[Jawbone54]

The New Orleans Saints' "bounty" program has a lot of people talking about a familiar subject: the future of football.

Concussions have become a hot topic in recent years. The NFL is fighting desperately to lessen their frequency, but athletes are continually getting bigger, stronger, and faster -- they can't eliminate concussions. Spinal injuries are another concern, and reports of ill-equipped training staffs on high school sidelines across America are another point of interest. Students are dying.

My friends and I almost universally agree: our kids aren't playing football. Keep in mind that this is the LSU Tiger-loving South. We're not quite as fanatical about football as Texas, but we're not far behind. We'd prefer our kids to play something safer, particularly basketball or soccer (both of which my kids will probably gravitate towards anyways, considering my viewing habits).

Will you let your kids play? Are you concerned about these issues? Do you have problems with all sports?

Vote, discuss.

[subego]

No. Only I get to give them concussions.

[andi*pandi]

My son hasn't expressed interest in football yet, he plays soccer. But if he did want to play I'd allow it, if I was confident of his coach and the attitudes toward "winning at any cost." Then again with his size, perhaps his opponents would be the ones to worry.

My niece played football and had a pretty bad neck injury.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

No. Only I get to give them concussions.

...because you believe in corporal punishment.
I feel I had to spell out the joke for the dimwits out there

[lpkmckenna]

I'd let my son or daughter play football, but I'd never let my daughter be a cheerleader. Cheerleading alone causes more injuries than every other high school sport put together. It's a national menace.

Football is a pretty stupid sport. I'm pretty sure it only exists to make gym teachers feel like generals instead of failures. I'm not too fond of hockey either, though pro-hockey has improved a lot. It used to be an unwatchable bloodsport, but the fact that they still permit fighting keeps me from watching.

If you want to create real men, you make your kids play soccer. No beer-gutted outfielders in that game.

BTW, before I let my son be a wrestler, I'd tell him he could get herpes.

[ort888]

I would try and steer my kid in another direction and/or lay out the risks, but by the time my son is old enough to play the dangerous kind of football, he'll be old enough to make his own life decisions. I would hope anyway.

[sek929]

I'd prefer my son/daughter played soccer, because that's what I grew up with and it is wonderful exercise, but in reality I'd have to go with whatever they chose to play.

High School soccer can be pretty physical too, I got insanely banged up one game while playing goalie, but of course the end game of football is to hit the dude with the ball hard so soccer still doesn't come close.

I'd rather my son/daughter played an actual team sport, instead of getting into skateboarding or some other 'extreme' activity. I think more people get severely injured riding dirtbikes and trying kickflips than everyone in High School Football combined. Of course if they are interested enough in something I think it would be counter-productive to force them out of it.

Also, everything said, I find soccer incredibly boring to watch, great game to play though.

[cjrivera]

He's already playing. Played from the 5th grade until now (7th grade).
He wanted to play and he loves it (even with the practices in the heat).
The league is a county league, and the coaches aren't cutthroat. They are looking out for the safety of the kids first and foremost, and also to teach them the fundamentals of the game. It does worry me at times, because he is one of the smallest kid in his age group.

If you had the option on the poll, I guess mine would be:
I would/do let my kid play football, but I wouldn't let him/her play any sport he wants.

[abbaZaba]

not letting your kids play a sport because they might get hurt? you are being overprotective. if they enjoy playing the sport and enjoy the knocks and bruises that come along with it (that come along with ANY sport) then why stop them from doing something they enjoy?

do you really think playing any other sport is really that much safer? I'm sure you're aware basketball plays with zero pads. haven't you ever seen anyone go up for a layup and get fouled hard? head hitting hardwood.

Hell, Kobe was even out for a concussion sustained in the ALL-STAR game. if you think you're helping your kids by not letting them play a "dangerous" sport simply based on the increase in diagnoses in concussion in football, you're parenting by way of knee-jerk reaction.

have you ever thought that the sport is getting MORE dangerous, it's just that more head injuries are being diagnosed? The only way the game is changing is by getting better equipment to protect the players, not the other way around.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

not letting your kids play a sport because they might get hurt? you are being overprotective.

In a sport prone to concussions which can lead to debilitating effects later in life? Yeah, I'm gonna disagree.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

have you ever thought that the sport is getting MORE dangerous, it's just that more head injuries are being diagnosed? The only way the game is changing is by getting better equipment to protect the players, not the other way around.

So changing ones opinion in light of new info is stupid as well?

[abbaZaba]

Also, there are goons in every sport. Basketball especially- there are enforcers on every team, particularly in the lower levels. Do you not remember Temple coach John Chaney sending out a big guy for the sole reason of injuring a player?

What you're worried about is not the safety of the SPORT, but the morality/competence of the people we select to coach and guide our children in the sport they choose

[The Godfather]

Citius, Altius, Fortius, Fatius. Choose three.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

We'd prefer our kids to play something safer, particularly basketball or soccer (both of which my kids will probably gravitate towards anyways, considering my viewing habits).

A kid two grades above me in high school lost a testicle playing soccer. He was forever known as the One Nut Wonder.

Look at the toll basketball can take on your knees, ankles, pretty much any joint. I knew another kid who blew out both knees playing basketball in high school. He will never play again. You seem to forget that other sports use other parts of the body that can also be injured.

You're sliding down a slippery slope here. Your job as a parent is to provide your offspring with all the necessary information and potential dangers of said sport. If they still want to proceed, then let them. They are people too, ya know.

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

In a sport prone to concussions which can lead to debilitating effects later in life? Yeah, I'm gonna disagree.

It's not only football. I've seen concussions in basketball, soccer, and volleyball players. (Heck, I've seen 2 in cheerleaders.)

But, I do understand the concern. I don't think you're being overprotective. As a parent you do what you think is best for your kid. Kudos.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

In a sport prone to concussions which can lead to debilitating effects later in life? Yeah, I'm gonna disagree.

So changing ones opinion in light of new info is stupid as well?

No. But you can regard new information like this: "wow I am seeing Sportscenter talk a lot more about concussions in the NFL lately. And ya know what? these players are a lot bigger than they used to be. That must mean this game is getting inherently more dangerous as time goes by."


Or you can regard new information life this: "Hey our knowledge of the human brain is decidely poor. As these issues pop up in sports and we gain more data and experience analyzing these types of issues/injuries and we get better at identifying when someone needs to be taken out of action then that might lead to an increase in concussion diagnoses".

It that it may look like more concussions are happening, but in reality, in the past, there were just a ton more people playing with concussion symptoms. that is a BAD THING. which is why, later in life, these people are experiencing such problems.

with all the attention football is giving head/neck/spinal injuries, equipment is only going to improve.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

What you're worried about is not the safety of the SPORT, but the morality/competence of the people we select to coach and guide our children in the sport they choose

There is that.

However, the worst injuries I ever saw in basketball were sprained fingers and ankles. A nosebleed from a wayward elbow in a mad dash for the ball. Basketball and soccer you are not supposed to slam into each other. I was the "enforcer" tall kid, my job was to be a tree in the bucket and block the basket, not tackle anyone.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

No. But you can look at the issue like this: "wow I am seeing Sportscenter talk a lot more about concussions in the NFL lately. And ya know what? these players are a lot bigger than they used to be. That must mean this game is getting inherently more dangerous as time goes by."


Or you could think: "Hey our knowledge of the human brain is decidely poor. As these issues pop up in sports and we gain more data and experience analyzing these types of issues/injuries and we get better at identifying when someone needs to be taken out of action then that might lead to an increase in concussion diagnoses" so that it may look like more concussions are happening, but in reality, in the past, there were just a ton more people playing with concussion symptoms. that is a BAD THING. which is why, later in life, these people are experiencing such problems.

I think you're missing what I'm saying – if we didn't realize how often concussions were occurring, then it's totally fair to not what your kid to play because his likelihood of concussion is still greater than most sports.

Also, how is not both?

[Paco500]

Tough one.

Both my kids do "dangerous" sports- my daughter show jumps competitively and my son plays rugby. The jumping is probably more dangerous as my son is only 10 and the rugby isn't that rough yet, but I'm glad they are both into sport.

Obviously, in the UK, there isn't much opportunity to play American Football, but I think I would allow it. My parents barred me as a kid because a guy a few years ahead of me at school broke his neck in a game and ended up a quadriplegic. I never really had an interest and played soccer and ran track instead.

All in all, I'd rather they played sports than didn't and if the one thing that really interested them was America Football, I guess I'd allow it.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I think you're missing what I'm saying – if we didn't realize how often concussions were occurring, then it's totally fair to not what your kid to play because his likelihood of concussion is still greater than most sports.

Also, how is not both?

I'm not missing what you're saying. If anything, your thought process should be "Well I am really glad all this attention is being paid to head and neck injuries these days. What better time to let my kid play this sport when all this attention is focused on how to identify, treat, and eventually prevent these injuries?"

There isn't a single sport where there is 0% chance of concussion. Hell, I rattled my head one time when I had a bad TUBING crash. I've sprained ankles playing basketball, stoved fingers in pretty much every sport, broke my collarbone mountain biking, fractured my wrist playing ULTIMATE FRISBEE, sprained my shoulder in basketball, and I have caught many elbows, one which split my eye open pretty good.

The fact of the matter is if you're trying to get your kid through life without losing any HP, you're fighting a losing battle. If your child enjoys the sport, is coached by an upstanding human being, and is aware enough of other people to not lose control and hurt themselves or other people, then why ban them from a sport? They're going to be driving someday anyway- the potential for harm is never going away

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

I'm not missing what you're saying. If anything, your thought process should be "Well I am really glad all this attention is being paid to head and neck injuries these days. What better time to let my kid play this sport when all this attention is focused on how to identify, treat, and eventually prevent these injuries?"

That's kind of like thinking, "Hey, at least if my leg gets injured in a war I'm not as likely to get gangrene like 150 years ago." You know, I think I'd just like to avoid that situation altogether since I can rather than thinking, "Well hey, at getting injured in war isn't as fatal as it used to be."

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

There isn't a single sport where there is 0% chance of concussion.

That's great, because I'm not claiming that. Am I raising some kind of pussy because I'd like them to play something where the chances of them wrecking their head are significantly lower?

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Basketball and soccer you are not supposed to slam into each other.

Tell that to the kid who lost a testicle playing soccer. Shit happens. if you spend all your waking minutes worrying about the shit that might happen, you'll never accomplish anything. and if you instill this in your children, neither will they.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

That's kind of like thinking, "Hey, at least if my leg gets injured in a war I'm not as likely to get gangrene like 150 years ago." You know, I think I'd just like to avoid that situation altogether since I can rather than thinking, "Well hey, at getting injured in war isn't as fatal as it used to be."

You're comparing war with sport. Not even close to the same thing. Motivations to play sports and go to war are completely different, so don't ever bring this up again.

That's great, because I'm not claiming that. Am I raising some kind of pussy because I'd like them to play something where the chances of them wrecking their head are significantly lower?

Whoa, where did this vulgarity come from? Let's keep it PG. Insulting a non-existent Dakar offspring is only going to degrade this discussion.

"Dad, why can't I play football?
"You are 86% more likely to receive a head injury playing football than you are playing soccer, so you are playing soccer and that's final"

Am I the only one that sees a problem with this?

You're not 100% guaranteed to get a head injury playing football and you're not 100% to not get injured playing other sports. You can receive the same head injuries in any sport....just because the odds are less doesn't mean it won't happen. Equipment in football is being improved all the time. A problem area (head injuries) has been identified as an area where more information is needed and this is ONLY going to improve safety.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

You're comparing war with sport. Not even close to the same thing. Motivations to play sports and go to war are completely different, so don't ever bring this up again.

I'm comparing advances is medicine. And war and sport have a lot in common, actually.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

Whoa, where did this vulgarity come from? Let's keep it PG.

You may discontinue the dialogue if you do not enjoy my style of discourse. I will not be offended.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

"Dad, why can't I play football?
"You are 86% more likely to receive a head injury playing football than you are playing soccer, so you are playing soccer and that's final"

Am I the only one that sees a problem with this?

So far, it seems.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

You're not 100% guaranteed to get a head injury playing football and you're not 100% to not get injured playing other sports. You can receive the same head injuries in any sport....just because the odds are less doesn't mean it won't happen.

Yeah, you said that before. I already have my reply on that. Shall we go in circles?

You're trying to portray mitigating risk as a futile attempt to eliminate it. How about you don't do that.

[sek929]

I've heard soccer players end up with more scar tissue on their brains than football players from heading the ball so much.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I'm comparing advances is medicine. And war and sport have a lot in common, actually.

Neat, but I explicitly stated that the motivations are different from one to the other.

Originally Posted by sek929 

I've heard soccer players end up with more scar tissue on their brains than football players from heading the ball so much.

I hadn't even think of that. which makes me wonder what the parents who are banning their children from football aren't think about also

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

Yeah, you said that before. I already have my reply on that. Shall we go in circles?

I would love to not go in circles.

Dakar/Jawbone/anyone not letting their kid play football: so is the succinct answer simply "I do not want my child playing football because they have a higher chance of getting hurt compared to other sports"? is that right?

[Jawbone54]

I started quoting nearly everyone in this thread for a response, but realized it would probably be harder to follow that way.

I played basketball in school for 9 years. I sprained my right wrist (which still bothers me to this day), sprained both ankles (once severely), suffering a blood clot in my right quadricep from an intense collision in a state tournament, broke two fingers, and took dozens of undercut spills while going up for a lay-up. The only permanent repercussion from it all is that I learned how to eat left-handed because it hurts to try to cut food with my right hand. I still play pick-up basketball, run at high speeds, jump, and live my life almost completely unencumbered by past injuries.

Through all those years, I've only seen one serious injury, and it was an ankle break in which the fractured bone pierced the skin. Yes, it was gruesome, but the guy was playing against us the next year.

About half of the football players I've counted as friends or acquaintances talk about how their knees are messed up, and several had concussions in high school.

Basketball is not nearly as dangerous as football, and I have the stats to back it up:

- At least one player sustains a mild concussion in nearly every American football game.
- There are approximately 67,000 diagnosed concussions in high school football every year.
- According to research by The New York Times, at least 50 youth football players (high school or younger) from 20 different states have died or sustained serious head injuries on the field since 1997.
- Anecdotal evidence from athletic trainers suggests that only about 5% of high school players suffer a concussion each season, but formal studies surveying players suggest the number is much higher, with close to 50% saying they have experienced concussion symptoms and fully one-third reporting two or more concussions in a single season.
- One study estimates that the likelihood of an athlete in a contact sport experiencing a concussion is as high as 20% per season.
- According to the National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research, there were 5 catastrophic spinal cord injuries in high school football in 2010. 67.8% of all catastrophic injuries in football since 1977 are from tackling.
- According to a study reported in the July 2007 issue of The American Journal of Sports Medicine:
- Football players suffer the most brain injuries of any sport -- an unacceptably high percentage (39%) of high school and collegiate football players suffering catastrophic head injuries (death, nonfatal but causing permanent neurologic functional disability, and serious injury but leaving no permanent functional disability) during the period 1989 to 2002 were still playing with neurologic symptoms at the time of the catastrophic event.

67,000 diagnosed concussions in high school football every year. The key word is diagnosed. There are probably many more.

Concussion rate for boys in football (per 100,000 athletes): Between 60 and 76.8
Concussion rate for boys in basketball (per 100,000 athletes): Boys' basketball: Between 11 and 21.2
Concussion rate for boys in soccer (per 100,000 athletes): Boys' soccer: Between 17 and 19.2

I want my son to lead an active lifestyle. I want him playing sports (if he's interested) and learning teamwork principles. What I don't want to do is encourage him to play a sport in which the likelihood of him suffering concussions (16.8% of high school athletic concussions are repeat concussions) is far greater.

I listened to Colin Cowherd talk about this yesterday. He said, "Mark my words, football will cease to be the #1 sport in America. My stock in soccer."

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by sek929 

I've heard soccer players end up with more scar tissue on their brains than football players from heading the ball so much.

In all honesty, I've read this as well.

Most of the damage is apparently done during practices, during heading drills. Coaches across the world are supposed to be significantly cutting down header repetitions.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

Dakar/Jawbone/anyone not letting their kid play football: so is the succinct answer simply "I do not want my child playing football because they have a higher chance of getting hurt compared to other sports"? is that right?

Hurting their brain.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I listened to Colin Cowherd talk about this yesterday. He said, "Mark my words, football will cease to be the #1 sport in America. My stock in soccer."

He's an idiot.

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I want my son to lead an active lifestyle. I want him playing sports (if he's interested) and learning teamwork principles. What I don't want to do is encourage him to play a sport in which the likelihood of him suffering concussions (16.8% of high school athletic concussions are repeat concussions) is far greater.

I understand all this. I understand your reasoning behind not wanting you child to play a sport, and believe me, I believe you when you say you don't encourage him.

I have no idea how old your kid is or if you even have one, but what happens when one day he comes up to you and says "Dad, I'd like to play football with my friends"? Are you going to say No to him? Are you going to say "Son that sport is far too dangerous, here are some shinguards, go get your friends to play soccer"?

Or are you going to sit him down and say "Son, I have some concerns with football, particularly with head injuries. You run a higher risk of receiving a head injury which could affect you later in life. There have been vast improvements in the care and treatment of concussions recently, so as long as you're careful and listen to your body and stop if you ever feel like you've got your clock rung too hard, I support your decision to play football."

MY point is that as a parent you can't just ban your child from something he or she wants to do. Let them explore and see if they like it. I'm not arguing whether or not football is more dangerous. I just don't feel it is responsible for parents to prohibit a child from something simply because of a potential danger. I mean, if you're getting this worked up over a sport, how are you going to handle your child driving a car? (I'm not looking for an answer to this question, it's just something to compare)

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

You're comparing war with sport. Not even close to the same thing. Motivations to play sports and go to war are completely different, so don't ever bring this up again.

Both use skill, tactics, teamwork, chain of command, and communication. The motivations are different, but some of the principles do apply, and that's why it's always spoke of allegorically by commentators, journalists, and even coaches/players.

"Dad, why can't I play football?
"You are 86% more likely to receive a head injury playing football than you are playing soccer, so you are playing soccer and that's final"

Am I the only one that sees a problem with this?

...maybe.

You're not 100% guaranteed to get a head injury playing football and you're not 100% to not get injured playing other sports. You can receive the same head injuries in any sport....just because the odds are less doesn't mean it won't happen.

Hello.

Equipment in football is being improved all the time. A problem area (head injuries) has been identified as an area where more information is needed and this is ONLY going to improve safety.

Then why are concussion rates increasing? Surely there were many undiagnosed concussions in the past, but it's not like the term, diagnosis, and concept is brand new.

[The Final Dakar]

abbaZaba
Grizzled Veteran

Like mercury & water, we just don't blend

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

...maybe.

man I'm glad I've never needed you to keep track of the score of a 5on5 game...scroll up and check that little poll you made.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Then why are concussion rates increasing? Surely there were many undiagnosed concussions in the past, but it's not like the term, diagnosis, and concept is brand new.

I explained this earlier: just because there are more concussion diagnoses doesn't necessarily mean there are more concussions. We have much better technology to detect concussions in a finite way. we have more information. Just because we understand concussions better, can better detect them, and can treat them better does NOT mean there are more occurrences of concussions. it's a matter of numbers: we have a far greater number of doctors, medical professionals looking at this issue than there were in the past (if you disagree with this then I am just going to stop because we won't progress any further) so we are going to identify more slight concussions that would have gone by the wayside in the past.

incidentally, I'm off to run some 5on5. I'll be sure to watch my head.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Hurting their brain.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

He's an idiot.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

I understand all this. I understand your reasoning behind not wanting you child to play a sport, and believe me, I believe you when you say you don't encourage him.

I have no idea how old your kid is or if you even have one, but what happens when one day he comes up to you and says "Dad, I'd like to play football with my friends"? Are you going to say No to him? Are you going to say "Son that sport is far too dangerous, here are some shinguards, go get your friends to play soccer"?

Or are you going to sit him down and say "Son, I have some concerns with football, particularly with head injuries. You run a higher risk of receiving a head injury which could affect you later in life. There have been vast improvements in the care and treatment of concussions recently, so as long as you're careful and listen to your body and stop if you ever feel like you've got your clock rung too hard, I support your decision to play football."

MY point is that as a parent you can't just ban your child from something he or she wants to do. Let them explore and see if they like it. I'm not arguing whether or not football is more dangerous. I just don't feel it is responsible for parents to prohibit a child from something simply because of a potential danger. I mean, if you're getting this worked up over a sport, how are you going to handle your child driving a car? (I'm not looking for an answer to this question, it's just something to compare)

That makes more sense to me. Here's my perspective:

My son is only four-months-old now. At 10, 11, 12, he won't be at the "age of accountability" to where he'll make sensible decisions about sports. He might say, "Football is fun, and I want to play." He doesn't understand the possible consequences. At 16, 17...he has a much better idea of what the risks are, and a much greater say in whether or not he'll play football. But after 4 tumultuous high school years and 8 years of working with high schoolers, I'm as convinced as ever that parents are there to be parents. Some decisions are up for debate, but others aren't. At 12-years-old, when my boy is developing physically and emotionally, I don't feel that's an appropriate time to give in.

This likely won't even be an issue in my home, since 90% of the sporting events I see are either soccer or basketball. I'll watch LSU during college football season, but this was the first year that I saw more than 5 games.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

man I'm glad I've never needed you to keep track of the score of a 5on5 game...scroll up and check that little poll you made.

Hence the smiley. I saw the poll. It was tongue-in-cheek.

I explained this earlier: just because there are more concussion diagnoses doesn't necessarily mean there are more concussions. We have much better technology to detect concussions in a finite way. we have more information. Just because we understand concussions better, can better detect them, and can treat them better does NOT mean there are more occurrences of concussions. it's a matter of numbers: we have a far greater number of doctors, medical professionals looking at this issue than there were in the past (if you disagree with this then I am just going to stop because we won't progress any further) so we are going to identify more slight concussions that would have gone by the wayside in the past.

Just because many concussions were undiagnosed for a long period of time doesn't mean that there were as many as there are today. There might've been as many, but there also might have been far fewer. We don't know. All we have is the current data, and the statistics say that diagnosed concussions are on the rise, not the other way around.

Also, what you said was...

Equipment in football is being improved all the time. A problem area (head injuries) has been identified as an area where more information is needed and this is ONLY going to improve safety.

When new equipment makes a sizable dent in the concussion statistics, then that argument has a lot more validity. Saying it will get better because we're aware of it doesn't mean that it has. Look at the Saints story -- even during the era of a proactive NFL doing all it can to lessen the impact of concussions on the game, defensive coordinators are trying to push their players to knock opposing players out of games.

Football, along with hockey and rugby, is an inherently violent sport. Basketball and soccer are certainly physical, but forceful physical contact is punished. That's the biggest difference.

incidentally, I'm off to run some 5on5. I'll be sure to watch my head.

No need. You're playing basketball.

[imitchellg5]

One of my closest friends in high school was pretty seriously injured during a high school football game. He basically had a concussion without knowing in, then received another concussion, and was unconscious for for quite a while. We weren't sure if he would ever wake up. I know that's a pretty extreme example, but considering his job (defensive tackle), and the fact that the games were not unusually rough, I personally wouldn't allow my kids to play American football.

I played soccer when I was younger and remember getting pretty beat up, but it was never anything as serious as internal injuries like a concussion. Just the typical blood and bruises.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by sek929 

I've heard soccer players end up with more scar tissue on their brains than football players from heading the ball so much.

[citation needed]

[andi*pandi]

Does heading a soccer ball raise the risk of brain injury? - Daily Dose: A Boston Globe blog with health news, advice, and information.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...134652418.html

[abbaZaba]

welp back from playing and safe to say no injuries occurred. except for the injury to the guy's ego covering me all night as I drained baby hooks on him

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

That makes more sense to me. Here's my perspective:

My son is only four-months-old now. At 10, 11, 12, he won't be at the "age of accountability" to where he'll make sensible decisions about sports. He might say, "Football is fun, and I want to play." He doesn't understand the possible consequences.

(just as a side note, I use the general "you" a lot- this is not directed solely at you)
This is the where we our fundmental opinions separate. I believe that if you sit down with a 12 year old and explain why you have misgivings about a certain sport and explain the potential life altering changes that may happen (and I admit, in football it is a higher percentage than other sports) and he still chooses to go ahead with it, then you've done your job as a parent. It is his/her choice. What I want is for parents to sit down with their children and discuss things. As long as you've explained the dangers and why you don't want him to partake in football, you've done your job in my opinion. But straight out banning them from a sport is not the way I believe something like this should be handled.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

At 16, 17...he has a much better idea of what the risks are, and a much greater say in whether or not he'll play football. But after 4 tumultuous high school years and 8 years of working with high schoolers, I'm as convinced as ever that parents are there to be parents. Some decisions are up for debate, but others aren't. At 12-years-old, when my boy is developing physically and emotionally, I don't feel that's an appropriate time to give in.

And MY perspective is that "being a parent" means sitting down with your children and having a discussion about these things and when your full side of the story is heard, THEN letting them decide. My issue is with straight-up denying them from doing an activity.

Jawbone: is ice hockey in the same boat as football then? (for the record, I believe ice hockey is much more dangerous than football)

edit: I'll give some info about me: I'm 24 no with plans for kids in the near future. Perhaps once I go through all that and my little bundle of joy goes from blabbing and spitting to actually forming sentences and opinions, my perspective may (probably) will change. but I firmly believe that you need to give children (though I wouldn't exactly call a 13 year old a child) choices and as long as you (the parent) have provided them with information and a perspective on the subject, you should let the child decide for themselves.

[subego]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

I firmly believe that you need to give children (though I wouldn't exactly call a 13 year old a child) choices and as long as you (the parent) have provided them with information and a perspective on the subject, you should let the child decide for themselves.

"Dad, I've weighed all the options, I'm going to the Internet now for some perspective and information on bukkake."

[sek929]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

[citation needed]

I've heard it several times throughout my soccer career.

This isn't the PWL, I don't need to back up everything I post with a peer reviewed study.

[Shaddim]

If she wants to play football, more power to her.

[andi*pandi]

You know, I had no misgivings at all about getting my kids into skiing, so football shouldn't be a big deal. They do wear helmets to ski.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by sek929 

I don't need to back up everything I post with a peer reviewed study.

[citation needed]

[Jawbone54]

Saw that last post and wheeze-chuckled while in a meeting. Got a bad look from the boss.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Saw that last post and wheeze-chuckled while in a meeting. Got a bad look from the boss.

God?

[The Final Dakar]

Fenslerfilm GI Joe PSA Football - YouTube

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

God?

Incorrect. He's shooting that look at you.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

You know, I had no misgivings at all about getting my kids into skiing, so football shouldn't be a big deal. They do wear helmets to ski.

But the point of skiing is to avoid collisions with large, solid objects like trees. With football, half of the people on the field are there for the sole purpose of running and slamming into other humans.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

welp back from playing and safe to say no injuries occurred. except for the injury to the guy's ego covering me all night as I drained baby hooks on him

I'm not sure why that comment brought this question to mind, but have you ever got into a legitimate fight while playing basketball?

(just as a side note, I use the general "you" a lot- this is not directed solely at you)
This is the where we our fundmental opinions separate. I believe that if you sit down with a 12 year old and explain why you have misgivings about a certain sport and explain the potential life altering changes that may happen (and I admit, in football it is a higher percentage than other sports) and he still chooses to go ahead with it, then you've done your job as a parent. It is his/her choice. What I want is for parents to sit down with their children and discuss things. As long as you've explained the dangers and why you don't want him to partake in football, you've done your job in my opinion. But straight out banning them from a sport is not the way I believe something like this should be handled.

And MY perspective is that "being a parent" means sitting down with your children and having a discussion about these things and when your full side of the story is heard, THEN letting them decide. My issue is with straight-up denying them from doing an activity.

Yeah, we just have different perspectives.

While I do believe there are some mistakes that kids should be allowed to make, I don't want any of them to be the kind that have a good chance of carrying permanent repercussions. I'd like for my kid to practice abstinence, not only for the religious reasons, but also to avoid unplanned teenage pregnancy, STDs, and such.

I feel the danger involved in football is real enough that I'm going to do my best to steer my son away from it. No matter what every coming-of-age movie tries to instill in people, teenagers are not fully capable of making rational decisions. Their prefrontal lobes are not fully developed until their early 20s.

Will I forbid my son to play football? After he reaches 14 or 15...probably not.

Optimally, this will never be a concern, and my son will love basketball, soccer, and golf, like his old man. Today I'm just more concerned with his poop not overspilling his diaper and getting all over my leg.

Jawbone: is ice hockey in the same boat as football then? (for the record, I believe ice hockey is much more dangerous than football)

Absolutely. The only reason I don't mention it is because it's pretty unlikely since our local hockey team went belly-up last year. There probably won't be any interest.

edit: I'll give some info about me: I'm 24 no with plans for kids in the near future. Perhaps once I go through all that and my little bundle of joy goes from blabbing and spitting to actually forming sentences and opinions, my perspective may (probably) will change. but I firmly believe that you need to give children (though I wouldn't exactly call a 13 year old a child) choices and as long as you (the parent) have provided them with information and a perspective on the subject, you should let the child decide for themselves.

I've only been a dad for 4 months, so I'm by no means an expert. And I definitely think the "Well, one day, when you have a teenager, you'll understand" argument is ridiculous, so it wouldn't be right for anyone to tell you that your opinion is lacking because you haven't had kids yet.

I'll give my kids the information, try to encourage them to pursue their natural gifts and inclinations, and oversee what they do, gradually tapering off my control as they get older. But each unique decision will be require a judgment call based around the question, "Is my son/daughter equipped to make this particular decision on his/her own?" For some, that will mean letting a boy decide he wants to play football at 10-years-old. For me, it might mean a five-year difference.

My opinions are subject to change, but as of now I sincerely hope my son looks elsewhere.