PDA

View Full Version : Did anyone read this? "Duerson’s Brain Trauma Diagnosed"



Connie Jo
05-02-2011, 11:51 PM
Duerson Found to Have the Brain Trauma He Suspected - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/sports/football/03duerson.html)

Any thoughts?

Chiefster
05-06-2011, 11:02 PM
There's no denying that the game has, by far, become too physical. Very sad.

Drunker Hillbilly
05-07-2011, 11:16 AM
There's no denying that the game has, by far, become too physical. Very sad.
To physical? Sorry Chiefster, I just can't agree with you on this. IMO, it has evolved just as everything else in the world. It's what society wants. Heck, it's what the players want. Just as with any job, there are risks and they are compensated well to take these risks. Don't get me wrong, I don't like to hear about brain trauma and things of that nature but it is what these guys sign on the dotted line to do. They know going in, or atleast they should that they are bound to have some consequence. I may be bias to the physicality but then again, I played hockey for 25 years and yes, I pay for it on a daily basis but would not do anything differently if I had to do it again. JMO.......

chiefnut
05-07-2011, 11:35 AM
i wish they would look into softer helmets, they would absorb impact shock better instead of transmitting it to the brain and would no longer be able to be used as a weapon.

Chiefster
05-09-2011, 02:29 PM
To physical? Sorry Chiefster, I just can't agree with you on this. IMO, it has evolved just as everything else in the world. It's what society wants. Heck, it's what the players want. Just as with any job, there are risks and they are compensated well to take these risks. Don't get me wrong, I don't like to hear about brain trauma and things of that nature but it is what these guys sign on the dotted line to do. They know going in, or atleast they should that they are bound to have some consequence. I may be bias to the physicality but then again, I played hockey for 25 years and yes, I pay for it on a daily basis but would not do anything differently if I had to do it again. JMO.......

Not denying any of that; merely stating that I don"t believe the human body was not meant to endure, on a prolonged basis, the kind of physical demands that football, especially the NFL, places on it. We may need to agree to disagree. :smile

Connie Jo
05-10-2011, 01:05 AM
They've made playing football much safer over the years by comparison to what it once was. Heck, so many new rules have been adopted to protect players from serious injury, as well as physical endurance training, better body equipment, medical advancements with treating & healing injuries, etc..

It's a contact sport, there's always gonna be risk involved, but at least they do what they can to protect players of today so much more than those of yesteryears game. :(

Chiefster
05-11-2011, 02:01 AM
I wonder how the ratio of severe head trauma in rugby compares to that in American football? This is not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely curious.

Drunker Hillbilly
05-11-2011, 10:51 AM
I wonder how the ratio of severe head trauma in rugby compares to that in American football? This is not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely curious.
I actually played Rugby for a few seasons on a club team here in Scottsdale. IMO, it's not as physical as everyone believe's it to be and certainly not as physical as football on that level. I obviously didn't play professionally or even at the college level but from my limited experience there are more lower body injurie's in Rugby. Not because the head is avoided but because more times than not you are looking to simply knock someone down or trip them up as opposed to seperating them from the ball. Everyone has the opportunity to carry the ball and everyone is normally pretty fast. The field is also larger and another thing that comes into play is the number of players on the field is different depending on the league or union. I think the range is anywhere between 7 and 15 or 16 per team on the field at once.

Chiefster
05-12-2011, 10:11 PM
I actually played Rugby for a few seasons on a club team here in Scottsdale. IMO, it's not as physical as everyone believe's it to be and certainly not as physical as football on that level. I obviously didn't play professionally or even at the college level but from my limited experience there are more lower body injurie's in Rugby. Not because the head is avoided but because more times than not you are looking to simply knock someone down or trip them up as opposed to seperating them from the ball. Everyone has the opportunity to carry the ball and everyone is normally pretty fast. The field is also larger and another thing that comes into play is the number of players on the field is different depending on the league or union. I think the range is anywhere between 7 and 15 or 16 per team on the field at once.

Well, that makes some sense. I wonder if the pads football players wear sometimes give them a false sense of security or invincibility. Don't get me wrong; I'm not advocating the stripping away of necessary protection from football players; just merely that I wonder if players are compelled to take unnecessary risk because they wear a helmet and pads.

Hayvern
05-13-2011, 12:33 AM
Well, that makes some sense. I wonder if the pads football players wear sometimes give them a false sense of security or invincibility. Don't get me wrong; I'm not advocating the stripping away of necessary protection from football players; just merely that I wonder if players are compelled to take unnecessary risk because they wear a helmet and pads.

That may be Chiefster, but I think it is the way the game is coached. It is taught to hit hard, it seems to be what one has to do to make it on the team. Very few are trained to go out and hurt someone, but the idea is to hit the guy hard to let him know you are there and to make him think twice about catching the ball again.

I also believe the science of football has a lot to do with it as well. Guys are taught the best way to bring a guy down, the best way to hit them to jar the ball loose, the best timing to hit a receiver right at the correct time to break up the play. It seems before, it was much more about just playing the game.

Baseball and Basketball are the same way.

chief31
05-13-2011, 04:17 AM
Well, that makes some sense. I wonder if the pads football players wear sometimes give them a false sense of security or invincibility. Don't get me wrong; I'm not advocating the stripping away of necessary protection from football players; just merely that I wonder if players are compelled to take unnecessary risk because they wear a helmet and pads.

It REALLY does.

Most guys would never dream of driving into someone, while not wearing pads, with the force they feel free to use while padded up.

If guys were delivering, without pads, like NFL players do, with pads, then there would be a whole lot of deaths and crippling injuries.

Not sure what the answer is, to limit these serious injuries though.

Maybe better protection for those who are more likely to receive the hits than they guys dishing it out?

You may not hit as hard if the target is better equipped than you? :lol:

Chiefster
05-15-2011, 12:15 AM
That may be Chiefster, but I think it is the way the game is coached. It is taught to hit hard, it seems to be what one has to do to make it on the team. Very few are trained to go out and hurt someone, but the idea is to hit the guy hard to let him know you are there and to make him think twice about catching the ball again.

I also believe the science of football has a lot to do with it as well. Guys are taught the best way to bring a guy down, the best way to hit them to jar the ball loose, the best timing to hit a receiver right at the correct time to break up the play. It seems before, it was much more about just playing the game.

Baseball and Basketball are the same way.

A point of view I hadn't considered but seems to make sense. I agree, and also believe that coaching and the science must play a significant role.


It REALLY does.

Most guys would never dream of driving into someone, while not wearing pads, with the force they feel free to use while padded up.

If guys were delivering, without pads, like NFL players do, with pads, then there would be a whole lot of deaths and crippling injuries.

Not sure what the answer is, to limit these serious injuries though.

Maybe better protection for those who are more likely to receive the hits than they guys dishing it out?

You may not hit as hard if the target is better equipped than you? :lol:

All very good questions; I wish I had very good answers. I guess I'm a little more concerned and aware of the problem since my son came home from college for the summer having received a slight concussion in spring football; his very first ever.

chief31
05-15-2011, 05:37 AM
A point of view I hadn't considered but seems to make sense. I agree, and also believe that coaching and the science must play a significant role.



All very good questions; I wish I had very good answers. I guess I'm a little more concerned and aware of the problem since my son came home from college for the summer having received a slight concussion in spring football; his very first ever.

Yep. That'll draw some extra attention, for sure.

Hopefully, that will be his only one.

Drunker Hillbilly
05-17-2011, 01:26 PM
Another thing I think is a huge factor is that the kids these days are simply bigger, stronger and faster than ever before.