As HUNH offenses become more common, I expect the average weight of players to drop - which should reduce injuries. The NCAA could always take that a step further by returning to limited substitution rules - "iron man football", if you will. If players had to have stamina to play for 3 hours without a break (like soccer), you'd see smaller players built for stamina rather than for explosiveness. That would also reduce injuries, IMO (but I doubt it ever happens).

1. If you had a high school age son would you let him play high school football?
High school is there to develop young brains, not damage them.

2. How can the game of football be modified to significantly reduce the risk of brain damage?
I expect the sport will evolve into something more fleet of foot, with tackling eventually eliminated.

3. If the game of football is modified to significantly reduce the risk of brain damage, would people watch it the way they do now?
Fans will hang with the sport as it evolves. It won't forever be the top revenue sport, but people will watch.

4. Will college football still be played 20 years from now?
Sure. American football has a long tradition on campuses.

5. If college football has to go, what, if anything, could replace it?
World football (soccer) would probably be the best bet. The game has broad international appeal. Women as well as men enjoy the sport.
As a uniquely American game lacrosse will probably keep gaining ground.

(08-03-2017 08:12 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  As HUNH offenses become more common, I expect the average weight of players to drop - which should reduce injuries. The NCAA could always take that a step further by returning to limited substitution rules - "iron man football", if you will. If players had to have stamina to play for 3 hours without a break (like soccer), you'd see smaller players built for stamina rather than for explosiveness. That would also reduce injuries, IMO (but I doubt it ever happens).

Maybe, but there's a flip side to the coin.

Players will/would be more fatigued, and fatigue leads to injuries.

(08-04-2017 07:41 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-03-2017 08:12 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  As HUNH offenses become more common, I expect the average weight of players to drop - which should reduce injuries. The NCAA could always take that a step further by returning to limited substitution rules - "iron man football", if you will. If players had to have stamina to play for 3 hours without a break (like soccer), you'd see smaller players built for stamina rather than for explosiveness. That would also reduce injuries, IMO (but I doubt it ever happens).

Maybe, but there's a flip side to the coin.

Players will/would be more fatigued, and fatigue leads to injuries.

Perhaps at first, as teams try to field larger players, but I'm convinced that eventually stamina would be the #1 factor in recruiting - and keep in mind, all 22 players would be tired, not just the one trying to make the tackle. Collision speeds would thus be reduced. F = mA, with both m and A being reduced.

Interesting thread, and a related article on ESPN today about Dr. Bennet Omalu. He's the inspiration for the movie Concussion, and it must be noted, is promoting his new book.

He gives this analogy, for better or worse:
Omalu said parents must ask themselves a question: "Do I love football more than I love my child?"

He added: "I wouldn't let my children engage in an activity that has a very strong probability of undermining their intellectual development. Why would I do that to my child?"

Omalu compared the dilemma to a man who is told that his wife has cheated on him.

"He might deny it because he loves this woman," Omalu said. "He might think there is no way it is true. Eventually he accepts that it happened. I think that's what America is experiencing now. America is in love with football but is struggling with its truth. But just like the man in love, give him time."

CTE obsession obscuring truth about brain health of football players

(08-04-2017 11:17 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 07:41 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-03-2017 08:12 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  As HUNH offenses become more common, I expect the average weight of players to drop - which should reduce injuries. The NCAA could always take that a step further by returning to limited substitution rules - "iron man football", if you will. If players had to have stamina to play for 3 hours without a break (like soccer), you'd see smaller players built for stamina rather than for explosiveness. That would also reduce injuries, IMO (but I doubt it ever happens).

Maybe, but there's a flip side to the coin.

Players will/would be more fatigued, and fatigue leads to injuries.

Perhaps at first, as teams try to field larger players, but I'm convinced that eventually stamina would be the #1 factor in recruiting - and keep in mind, all 22 players would be tired, not just the one trying to make the tackle. Collision speeds would thus be reduced. F = mA, with both m and A being reduced.

Fair point about the force of the hits, but after a certain (surprisingly low point), force stops being the only factor that matters. Form, awareness, and strength of the other party are surprisingly important.

Here's a pretty decent illustration of strength/size not being everything: (WARNING - I can't use sound right now, so I have no idea what kind of language is used in this video)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tdPJWM4iJrA

I'm glad to see the NFL is really looking into this!! I don't think the doctor attacked the NFL either, but I think the NFLPA and some player friendly owners got the ball rolling on this issue, and good for them. Having more questions than answers means the NFL is giving this a very hard look, which truthfully, it really needs to!! Bravo to the NFL for once.

I'm honestly shocked so many of you wouldn't let your kids play. I mean I respect it, but if my future son wants to play, in no way am I going to stop him. One thing about that report that everyone seems to ignore: all of the brains studied are from deceased players, many who played decades ago. In those times, there was zero focus on player safety, no concussion protocol, far less technology, far less research, etc. Guys got their bell rung back then and didn't even come out. Now guys are held out for weeks on end if they can't pass tests.

I'm in no way saying CTE isn't an issue, but let's see studies on players who actually played in the newer era where player safety is actually a real concern. It's comparing apples and oranges.

1. Absolutely
2. Better helmets and harsher penalties for dangerous plays
3. If it turns into 7 on 7, no one will watch
4. Yes, at the P5 level. You may see lower levels drop it due to lack of players
5. Nothing will replace football

A world without football honestly depresses me. It's been such a huge part of my family and it is the American sport. There would be a hole in the sports world that can never be filled. I hope changes are made and the game thrives even more in the future.

(07-31-2017 10:03 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  As somebody else pointed out, this board is kinda dead now so let's discuss a very important long term issue. There's been an alarming report out about the prevalence of brain damage in former football players.

Questions:
1) If you had a high school age son would you let him play high school football?
2) How can the game of football be modified to significantly reduce the risk of brain damage?
3) If the game of football is modified to significantly reduce the risk of brain damage, would people watch it the way they do now?
4) Will college football still be played 20 years from now?
5) If college football has to go, what, if anything, could replace it?

1. Yes.
2. Better helmets. Maybe slight rule modifications.
3. Probably.
4. Yes.
5. Spending more (active) time with your family on Saturday and Sunday.

Funny the # of people who say they wouldn't let their sons play. But they'll sure as hell spend Saturday and Sunday watching other people's sons risk their health.