Zero facks given about Obama and sports he’d let his kid play.
[quote=“The White Samurai, post:20, topic:27424”]I’m sure you all never spend time talking to people about things outside of your job.[/quote]I don’t have the fate of the free world resting on my shoulders. But if I did…
This is why my FaceBook blows up with warnings that Obama is after our FootBall.
[quote=“919R, post:12, topic:27424”]No, but perhaps he should say something along the lines of "well, I should probably leave that to the experts who have a freakin’ clue about the issue’…but of course he has never known anyone as intelligent as he is… ::)[/quote]Is that what you would say if asked? How many on this board have posted opinions about something they aren’t experts on, based on what they’ve seen, read or heard from others? I assume we aren’t all basketball coaches, but we sure act like one on message boards…
Seems like manufactured outrage to me. If we really care about those other issues so much, seems like the thing to do is ignore this and discuss those other issues.
I dont really care what he had to say - only that as president what he says carries more weight than if just some yahoo says it. There is already pressure to make the sport safer and him weighing in just adds to that. Great if you want it safer, sucks if you are concerned about the game losing some of its characteristics.
I ask this question to the members of the board:
Would YOU let your kids play football?
I wouldn’t. I love the game of football, but there is simply too much risk of long term health consequences for letting your child play football, especially if they are playing QB, LB, or RB.
Flag football
[quote=“Niner National, post:26, topic:27424”]I ask this question to the members of the board:
Would YOU let your kids play football?
I wouldn’t. I love the game of football, but there is simply too much risk of long term health consequences for letting your child play football, especially if they are playing QB, LB, or RB.[/quote]
As it is currently constructed - not me. If they eliminate tackling at a young age I wouldn’t mind. There is talk of making JV football in HS the first tackling kids do. If that happened I would consider it.
[quote=“Niner National, post:26, topic:27424”]I ask this question to the members of the board:
Would YOU let your kids play football?
I wouldn’t. I love the game of football, but there is simply too much risk of long term health consequences for letting your child play football, especially if they are playing QB, LB, or RB.[/quote]
The current game, no. Especially before high school. Even linemen have head issues because they are constantly going through impacts to the head.
Would consider with drastic changes to the game and equipment.
I’d prefer they play soccer or lacrosse or other sport like that. I don’t mind dealing with injuries, but stuff involving the brain is frightening. Some are advocating eliminating heading the ball in youth soccer since brains are still developing at that age.
[quote=“Niner National, post:26, topic:27424”]I ask this question to the members of the board:
Would YOU let your kids play football?
I wouldn’t. I love the game of football, but there is simply too much risk of long term health consequences for letting your child play football, especially if they are playing QB, LB, or RB.[/quote]No way in hell. The research is becoming too clear that repeated pounding, even if it’s not one big blow but instead lots of little blows, has potential to do serious brain damage.
I’ve been a huge college football fan since I was little and I used to go “oooh” at the big hits. But now I just cringe. As more parents learn about the concussion research, there will be fewer and fewer kids playing football. Some still will, but they’ll have to significantly change the character of the game eventually, it’s inevitable.
I think you are going to see a move to make the game non-contact at a young level. My opinion is this:
- Flag football for all kids playing football until the time they become high school aged (13 or 14).
- JV football being where kids learn to properly hit and tackle. This will lead to what JV was designed for in the past, which was primarily freshmen and sophomores who were still adjusting to the high school game.
- Fair game once a kid reaches varsity. If the kid wants to play football, that’s his choice. Make adjustments to the equipment and rules to make it safer, but ultimately, it is a contact sport and there are health risks that go along with that. Also, along with this, I’d like to see kids educated somehow on the dangers of the game. This is not to stop them from playing; rather, it’s there for them to know what they are getting into.
I see some good ideas here. While I think football shouldn’t be on the top of Obama’s pile I think it is significant that he has this opinion. And let me say, it doesn’t seem like an unreasonable opinion either. Here is the scary part though–you must have insurance to cover your players against injury and because the incidence of injury is higher than for that of the students sitting in the stands it is more expensive. That is okay, the industry has a model and charges an appropriate premium that allows them to provide the coverage and make a profit. But, when we go to a one-provider model will the government still be willing to provide coverage for this behavior which is more expensive to cover? If not then football as we know it stops. I sure hate to think Charlotte has just spent $50 million, and I have spent thousands of dollars, for a sport that might be squashed by executive fiat. I know this sounds a little extreme, but at some point our limited resources are going to have to get prioritized and I do not think sports will be at the top of the list.
Part of the risk is we start kids at K or Pre-K. When I was coming along, you couldn’t even start until 4th grade. Let the kids grow before playing. No 5 year old should play FB.
[quote=“Nugget, post:32, topic:27424”]I see some good ideas here. While I think football shouldn’t be on the top of Obama’s pile I think it is significant that he has this opinion. And let me say, it doesn’t seem like an unreasonable opinion either. Here is the scary part though–you must have insurance to cover your players against injury and because the incidence of injury is higher than for that of the students sitting in the stands it is more expensive. That is okay, the industry has a model and charges an appropriate premium that allows them to provide the coverage and make a profit. But, when we go to a one-provider model will the government still be willing to provide coverage for this behavior which is more expensive to cover? If not then football as we know it stops. I sure hate to think Charlotte has just spent $50 million, and I have spent thousands of dollars, for a sport that might be squashed by executive fiat. I know this sounds a little extreme, but at some point our limited resources are going to have to get prioritized and I do not think sports will be at the top of the list.[/quote] Was not aware we were going to a one-provider model. We can still play football I guess, since Canada still plays and they do have socialized medicine.
Football will not be squashed by executive fiat as long as we still elect our politicians and football is still our most popular sport. Rest easy.
If Barry O’Bama said football was the best thing ever, the house would be drafting a rule trying to ban the sport tomorrow. Boehner would give a tearful press conference promising to obstruct any pro-football legislation, and get rid of any public funding that might be useful to football players–such as roads, law enforcement, and universities.
In an interview that aired before Super Bowl 20, Reagan was asked and had the nerve to give his opinion on the game. Unemployment was still over 7.4 %, Reagan was still blaming gays for AIDS, and was smack in the middle of selling Iranian arms to the contras. There was widespread outcry over his decision to answer a question about sports before every domestic and foreign issue had been resolved.
Oh, wait, that’s right. No one gave a shit if Reagan talked about football. Oh well, times change. Shut yer trap obummer.
Can we get this s*** on the Politics board where it belongs?
[quote=“casstommy, post:36, topic:27424”]In an interview that aired before Super Bowl 20, Reagan was asked and had the nerve to give his opinion on the game. Unemployment was still over 7.4 %, Reagan was still blaming gays for AIDS, and was smack in the middle of selling Iranian arms to the contras. There was widespread outcry over his decision to answer a question about sports before every domestic and foreign issue had been resolved.
Oh, wait, that’s right. No one gave a s*** if Reagan talked about football. Oh well, times change. Shut yer trap obummer.[/quote]
Yeah but Reagan was trying to save America, not destroy it…
Look, pal. Unless you wanna talk about playing music or working in real estate, we gotta stop being friends. Those are the only two things I’m paid to do, so those are the only two things with which I can concern myself. Wanna talk about the weather? Tough titty. Better go talk to a meteorologist. They’re the experts, and I’m too busy focusing on multifamily housing and writing a record.
Some of the things that people get pissed off about on here are downright laughable.
[quote=“9erken, post:24, topic:27424”]Is that what you would say if asked? How many on this board have posted opinions about something they aren’t experts on, based on what they’ve seen, read or heard from others? I assume we aren’t all basketball coaches, but we sure act like one on message boards…
Seems like manufactured outrage to me. If we really care about those other issues so much, seems like the thing to do is ignore this and discuss those other issues.[/quote]
Amen.
FWIW, I’d prefer to leave this thread up and refocus on the legitimate question that was asked…
[quote=“Niner National, post:26, topic:27424”]I ask this question to the members of the board:
Would YOU let your kids play football?
I wouldn’t. I love the game of football, but there is simply too much risk of long term health consequences for letting your child play football, especially if they are playing QB, LB, or RB.[/quote]
This is a good discussion. Do you folks think we can stay on topic with this?
Personally - My answer is no - not until my kids are older and they make the game safer. Padding on the outside of helmets, proper tackling, etc.