[Football1]

A players launches himself headfirst into Casey's head. Seeing my precious son laying there. Face numb. Unable to move for fear of paralysis. Ambulance.... Backboard.... Prayers... CT scan - and good news - he walked to my car. I was never so happy. And still find myself giddy just watching him walk around.

Two years ago Codi (KC Class of 2011 / eldest Diamond son) lost 20% of his senior season when a TN ref ejected him for throwing a punch. He did not - but that is the refs job. Two D1 colleges walked away from the recruiting process. Big penalty to pay for nothing more than pushing a kid off you. Today, a player can launch himself like a missle at a kids head - head first - and all that can happen is a 15 yard penalty. I don't even blame the kid who did it nor the kids who do it every Friday night. They are coached for the big hit. Does a kid ever get taken out of the game for taking an action that could end another kids life? Never. That is why in 10-20 years football as we know it will be gone. Lawyers, insurance companies, and parents with kids in wheelchairs will see to that.

Football should save itself by drastically changing the rules around contact. When a player uses his helmet to lead in any way they should be immediately ejected and suspended for a game. Launching yourself in anyway for any reason should be treated the same. The medical data will only continue to accumulate. The lawsuits are only going to get bigger. Either change or become a part of American history.

Dave Diamond
[email]cdavediamond@gmail.com[/email]

[oneijoe]

A players launches himself headfirst into Casey's head. Seeing my precious son laying there. Face numb. Unable to move for fear of paralysis. Ambulance.... Backboard.... Prayers... CT scan - and good news - he walked to my car. I was never so happy. And still find myself giddy just watching him walk around.

Two years ago Codi (KC Class of 2011 / eldest Diamond son) lost 20% of his senior season when a TN ref ejected him for throwing a punch. He did not - but that is the refs job. Two D1 colleges walked away from the recruiting process. Big penalty to pay for nothing more than pushing a kid off you. Today, a player can launch himself like a missle at a kids head - head first - and all that can happen is a 15 yard penalty. I don't even blame the kid who did it nor the kids who do it every Friday night. They are coached for the big hit. Does a kid ever get taken out of the game for taking an action that could end another kids life? Never. That is why in 10-20 years football as we know it will be gone. Lawyers, insurance companies, and parents with kids in wheelchairs will see to that.

Football should save itself by drastically changing the rules around contact. When a player uses his helmet to lead in any way they should be immediately ejected and suspended for a game. Launching yourself in anyway for any reason should be treated the same. The medical data will only continue to accumulate. The lawsuits are only going to get bigger. Either change or become a part of American history.

Dave Diamond
[email]cdavediamond@gmail.com[/email]

As a parent, I can sympathize with what you've written and agree with most everything you've said.

Unfortunately, I don't believe there's a way "drastically changing the rules around contact" is compatible with keeping the nature of the game as we know it.

As long as offensive coaching teaches runners to lower his head in running "through" a tackler while defensive coaches instruct players to stand their ground or jar the ball loose from receivers, there WILL be head-to-head contact. You get away from those basics and the game of football changes on a very basic level.

It wouldn't matter how long a player would be suspended for a hit to the head, the REAL problem is the result of the hit.

[Real Badman]

I'm saddened for anyone who experiences any sort of tragedy from playing football, but you know what you're signing up for. There is no need to change the rules. Football is watered down as it is. Within 20 years some PAC will want to strip all contact football, and this is just the first step.

[Pulp Fiction]

I'm saddened for anyone who experiences any sort of tragedy from playing football, but you know what you're signing up for. There is no need to change the rules. Football is watered down as it is. Within 20 years some PAC will want to strip all contact football, and this is just the first step.

I posted the same comment on my FB page a few weeks ago....

The next step will be no tackling below or at below the knees. I do see the NFL and NCAA doing this to "protect the players"

[HSFOOTBALL]

There is a catch 22 with all this, and that is Personal Fouls are judgement calls. Calls made on the fly, where sometimes one ref is all that sees the penalty or think they see the penalty.

So while I sympathize with your story, and totally agree that something needs to be done to protect football from dissipating over the next few decades, we have to keep in mind the consequences.

What if your son is playing in the regional finals and gets ejected on a questionable helmet to helmet call that could have gone either way and you lose that game, or better yet win that game and have to play in the SC without him? Now you have a son that worked all year to be a part of something special and he doesn't get to play in the biggest game of his life because a ref made an incorrect judgement call? I think you or any other parent would be on the other end of the argument.

[Football1]

I'm saddened for anyone who experiences any sort of tragedy from playing football, but you know what you're signing up for. There is no need to change the rules. Football is watered down as it is. Within 20 years some PAC will want to strip all contact football, and this is just the first step.

Here is the problem. Football is already under the microscope. Data analytics have already provided insights that connect multiple concussions to serious mental function decline. The evidence will only continue to mount unless drastic change is implemented.

I grew up on the game. Played in college. Coached for years. Nobody has more reason to defend it than me. But I see the writing on the wall - and yes - my son getting a head injury certainly drives my view. But last year I sat at Cleveland Clinic Innovations Summit and listened to the data being presented by leading neuro and ortho clinicians. It was stunning then - and now post what occurred to Casey - it is terrifying.

No matter how much we all love seeing these big hits and the "tradition" of football there is a stark reality that is at the front of the line now. In the past - medical evidence was simply not there to prove the link between what happens on the field and a person's mental state. That is history. Electronic Medical Records capture this data each time a person goes to the ER; has a CT scan; goes to his family doctor; and so on... Which means soon enough the companies that insure football teams will increase premiums and the lawyers who defend the injured will circle like vultures on meat. The game will end as we know it.

The only remedy is to allow the data to prove that changes implemented have had impact. And yes, those changes may mean the game looks totally different that it does today - but it can survive as a great team sport that actually teaches men things that nothing else can. It does not take young men on the field inflicting life long injuries to make it a good game.

[Football1]

As a parent, I can sympathize with what you've written and agree with most everything you've said.

Unfortunately, I don't believe there's a way "drastically changing the rules around contact" is compatible with keeping the nature of the game as we know it.

As long as offensive coaching teaches runners to lower his head in running "through" a tackler while defensive coaches instruct players to stand their ground or jar the ball loose from receivers, there WILL be head-to-head contact. You get away from those basics and the game of football changes on a very basic level.

It wouldn't matter how long a player would be suspended for a hit to the head, the REAL problem is the result of the hit.

I disagree. If coaches knew that head first hits and launches would cost them ejection and suspension you would see a tremendous effort to have kids not tackle in this manner. The kids who make these types of hits are often the team leaders.

The play where my son was injured is a great example. His head was six inches off the ground when the player who launched himself into Casey hit him in the head. For all intents and purposes he was already down. But because we teach that football is about the big hit this player wanted to get his share. If enough kids get ejected and suspended they will play the game differently which could save the game for everyone. So long as we keep teaching kids that the objective of this game is to inflict the big hit each time you get the chance we usher in the day that the game ceases to be played in high school.

[HSFOOTBALL]

High School and College/NFL are two totally different issues. You are talking about 14-17 yr old kids, who can't balance a check book.

The issue with the NFL and College is simple. These are grown men that have had their entire life to make a decision on what they want to do, and this is what they have chosen. They know the consequences, let them play.

These same people can go to war, where there are no rules, if they choose so.

Football is not a contact sport anymore, it is a collision sport, where we as a society have groomed the best athletes in the world to get bigger faster and stronger to one day hopefully make millions of dollars playing a game they love and have fans across the world worship them for their talents. To me if you have made it to the NFL, or even College, you are old enough to know the consequences of playing the game. You can choose to play or not play, but by that time in your life you should mentally mature enough to know the costs/rewards.

It's pretty simple ... when you're 18 and you pick that cigarette up, you know that when you are 60, their could be major health consequences. Its the same thing with College and NFL football. They do it because they love it, so let them play.

[EKUAlum05]

There is a catch 22 with all this, and that is Personal Fouls are judgement calls. Calls made on the fly, where sometimes one ref is all that sees the penalty or think they see the penalty.

So while I sympathize with your story, and totally agree that something needs to be done to protect football from dissipating over the next few decades, we have to keep in mind the consequences.

What if your son is playing in the regional finals and gets ejected on a questionable helmet to helmet call that could have gone either way and you lose that game, or better yet win that game and have to play in the SC without him? Now you have a son that worked all year to be a part of something special and he doesn't get to play in the biggest game of his life because a ref made an incorrect judgement call? I think you or any other parent would be on the other end of the argument.

To piggyback off this there is a reason the NCAA enforces an ejection for targeting, but not for helmet to helmet. Much like holding, helmet to helmet contacts are prevalent throughout the game.. just many go uncalled. Helmet to helmet happens all the time incidentally as the by product of violent collisions with a running back going full steam one way with his shoulders/head lowered and a defender going the other way looking to "get low". Where contact becomes a penalty involves exclusively with "intent".

Targeting is a no brainer because there is no denying intent versus incidental contact. There is still an aspect of judgement typically involved, but typically there is little doubt that there was either excessive roughness or unnecessary contact to base it off.

Imagine your son is a star Senior LB in the scenario HSFOOTBALL outlined and he is going up against a kid like Damien Harris who is big, strong, and runs like a freight train. Let's say it is the Regional-Finals and trailing 14-8 with 2:30 to go in the 4th Madison Southern is facing a 4th and 6. They give the ball to Harris on a stretch and he turns his shoulders and explodes up the field and your son is set to meet him at the sticks. Harris knows contact is coming so at the last second he decelerates and dips his shoulder to not only brace the impact, but hopefully catch a grazing blow he can spin off of and continue forward thanks to his speed

Your son flies into him and Harris goes straight down a yard shy of the marker. In the collision though it appeared as if Harris sustained a helmet to helmet blow. Not only is the drive extended, but now your son is ejected from the key juncture of the game and potentially the Semi's and Finals. His carer just ended on a sensational play where he did nothing wrong.

I like the idea of penalizing targeting (though HS refs are NOT the same quality as collegiate so even here there is a chance for a massive failure). I also like the idea at the HS level of extending targeting to also include excessively late hits.

The thing that is difficult in all this is the fact I would say a disproportionately high amount of HS concussions are the result of Special Teams plays. Crack back blocks on returns and players getting hurt busting a wedge have IMO by far the highest incident rate. Yet these are extremely difficult to police since they are part of the live game action.

[Football1]

There is a catch 22 with all this, and that is Personal Fouls are judgement calls. Calls made on the fly, where sometimes one ref is all that sees the penalty or think they see the penalty.

So while I sympathize with your story, and totally agree that something needs to be done to protect football from dissipating over the next few decades, we have to keep in mind the consequences.

What if your son is playing in the regional finals and gets ejected on a questionable helmet to helmet call that could have gone either way and you lose that game, or better yet win that game and have to play in the SC without him? Now you have a son that worked all year to be a part of something special and he doesn't get to play in the biggest game of his life because a ref made an incorrect judgement call? I think you or any other parent would be on the other end of the argument.

I lived that with my oldest son losing two games of his senior season due to a bad call. I protested loudly to KHSAA about he 2 game rule along with others. The rule was changed back to 1 game suspension as of this year. No consolation to my eldest - but better for those that follow.

No greater threat exists today to the game of football. Concussions, head injuries, and the results thereof literally threaten to wipe the game away. Is it not better to have the game survive on the shoulders of inevitable bad calls than to see it disappear completely at the hands of litigation and athletes with life long disabilities?

[Wildcat18]

Football is a very physical sport. Unfortunately injuries (concussions, ACLs, paralysis, etc.) are part of the game and it's a risk every time you put on the pads. One guy that I follow closely as somewhat of a role model is Eric LeGrand, the defensive lineman from Rutgers who was paralyzed following a tackle in 2010. He's accomplished some great things for the community since his injury. I suggest you give him a search if you're not familiar with him.

I personally don't like any of the hit rules that the officials have implemented into the game because it takes away from the sport. If you don't like contact, I suggest you play golf or another non-contact sport. Of course that's just my opinion.

[Football1]

To piggyback off this there is a reason the NCAA enforces an ejection for targeting, but not for helmet to helmet. Much like holding, helmet to helmet contacts are prevalent throughout the game.. just many go uncalled. Helmet to helmet happens all the time incidentally as the by product of violent collisions with a running back going full steam one way with his shoulders/head lowered and a defender going the other way looking to "get low". Where contact becomes a penalty involves exclusively with "intent".

Targeting is a no brainer because there is no denying intent versus incidental contact. There is still an aspect of judgement typically involved, but typically there is little doubt that there was either excessive roughness or unnecessary contact to base it off.

Imagine your son is a star Senior LB in the scenario HSFOOTBALL outlined and he is going up against a kid like Damien Harris who is big, strong, and runs like a freight train. Let's say it is the Regional-Finals and trailing 14-8 with 2:30 to go in the 4th Madison Southern is facing a 4th and 6. They give the ball to Harris on a stretch and he turns his shoulders and explodes up the field and your son is set to meet him at the sticks. Harris knows contact is coming so at the last second he decelerates and dips his shoulder to not only brace the impact, but hopefully catch a grazing blow he can spin off of and continue forward thanks to his speed

Your son flies into him and Harris goes straight down a yard shy of the marker. In the collision though it appeared as if Harris sustained a helmet to helmet blow. Not only is the drive extended, but now your son is ejected from the key juncture of the game and potentially the Semi's and Finals. His carer just ended on a sensational play where he did nothing wrong.

I like the idea of penalizing targeting (though HS refs are NOT the same quality as collegiate so even here there is a chance for a massive failure). I also like the idea at the HS level of extending targeting to also include excessively late hits.

The thing that is difficult in all this is the fact I would say a disproportionately high amount of HS concussions are the result of Special Teams plays. Crack back blocks on returns and players getting hurt busting a wedge have IMO by far the highest incident rate. Yet these are extremely difficult to police since they are part of the live game action.

Would I choose that outcome over the loss of football as sport? All day.

This is my point. So many of us who live insulated by the game are overlooking the enormous pressure that is already being applied to end the game in high school. Offense and defense should be held to the same standard. Do not lower your head. If you do you get ejected and suspended. When coaches start losing running backs and linebackers they will teach the game differently. But they will not until that happens.

I am not naïve enough to think a simple rule change with punishment can fix the problem. But it is a start. The culture of football will have to change if it is to survive. The goal to often becomes "win at all cost" - as that keeps the coach employed. That "cost" is $15K every time you send a player to ER and maybe lifelong health impact. The game has to evolve to a place where the safety of the player comes before winning. Imagine what would have happened to basketball sans the three second rule? Rule changes can alter incentives. And that is what is needed with football.

[Football1]

Football is a very physical sport. Unfortunately injuries (concussions, ACLs, paralysis, etc.) are part of the game and it's a risk every time you put on the pads. One guy that I follow closely as somewhat of a role model is Eric LeGrand, the defensive lineman from Rutgers who was paralyzed following a tackle in 2010. He's accomplished some great things for the community since his injury. I suggest you give him a search if you're not familiar with him.

I personally don't like any of the hit rules that the officials have implemented into the game because it takes away from the sport. If you don't like contact, I suggest you play golf or another non-contact sport. Of course that's just my opinion.

"Takes away from the sport"... Really - so in order for "the sport" to be all it can be we need teenagers fully empowered to launch head fist into other teenagers causing costly and at times permanent damage to their bodies forever? But since some of them serve the community well from a wheelchair - its ok. Not from where I sit.

"The sport" exists as an extracurricular activity on the backs of taxpayers at public schools. What "takes away from the sport" is the view that it is only valuable so long as the players are free to injure (often times permanently) each other so fans can have the full enjoyment of the game. I don't need kids legally entitled to injure or kill each other with only a 15 yard penalty as a deterrent. It is easy to attack my stance as "you arent' tough enough for football go play golf". And that mindset will help bring football to an end in high school. Since golf is a fall sport, I'm sure they will be delighted. The get tough argument just does not hold water. If people want to see the greatest team sport survive they will accept it in a different form.

[Football1]

There are inherent risks with this game - I get that. Players often end up with shoulder and knee issues that are life long. But they can still remember the names of their kids. My point is special attention will have to be focused on head injuries or the game will cease.

[64SUR]

Spearing - ejecting from the game Plus 1 game
Fighting - ejecting from game plus 1 game
Helmet to Helmet this happen about every play I have no ideal
Helmet to Helmet if a player is being stood up ejecting from the game plus 1 game

I really have no answer :igiveup:

[Wildcat18]

"Takes away from the sport"... Really - so in order for "the sport" to be all it can be we need teenagers fully empowered to launch head fist into other teenagers causing costly and at times permanent damage to their bodies forever? But since some of them serve the community well from a wheelchair - its ok. Not from where I sit.

"The sport" exists as an extracurricular activity on the backs of taxpayers at public schools. What "takes away from the sport" is the view that it is only valuable so long as the players are free to injure (often times permanently) each other so fans can have the full enjoyment of the game. I don't need kids legally entitled to injure or kill each other with only a 15 yard penalty as a deterrent. It is easy to attack my stance as "you arent' tough enough for football go play golf". And that mindset will help bring football to an end in high school. Since golf is a fall sport, I'm sure they will be delighted. The get tough argument just does not hold water. If people want to see the greatest team sport survive they will accept it in a different form.

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that players and families know what they're getting into when they decide to put the pads on. Basketball players collapse on the court, baseball players get hit in the head by pitches, race-car drivers crash, and football players get concussions. It's not about purposely injuring someone on the football field. It's about laying a hit that leaves the crowd in awe. Big hits are what makes the game fun, playing and spectating. Accidents happen in all sports, but if you don't want to get hit, play a no-contact sport.

[oneijoe]

I disagree. If coaches knew that head first hits and launches would cost them ejection and suspension you would see a tremendous effort to have kids not tackle in this manner. The kids who make these types of hits are often the team leaders.

...

Ah, but what seems to be unrecognized is MOST head on collisions don't come from the defense at all. Rather the most common player who uses the helmet in contact is the BALL CARRIER.

I was making the simple point that such a basic part of the game as a ball carrier going forward into a hit would ALSO need to be disallowed if tackling impacts are outlawed. THAT would result in a basic change in the game.

I'm not arguing right or wrong...just pointing out the issue isn't necessarily only about the "tackle"...

[Wildcat18]

There are inherent risks with this game - I get that. Players often end up with shoulder and knee issues that are life long. But they can still remember the names of their kids. My point is special attention will have to be focused on head injuries or the game will cease.

What are your thoughts on this article? Just out of curiosity.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdo...--nfl.html

[Football1]

What are your thoughts on this article? Just out of curiosity.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdo...--nfl.html

Low hits are terrible. I think of the kid from SC who got his knee destroyed. But the fact is you can't compare the worst ACL blow out to a person who lands in a wheelchair. Head to head contact is the biggest risk to the game of football because it is the biggest risk to the health of those who play.

[Football1]

Ah, but what seems to be unrecognized is MOST head on collisions don't come from the defense at all. Rather the most common player who uses the helmet in contact is the BALL CARRIER.

I was making the simple point that such a basic part of the game as a ball carrier going forward into a hit would ALSO need to be disallowed if tackling impacts are outlawed. THAT would result in a basic change in the game.

I'm not arguing right or wrong...just pointing out the issue isn't necessarily only about the "tackle"...

I totally agree with you. RBs or any offensive player should have the same penalty as defense if they launch themselves head first.

[Football1]

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that players and families know what they're getting into when they decide to put the pads on. Basketball players collapse on the court, baseball players get hit in the head by pitches, race-car drivers crash, and football players get concussions. It's not about purposely injuring someone on the football field. It's about laying a hit that leaves the crowd in awe. Big hits are what makes the game fun, playing and spectating. Accidents happen in all sports, but if you don't want to get hit, play a no-contact sport.

But why must the game be destroyed for our love of the big hit? Why can't we embrace the speed, agility, and every other aspect of the game? Toughness is an admirable trait but no amount of it will protect the brain from what a concussion does to it. So is it toughness, ignorance, lack of wisdom or some combination that drives this game?

You can bookmark my post and return to it in 5,10, or 15 years when the game is banned from public high schools. The data will speak. And they tell a story that is ever more proving the hazards of how the game is played today far outweigh any benefit it can deliver. I hope I am wrong as the game provided a family for me in a fatherless childhood. It gave me upperclassmen to admire and lower classmen to teach and mentor. It was a blessing. But so much of that is now gone anyway. Add to that the risk permanent life altering head injury and the zest for the game fades quickly.

[Football1]

Spearing - ejecting from the game Plus 1 game
Fighting - ejecting from game plus 1 game
Helmet to Helmet this happen about every play I have no ideal
Helmet to Helmet if a player is being stood up ejecting from the game plus 1 game

I really have no answer :igiveup:

Agreed. It is not a simple issue. But it is one that if not solved will ensure countless young men suffer injuries that in many cases could produce permanent effects. Today's answer - a 15 yard penalty - surely is not correct!

[HSFOOTBALL]

Agreed. It is not a simple issue. But it is one that if not solved will ensure countless young men suffer injuries that in many cases could produce permanent effects. Today's answer - a 15 yard penalty - surely is not correct!

Again, I sympathize with your original story and agree with your assertion that something needs to be done, but you can't start suspending kids left and right because Tom, the grocery bagger who wears stripes on Friday nights, thought the helmet hit before the shoulder pad.

[oneijoe]

To be more clear, it isn't -overall- head contact which is the problem. It's striking a blow on another player using the crown (top) of the helmet which causes the majority of serious neck injuries.

A classmate of mine spent the final 35 years of his life in a wheelchair as a quadriplegic (he passed away just this year, having only recovered gross arm movement). In his case, he suffered a compression C-spine injury because he didn't continue to keep his head up when stopping a ball carrier coming at him who also had his head down. It wasn't correct technique for the tackler as he's supposed to keep his head up, but the fullback who supplied most of the destructive force did exactly what was/is taught when power running inside - pick the hole then put the head down and run over tacklers.

One of the biggest problems is (in this particular incident) simple reflex. If a hit is seen coming head-on at the last second, the automatic reaction is to turn the face away (usually down).

It's a tough problem... 80 years ago when the helmets were little more than layered leather serious neck injuries were extremely uncommon. IMO, the reason is you then force the sense of survival to work -against- injury. After all who would intentionally hit someone head-on with nothing more than leather strapped to his head ?!? Of course, nowadays with larger players, weightlifting, and advanced training the speed and gross force of the game is so much greater, even at the high school level, ratcheting down the helmet quality is unlikely to be an effective answer to the problem.

[Football1]

To be more clear, it isn't -overall- head contact which is the problem. It's striking a blow on another player using the crown (top) of the helmet which causes the majority of serious neck injuries.

A classmate of mine spent the final 35 years of his life in a wheelchair as a quadriplegic (he passed away just this year, having only recovered gross arm movement). In his case, he suffered a compression C-spine injury because he didn't continue to keep his head up when stopping a ball carrier coming at him who also had his head down. It wasn't correct technique for the tackler as he's supposed to keep his head up, but the fullback who supplied most of the destructive force did exactly what was/is taught when power running inside - pick the hole then put the head down and run over tacklers.

One of the biggest problems is (in this particular incident) simple reflex. If a hit is seen coming head-on at the last second, the automatic reaction is to turn the face away (usually down).

It's a tough problem... 80 years ago when the helmets were little more than layered leather serious neck injuries were extremely uncommon. IMO, the reason is you then force the sense of survival to work -against- injury. After all who would intentionally hit someone head-on with nothing more than leather strapped to his head ?!? Of course, nowadays with larger players, weightlifting, and advanced training the speed and gross force of the game is so much greater, even at the high school level, ratcheting down the helmet quality is unlikely to be an effective answer to the problem.

You make an excellent set of points. Your friend's story is sobering and sad. So many today are literally drunk on the notion that this game cannot exist with any form that restrains the "big hit". I challenge that as a paradigm that can be moved to a more modern and less risky form of a great team sport where players and coaches are heavily incented to coach a cleaner safer game.

That same "Tom the grocery bagger" already holds the near holy responsibility to define calls every Friday night that determine outcomes of games, keep order, and eject those who earn it. Having them manage a set of rules that could literally save another person from 35 years in a chair is worth the effort - never mind saving the game.

[Wildcat18]

You're more than 5 times as likely to end up in a wheelchair from your morning drive to work/school than by playing sports. Players and families have to realize how dangerous the game is and then make an educated decision on whether or not the risk is worth the long-term effects. To most it's worth it, but to others not so much.

[Football1]

You're more than 5 times as likely to end up in a wheelchair from your morning drive to work/school than by playing sports. Players and families have to realize how dangerous the game is and then make an educated decision on whether or not the risk is worth the long-term effects. To most it's worth it, but to others not so much.

I agree.

That said, I still believe the game could be saved if fans would be willing to tolerate a less risky thus less violent flavor of the game. Likely, that will never happen. And even more likely, the game will end up as a part of American history and not its future. Time will tell.

[stripedofficial]

Although you never see it called, it is actually illegal now for the ball carrier to lower his head and initiate contact with his head just like its illegal for the defense to lead with the head.

I disagree very much so with giving the officials something else to police, especially with ejections. They are already told to eject as a very last resort. We have some really bad officials in the mountains, the last thing they need is to be told they have to eject a kid every time he uses his head.

[Van Hagar]

Dave Diamond, I pretty much totally agree with you all the way down the line. I thought a few years ago when the link between football related head injuries and major problems later in life was finally being recognized that it was the beginning of the end for football as we know it. I have seen nothing since to make me think otherwise. As crazy as some may see it, I think football will be gone from a lot of high schools within my lifetime, and I am 50+. Just wait until the first time a school system is held financially accountable for injuries suffered by someone while representing that school system playing football. I'm talking about years after that person has graduated from that school system. See how quickly things get shut down then. I would hate to see it go, because football is as you said the greatest of the team sports. But changes, hard choices, will have to be made. Now football will never totally be gone, there is way too much television and gambling money involved. There will always be a professional level, and a developmental level below that. I think the big transformation will come in those developmental levels and how they are administered.

[Football1]

Dave Diamond, I pretty much totally agree with you all the way down the line. I thought a few years ago when the link between football related head injuries and major problems later in life was finally being recognized that it was the beginning of the end for football as we know it. I have seen nothing since to make me think otherwise. As crazy as some may see it, I think football will be gone from a lot of high schools within my lifetime, and I am 50+. Just wait until the first time a school system is held financially accountable for injuries suffered by someone while representing that school system playing football. I'm talking about years after that person has graduated from that school system. See how quickly things get shut down then. I would hate to see it go, because football is as you said the greatest of the team sports. But changes, hard choices, will have to be made. Now football will never totally be gone, there is way too much television and gambling money involved. There will always be a professional level, and a developmental level below that. I think the big transformation will come in those developmental levels and how they are administered.

It is a tough pill for some to swallow but I have lived in the Healthcare industry for 20 years. Data. That is what is happening. In the past "evidence" was anecdotal and sparse. Now lawyers will have empirical hard proof that will connect head injuries to permanent cognitive decline. That will come at an amazing cost that high schools and tax payers will not be able to bear.

THE ONLY way to PREVENT this is to make drastic changes to the game the will produce a dramatic decline in the number of head injuries that occur every time kids play. Will stiffer penalties get this done? Nope - but it is a start. Otherwise, look forward to Friday nights where you are watching 7 on 7 passing tournaments.


Dave Diamond
[email]cdavediamond@gmail.com[/email]