Kornheiser: NFL to decline?

[Chilli Dipper]

We were talking about hockey last off-season in the way we're talking about football now, when several of the NHL's enforcers died of painkiller overdoses. By and large, though, hockey doesn't face the kind of scrutiny football does because contact is not a routine part of the game, and unnecessary hits are taken very seriously. In the Canadian cities, players could face criminal charges for blatant cheap shots; I don't think an NFL team would make the league's best player sit out for nearly a year after a concussion, either.

[bwdial]

Originally Posted by Kapanda

Neither... rugby is also rough and violent, but it's not prone to concussions and wear and tear the same way high impact football is.

In my defence, I mentioned concussions specifically.

Part of that comes from the fact that, although seemingly similar, rugby and football are quite dissimilar.  By and large, everyone is moving in the same direction in rugby because of the lack of the forward pass.

Rugby is a violent sport.

Football is a collision sport.

If they really want to do something about concussions, the NFL, NCAA, etc. should simply outlaw the crossing pattern.  Make it illegal for a receiver lined up outside of the hash marks to run to the other side of the field.  Of course, that probably isn't going to happen.

[jamo]

If they really want to do something about concussions, the NFL, NCAA, etc. should simply outlaw the crossing pattern.  Make it illegal for a receiver lined up outside of the hash marks to run to the other side of the field.  Of course, that probably isn't going to happen.

Is the concussion rate among wide receivers really high enough that that would make an impact?

[newtogolf]

The NFL is balancing greed against the spirit of the game.  The owners and Goodell want to add more games to the regular season.  In order to get the union and players to approve this, they need to address the injury and concussion issue.  Basically Goodell is willing to change the rules to reduce violent hits as long as he gets the extra games he wants.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Kapanda

sorry, meant to say that I mentioned wear and tear specifically

Yeah that was the part that I was referring to. It's nonsensical.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Chilli Dipper

We were talking about hockey last off-season in the way we're talking about football now, when several of the NHL's enforcers died of painkiller overdoses. By and large, though, hockey doesn't face the kind of scrutiny football does because contact is not a routine part of the game, and unnecessary hits are taken very seriously. In the Canadian cities, players could face criminal charges for blatant cheap shots; I don't think an NFL team would make the league's best player sit out for nearly a year after a concussion, either.

The NHL doesn't make players (e.g Sidney Crosby, Marc Savard, etc) sit out any more than it was the NFL that made Peyton Manning sit out an entire season or Steve Young retire.

Anyway, although it's not the sole purpose of the sport, to say contact isn't a routine part of hockey tells me we're watching and/or played a different type of hockey. I thought contact was inevitable on pretty much every shift. Some players are less involved, but most of the high end players I know play through injuries, and have suffered documented concussions during their career. The point which is being made by researchers now is its the repeated undocumented concussions that are the problem. It's why linemen, boxers, hockey enforcers etc are most at risk.

For the record, I'm not sure how MMA ever got sanctioned.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by jamo

Is the concussion rate among wide receivers really high enough that that would make an impact?

That type of rule would fundamentally alter the sport so much that it would be almost unrecognizable in a few short years.

However, I don't think it would eliminate a significant portion of concussions.  The post pattern is still in play, as well as the slant, which can result in plenty of violent collisions that result in concussions.  Football doesn't necessarily have concussions as a result of the types of plays as much as it is a result of the very small windows in each portion of the field and the speed of the game.  A slot receiver running a squirrel out (seemingly harmless route) against a cover 2 corner sitting outside has a higher likelihood of getting his bell rung than does a WR running a crossing pattern against 1 or 0 coverage.

Brandon

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

The NFL is balancing greed against the spirit of the game.  The owners and Goodell want to add more games to the regular season.  In order to get the union and players to approve this, they need to address the injury and concussion issue.  Basically Goodell is willing to change the rules to reduce violent hits as long as he gets the extra games he wants.

Which sort of seems like it would be a wash, no?  Let's change the rules so we have less violent hits per game, but then add more games so we can make sure that all the players still get their fair share of violent hits for the whole season.

Originally Posted by bplewis24

That type of rule would fundamentally alter the sport so much that it would be almost unrecognizable in a few short years.

However, I don't think it would eliminate a significant portion of concussions.  The post pattern is still in play, as well as the slant, which can result in plenty of violent collisions that result in concussions.  Football doesn't necessarily have concussions as a result of the types of plays as much as it is a result of the very small windows in each portion of the field and the speed of the game.  A slot receiver running a squirrel out (seemingly harmless route) against a cover 2 corner sitting outside has a higher likelihood of getting his bell rung than does a WR running a crossing pattern against 1 or 0 coverage.

Brandon

Agreed.  And the play after play pounding the interior players take is just as dangerous long term as those occasional violent hits on receivers coming across the middle.

This is the fine line they walk.  How can they address the concussion and injury issue properly and yet still avoid having to alter the game to the point where its not football anymore?

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

For the record, I'm not sure how MMA ever got sanctioned.

I second that.

[Kapanda]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Yeah that was the part that I was referring to. It's nonsensical.

more wear and tear = harder to play more games.

ergo,

less wear and tear = easier to play more games

[bwdial]

Originally Posted by jamo

Is the concussion rate among wide receivers really high enough that that would make an impact?

Concussions by “general” Position

• QB = 11
• RB = 12
• TE = 15
• WR = 28
• OL = 15
  • Offense = 81 (48.5%)
• DL = 17
• LB = 25
• DB = 44
  • Defense = 86 (51.5%)

[Mr3Wiggle]

Originally Posted by bwdial

Concussions by “general” Position

QB = 11

RB = 12

TE = 15

WR = 28

OL = 15

Offense = 81 (48.5%)

DL = 17

LB = 25

DB = 44

Defense = 86 (51.5%)

I'm surprised the WRs concussions aren't higher.  Seem to always see really nasty hits across the middle.

[bwdial]

Those figures were taken off of a blog, so take them with a grain of salt.  I have no doubt that they are reasonably accurate.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Mr3Wiggle

I'm surprised the WRs concussions aren't higher.  Seem to always see really nasty hits across the middle.

Their hits are also more high profile, and offensive players are protected more within the rule book.  Just goes to show how out of touch the league commissioner is with actual health & safety concerns.  I'll bet not many folks would have imagined defensive players are concussed at a rate higher than offensive players.

Assuming those numbers are accurate, I believe it supports my theory that improper tackling technique (specifically, allowing the facemask to point towards the ground during a tackle attempt) is a big culprit in concussion-related collisions...at least the ones that can be avoided.

Brandon

[Kapanda]

I think those figures are very off.

All the talk is on linemen's brains mainly. Receivers receive big hits, but it's every once in a blue moon.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Their hits are also more high profile, and offensive players are protected more within the rule book.  Just goes to show how out of touch the league commissioner is with actual health & safety concerns.  I'll bet not many folks would have imagined defensive players are concussed at a rate higher than offensive players.

Assuming those numbers are accurate, I believe it supports my theory that improper tackling technique (specifically, allowing the facemask to point towards the ground during a tackle attempt) is a big culprit in concussion-related collisions...at least the ones that can be avoided.

Brandon

Actually, now that I think about it, it makes perfect sense that the defensive players concussion rates are higher.  The defensive backs are the ones that are initiating the tackles with their helmets. To give the WRs concussions they have to hit helmet to helmet (yes, a lot of concussinos are caused by the ground too), but to give themselves a concussion, they can hit anything.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by Kapanda

I think those figures are very off.

All the talk is on linemen's brains mainly. Receivers receive big hits, but it's every once in a blue moon.

The numbers are probably right, but they are only reported concussions.  The obvious violent hits on the QB and WRs are hard to ignore, but I think there are probably a lot of concussions sustained in the interior that go unreported.  Also, I don't even think they need to technically get a concussion to get the long term damage.  The repeated "little" hits they give and receive play after play all add up too.

[Kapanda]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

The numbers are probably right, but they are only reported concussions.  The obvious violent hits on the QB and WRs are hard to ignore, but I think there are probably a lot of concussions sustained in the interior that go unreported.  Also, I don't even think they need to technically get a concussion to get the long term damage.  The repeated "little" hits they give and receive play after play all add up too.

True...