Malcom Gladwell on Penn Football - "Students Should Boycott"

concussion studies wrote:

moist wrote:

Do they know the risks?

Not with the NFL and NCAA covering up.

CTE is like smoking. Common sense tells you that inhaling smoke all day isn't good for you. Likewise, common sense tells you that intentionally banging your head into other peoples' heads dozens of times per day isn't good for you. Sure, it might take some time for the science to come out and for the specific pathologies and mechanisms to be uncovered, but the mere fact that it is unhealthy should be a surprise to exactly no one.

Sure, the NFL is going to cover up the data, just like cigarette companies did. But I don't need data to tell me that I should't stand up, walk across the room, and bang my head into the wall. Do you?

Knower of things. wrote:

More like 4:11.

Once wrote:

A 4:30 miler.

So in other words just some guy who wreaks of mediocrity. Got it.

runn wrote:

It's bad for football. I question any parent who lets their young child play football.

The decision to go on to college football is often an economic one.

What economics? The athlete isn't paid, is still paying for a big part of school and very likely getting a phony education.

Why is Bizarro Cam Levins promoting temper tantrums for adults?

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

runn wrote:

It's bad for football. I question any parent who lets their young child play football.

The decision to go on to college football is often an economic one.

What economics? The athlete isn't paid, is still paying for a big part of school and very likely getting a phony education.

Football players are paid under the table. Been this way since the days of Red Grange and Jim Thorpe.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

runn wrote:

It's bad for football. I question any parent who lets their young child play football.

The decision to go on to college football is often an economic one.

What economics? The athlete isn't paid, is still paying for a big part of school and very likely getting a phony education.

University athletic departments spend every dime they make. They don’t make a “profit”for the school.

two different schools wrote:

Balki Bartokomous wrote:

No they aren't, don't be ridiculous!

Penn State is a technical school in Williamsport. Penn is the Ivy League school near located between Centre Hall and Port Matilda, PA.

Joepa's pedophile ring spread to both schools? Is that what you are saying?

Mike Webster was white and an All Pro many times, had CTE and killed himself at 50. Jim McMahon is a mess because of CTE so you've already had prominent white players affected by it.

American football will be regarded by future generations as a curiously brutal and simplistic artifact of the American empire.

Fentrekker wrote:

American football will be regarded by future generations as a curiously brutal and simplistic artifact of the American empire.

So then we'll still have rugby, hockey, lacrosse, professional wrasslin', and soccer to ban?

Gramps wrote:

Fentrekker wrote:

American football will be regarded by future generations as a curiously brutal and simplistic artifact of the American empire.

So then we'll still have rugby, hockey, lacrosse, professional wrasslin', and soccer to ban?

I didn't say anything about banning. Merely assessing the future based upon my study of the historical arc of sport. I am not in favor of bans. I do think American Football is simplistic, boring and unnecessarily destructive of its participants.

football school wrote:

Yeah, their 100,000+ attendance at games and top 10 ranking clearly prove that football isn't an important part of the culture.

Just FYI, it is 2017, not 1917. Penn has been irrelevant for the better part of a century.

Gramps wrote:

Fentrekker wrote:

American football will be regarded by future generations as a curiously brutal and simplistic artifact of the American empire.

So then we'll still have rugby, hockey, lacrosse, professional wrasslin', and soccer to ban?

I think the point is that the only people playing football will be poor, ignorant people with so few options in life that getting brain damage seems worth it to them. Like boxing is already.

Malcolm, buddy that hair is getting out of control. Let's reel that back in a bit, yea?

Knower of things. wrote:

Gladwell was talking about Penn--the University of Pennsylvania--not Penn State. He's suggesting that academically-focused schools that have relatively less of their institutional identity derived through participation in major sports be the first to step away. I'm not really sure of the reasoning here. If Stanford, Vanderbilt, and the Ivies stop playing football, would that really mean Michigan and Ohio State decide eventually to retire the sport?

BTW, doesn't he say "two years ago" referring to the Penn captain's 2010 suicide? Is this video clip five years old?

Drought predicted wrote:

The students at Penn State are probably the last people to boycott their football games.

Thanks, Gladwell! Happy trails to you!

1. Eliminate kickoffs entirely. Easily the most dangerous play in football and over 50% of injuries occur on these plays.

2. At the youth level, focus more on skills like passing, catching, running routes at an early age. Tackling should not be introduced until high school at the earliest. I see third graders play tackle football yet most can barely catch a ball. In youth hockey in the U.S. they don't allow checking until at least 6th or 7th grade. I don't see why the same couldn't be done for football.

3. Universities (especially non-Ivy league ones) will support whatever sport is most popular, they don't really care about long term health effects. Sports are not a money maker for the university regardless of how good your football team is. They're another way to market your school to prospective students. Getting your school more recognition and tv time does wonders for application numbers.

Those who minimize the dangers of football do not see what I see as a doctor in a University clinic. To give you an example, we introduced concussion testing 14 years ago for incoming athletes. Within a year I had reports from athletes about instructions being given to incoming players on how to intentionally score low in their initial baseline test so that when they later got concussions they would not show any negative effect. It is a toxic sport. I have seen athletes lose their scholarship because of brain injuries and not be able to finish a college degree. When I tried to report the staff of the team where I work I was threatened by the Chancellor of my University with legal action. I detest, DETEST football.

runn wrote:

It's bad for football. I question any parent who lets their young child play football.

The decision to go on to college football is often an economic one.

My girlfriend won’t allow her son to play football because of this. Her ex on the other hand is a retard with tiny brains and tiny genitals so he wants the kid to play football. I side with my girlfriend that it’s not worth it. Her ex is poor and I am not so the son playing football isn’t needed.

As they say at UPenn, "Penn, NOT State"