the reasons being a football player is prestigious. You have to be better than average just to make the team, even in high school.

After their playing years football players are less healthy than average. Their joints are shot, they suffer from the lingering effects of serous injuries to bones, joints, ligaments, and tendons, and they tend to die younger. Addiction to painkillers probably is a factor there, as it's hardly unknown for that to happen with the level of chronic pain most of these guys deal with. Now there's the brain damage issue.


And, just for the record - I'm not at all down on sports. I was varsity soccer/football for two years of high school on the best team in my state. I rode horses well enough to participate in a gymkana and do some roman riding. That's in addition to the hiking, wilderness camping, skiing (both nordic and alpine), and other sports I participated in. I am, actually, very pro sport. I understand there are some risks - I caused some permanent damage to my right knee playing soccer, as an example, and have some permanent damage from being kicked by a horse as examples. However, there is a point at which risks and injuries become unacceptable. Where that line should be drawn is debatable, but I am quite firm that it differs between children and adults, and for adults that decision needs to be fully informed.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Bullshit... dragon's first comment was a snide comment asking if this is why football players are such jerks. Then Napoleon jumped in with his "shit all over small towns" snark.

Most teenagers are jerks. Now, take a teenager. Standard neurological condition for teenagers is that they are full of hormones they are not used to yet, their amygdala (the asshole of the brain) is thus somewhat over-active. Their prefrontal cortex (responsible for impulse control) is having its communication with the rest of the brain re-wired. Poor impulse control + a supercharged amygdala=asshole, to varying degrees. Now, take that same teenager. Knock him about the head with various forms of impact traumas, concussions etc a few times. So as to cause physical brain damage in the white matter, and permanently fuck over brain development--particularly the web of connections that permit the prefrontal cortex to regulate the amygdalas aggressive and sexual urges.

You get a jerk. A bigger jerk than a standard teenager. And, because the damage is permanent, they will continue to be a jerk.

This is not good for them. They have had their brains damaged. Brain damage is bad.

It is ALSO bad for everyone around them.

Yes, clearly this comment is ALL about concern for young people, and not about insulting football players.

Come back and talk to me when you are subject to physical and psychological abuse by said football players for 4 years.

And yes, it is about concern for them. I dont WANT to see football players go to prison for beating up/raping/killing someone. I dont WANT to see them have shitty interpersonal and romantic relationships. I dont WANT to see them ruin their finances, become alcoholics, or any number of the other things that tend to happen when someone's brain is fucked up by repeated impact trauma.

I want them to be safe, happy, and productive members of society. Both for them, and so that the next generation of bookish gay kids dont have to go through the hell I went through, and so that young women in places like Steubenville (or anywhere in the general vicinity of Ben Rapistburger) are less likely to be raped, and so fewer people in the DFW area are killed by Cowboys team members who decide to drive while intoxicated.

Yes, you've made it clear that you view football players as individuals, and not as a "douche-canoe" stereotype you can rail against. Your concern is noted, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with misplaced angst and jealousy that they're fucking the girls you desperately wanted to fuck in high school, and a deep desire to go to your 20th high school reunion and discover the star quarterback is now fat and living on welfare.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Oh man. That is... Oh god my sides.

You deride me for engaging in stereotyping, which is a fair cop. They are not all assholes. It is just more likely to occur. On the other hand, I bear scars upon my flesh that attest to the assholery of a fair fraction of football players. You need only go to somethingawful to gaze upon the glorious douchery present in pro-football. The forum has an annual contest on that very subject. Or maybe look into the Tallahassee police department's complicity in covering up the rapes committed by USF's team.

But then, you engage in one yourself. One which is so wrong I cannot help but laugh my ass off. I am as gay as the day is long. So unless my high school mascot was a Thebian (and it was not), and the team took after the Sacred Band (they did not), there was no sexual jealousy. The guys I go for bear little resemblance to those who play contact sports.

My ten year reunion was in October. There was no point in going, so I didn't. Everyone I had any desire to ever see again, I have maintained my friendships with across university and graduate school. I have also kept in touch with the non-douche members of the various sports teams. They are doing pretty well for themselves, and I am happy for them.

Some of the rest are, or have recently been, in prison.

Being a football player does not automatically make one a douche. But it makes it more likely. Very likely due to head trauma.

So tell me, why on earth does objecting to the continued neurological damage suffered by teenagers make me a bad person? Because I am not entirely selfless about it? Because I recognize that said brain damage leads to behavior I and every other sane individual finds objectionable?

Fucking sue me.

[Frank the Tank]

Alyrium

Much like Fenix, you can't seem to figure out if you're going to try to claim your only issue is "concern" for the players, or if you're going to cop to your own angst. Well, I'll let you in on a secret. Nobody cares what happened to you at the hands of high school kids that also played football. Seriously... nobody cares. Deal with it however you want to deal with it... just don't come in here and start stereotyping and generalizing and expect everybody to accept your arguments on their face.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Alyrium

Much like Fenix, you can't seem to figure out if you're going to try to claim your only issue is "concern" for the players, or if you're going to cop to your own angst. Well, I'll let you in on a secret. Nobody cares what happened to you at the hands of high school kids that also played football. Seriously... nobody cares. Deal with it however you want to deal with it... just don't come in here and start stereotyping and generalizing and expect everybody to accept your arguments on their face.

And you dont seem to know how to read. I am perfectly capable of the following:

1) Being concerned that brain damage as a result of football harms the continued happiness and well being of children.

2) Recognizing that said brain damage leads to objectionable behavior by way of decreasing impulse control. It is almost like I am a biologist who knows how the brain works or something.

3) Disliking it when people are jerks.

4) Wanting to see improvements in the safety of contact sports so as to reduce the proportion of jerks, and also reduce the harm done to the happiness and well-being of children.

If you want actual statistics with respect to the douchiness of high school athletes, here you go.

http://asr.sagepub.com/content/72/5/705.short

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1343519/

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... ated=false

http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/12/5/441.short

Long Story Short: high school athletes--and football is the worst of the lot--are more physically, socially, and sexually aggressive than their non-athlete counterparts. Some of this is due to the social environment, but undoubtedly a large chunk of it is due to physical damage to the neural networks that regulate social behavior, which will create feedback loops when you put a bunch of them into a group.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Did Frank miss that link about a kid getting maimed by a cannon and his town being pissed off at him for maybe ruining their game? There's some evidence they give more a shit about football games than they do about the well-being of students. Or there's how often the teams are well-funded even if everything else at a school has no money going toward it.

So yeah, I think it's safe to say that there's an excessive value placed on football in much of this country. I take issue mostly with funding being diverted from important shit so that a handful of students can end up playing professionally. Hell, almost none of them even get a scholarship to play in college. The return is not there. If they wanna play football why can't they gather donations to get it going instead of stealing all the money from the programs that do something other than injure most of the participants? As far as I'm concerned, high school sports teams should be fully self-sufficient.

Wait, I'm confused... here I was told by Alyrium that all of you are concerned about the safety of children... but here you're telling me that you don't give two shits about player safety and your issue is money?

So why the fuck are you commenting in a brain damage thread if you don't give a shit about brain damage?
And why the fuck is Alyrium claiming that you do care about brain damage when you're telling me you don't?

My entire point was that people won't give a damn about the "small" amount of damage occurring, considering how they treat everything else about it. I'd personally love if they could make football safer and reduce brain injuries. But that wasn't what I was commenting on in the first place. I was commenting on the simple fact that high school football is serious business for a non-negligible number of people out there. So long as that is going on, it really doesn't matter if the injuries sustained without full-on concussion can fully heal, given time, or if it'll be permanent damage.

As it is, high school football is fucking over more people than just the players. So I feel comfortable taking issue with that.