Two major football-related studies have been published in recent weeks, but you likely have not heard about one of them.
The highly-publicized one is an updated study by the Journal of the American Medical Association that found 88 percent of 202 brains taken from deceased former football players (at all levels) revealed some degree of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. The other was an analysis of multi-decade survey data of men who played Wisconsin high school football in 1957, published in the estimable “JAMA Neurology.”
The reason you have not heard of this second study has more to do with its counterintuitive conclusions than anything else: Researchers found that former football players did not have higher incidences of cognitive impairment at age 65 as opposed to non-football players; former players were in fact slightly less likely to suffer from depression.
Both studies are newsworthy given the tenor of our nascent national conversation about football’s future, an issue that has resonated with some (especially on the Left) who want to outlaw what in their eyes is a game grown too violent. Note that this is not the first time the country has been forced to grapple with football’s future. President Theodore Roosevelt’s leadership led to safety “reforms” after dozens of college players died during the early years of the 20th century.
My long history with the sport includes experience as a youth, high school, and college player, graduate assistant college coach, and father of two boys who have played the game since age 7 (the oldest is a freshman college player). This resume by no means qualifies me as a professional coach, but it does provide standing to convey my opinions about the cross-currents attendant to the current debate.
You see, contrary to popular belief, relentless negative coverage over the past decade has had impact on football’s bottom line. Not the financial bottom line, but more about the sport’s level of social acceptability, particularly within certain socio-economic classes.
I have experienced the impact firsthand through far too many conversations (typically with middle class moms) eager to inform me that their sons are forbidden from playing the game. (I am rarely successful in challenging the decision, despite emotional appeals.) Interestingly, I have encountered far fewer working-class moms (or dads) with a similar attitude.
I do not infer that parents with lower incomes care less about their children, quite the opposite. It’s more that less-wealthy parents see football as a way to punch their son’s ticket into college, the middle class, and a better future. This path to life success through athletics is real in many cases; high school and college football remain immensely popular in part because the sport continues to provide opportunity for economically disadvantaged young athletes to attend college.
Observation No. 2 is more difficult to articulate: It concerns the considerable amount of hand-wringing engaged in by many who are directly or indirectly involved in the sport, including those who depend on it for their livelihood. The former includes broadcasters and a few ex-players who demean the game while profiting from it; the latter, politicians who indulge the recently popular mantra, “If I had boys, I would not allow them to play,” but who nevertheless assume the role of super fan for public consumption.
I convey these thoughts with appropriate reference to the realities of a violent game. All involved must recognize that a collision sport can be dangerous and accordingly is not for every boy, and made more so by the “bigger, stronger, faster” nature of today’s training regimes. The bottom line: Kids susceptible to concussions or those who have suffered numerous concussions should not play.
Further, we should all support additional research into the science of brain trauma and further safety measures. (In this respect, I for one would be happy to revisit the issue of artificial turf, an invention borne of convenience, but that has made a fast game faster and more dangerous. Note the Baltimore Ravens made the switch back to grass last year after its players had had enough of the fake stuff.)
Another move in the right direction is an increased focus on player safety in youth leagues, especially a new emphasis on experienced coaching. This is not a game where well-intentioned dads should simply show up to lend a hand. The teaching of proper technique has never been more important given what we now know about injury prevention and treatment.
Those who profess to love football should not be threatened, but rather welcome further study into how to make our game safer.
On the other hand, those who are engaged in a campaign of cultural assassination directed at America’s favorite sport should remember that millions of young men have played the game at all levels over the past 150 years. The vast majority are far better off for the experience.
Gov. Robert Ehrlich is a Washington Examiner columnist, partner at King & Spalding and author of three books, including the recently released Turning Point. He was governor of Maryland from 2003 – 2007.
