What's to Blame for Concussions In the NFL
December 13th 2010 17:55
The NFL reported today that the number of concussions has gone up from 127 to 154 in terms of between the pre-season and week eight in the past two years. I wrote a couple of pieces in I believe October, about the "State of the Mind", and how the game has evolved.
What's to blame for this spike in head injuries? Well there's a few main components to the much larger number than in years past. The simple fact that the training staff and doctors know exactly how to diagnose concussions. Then there is the obvious fact that the way players "launch" themselves to deliver the knock-out blow is too violent for the concussion rate not to keep going up.
As much as I love big hits, many of them come from leaning a shoulder into another player's neck and head area. The NFL has made loads of money selling DVD's of big hits that mostly have to do with these types of hits. Now, they are fining players left and right for hits that don't seem dirty at all. If James Harrison does as much as step onto the field, it seems he gets fined. I'm not saying he's not a bit dirty on some of his hits, I'm just saying that the NFL has gone a bit far with how they treat QB's and the fines that are handed out every week.
The truth is, I don't think there's a perfect way to clean up the game, when the line between legal and illegal, aware or helpless, clean or un-clean is not clearly drawn. Another reason for the higher rate of concussions is just the "change" in our kind. I'm not trying to go all "Darwin" on people in this blog, but it's true that athletes are faster, stronger, and more agile. You think any 300-pound man could run as fast a 40-yard dash 50, 25, even 15 years ago as they do today.
Either way, I think the league is happy where they are at. I could be wrong, but another line that's not drawn is how much the league really cares about it's players. Sure, they don't want to see a death or a bad spinal-cord injury on the field. Who would? I quiver just of the thought. But yet they want to play 18-game seasons and still market those big hits.
There is a way to deliver a blow without it being dirty and I'm blaming all of this on the league, not even close. But the NFL has gone too passive to too aggressive. In the middle is where you don't get as much money. Too passive, you sell the product better. Too aggressive, you take the players' money. And now 18-game seasons? Really.
There's many things to blame, from helmets as weapons, to leading with the shoulder, to getting the second concussion much easier than the first. The higher numbers, in a way, is a good thing. It should get the attention of the players, and the league. The league is trying, I'll give it that, and the trainers are more aware of when to let a player back onto the field. But the sport in general is still a long way away.
What's to blame for this spike in head injuries? Well there's a few main components to the much larger number than in years past. The simple fact that the training staff and doctors know exactly how to diagnose concussions. Then there is the obvious fact that the way players "launch" themselves to deliver the knock-out blow is too violent for the concussion rate not to keep going up.
As much as I love big hits, many of them come from leaning a shoulder into another player's neck and head area. The NFL has made loads of money selling DVD's of big hits that mostly have to do with these types of hits. Now, they are fining players left and right for hits that don't seem dirty at all. If James Harrison does as much as step onto the field, it seems he gets fined. I'm not saying he's not a bit dirty on some of his hits, I'm just saying that the NFL has gone a bit far with how they treat QB's and the fines that are handed out every week.
The truth is, I don't think there's a perfect way to clean up the game, when the line between legal and illegal, aware or helpless, clean or un-clean is not clearly drawn. Another reason for the higher rate of concussions is just the "change" in our kind. I'm not trying to go all "Darwin" on people in this blog, but it's true that athletes are faster, stronger, and more agile. You think any 300-pound man could run as fast a 40-yard dash 50, 25, even 15 years ago as they do today.
Either way, I think the league is happy where they are at. I could be wrong, but another line that's not drawn is how much the league really cares about it's players. Sure, they don't want to see a death or a bad spinal-cord injury on the field. Who would? I quiver just of the thought. But yet they want to play 18-game seasons and still market those big hits.
There is a way to deliver a blow without it being dirty and I'm blaming all of this on the league, not even close. But the NFL has gone too passive to too aggressive. In the middle is where you don't get as much money. Too passive, you sell the product better. Too aggressive, you take the players' money. And now 18-game seasons? Really.
There's many things to blame, from helmets as weapons, to leading with the shoulder, to getting the second concussion much easier than the first. The higher numbers, in a way, is a good thing. It should get the attention of the players, and the league. The league is trying, I'll give it that, and the trainers are more aware of when to let a player back onto the field. But the sport in general is still a long way away.
| 67 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Joe Soriano
Pro Sports Wrap
Orble Sport Blog
Comment by Seyal
Seyal's Slice of the Universe
Seyal's Adventures in Dog Training
They really need to define it and do so in a way that it can be called consistently. There's enough "judgment calls" or "borderline calls" in the game as it is. Don't need one for tackling, imo, and it definitely doesn't need to be position based. If you can't slap the head of a QB when trying to swap the ball out of his hand you shouldn't be able to do it when trying to strip the HB of the ball.
Make it uniform, make it a defined area, and take out the subjectiveness and reputation factor. Judge the PLAY not the players involved in the play.
And I also wonder if trainers are now going to the too cautious side perhaps out of fear of league penalty. Are there more true concussions or are their more "borderline" cases that in the past wouldn't be, but now are called concussions just to be safe?
Comment by Dustin Hull
Football Times
Diamond Press