Football will be irrelevant in 15-20 years.

[AMDZen]

Your arguments are so simplistic and dumb that I'm beginning to think that you have significant cognitive impairment. You didn't happen to play football in elementary, middle, or high school, did you?

At least I know what I'm talking about instead of making up facts and acting like I know what I'm talking about when you clearly don't.

You obviously have no idea how much football makes even at the High School level so of course you are clueless as to what it makes on the collegiate level and National (NFL) level.

Have you seen the TV contracts that schools have? Do you see what Notre Dame is able to do even not part of a conference? You have no clue what you are talking about - football is all about money and it does a damn good job of making it. A lot of college athletic programs are funded JUST BY their football programs.

 

[ichy]

Football is already irrelevant to me. I hope that catches on with other people.

How can you like something or cheer for something where no matter who wins or loses, it makes absolutely no difference in your life?

The outcome of a movie also makes no difference in anyone's life but it can still be entertaining.

I agree that it's absurd when people's lives revolve around "their" team but football can provide a couple of hours of entertainment on a Sunday or Monday evening. It also provides a useful topic for office small talk.

 

[ichy]

Have you seen the TV contracts that schools have? Do you see what Notre Dame is able to do even not part of a conference? You have no clue what you are talking about - football is all about money and it does a damn good job of making it. A lot of college athletic programs are funded JUST BY their football programs.

https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/hschein/www/readings/athletics/collegesports.html

One of the best-kept secrets about intercollegiate athletics-well guarded because athletic departments are extremely reluctant to open their financial books-is that most college sports programs lose money. If profit and loss is defined according to ordinary business practices, of the 802 members of the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association), the 493 of the NAIA (National Association of Intercollegiate Athletes), and the 1,050 nonaffiliated junior colleges, only 10 to 20 athletic programs make a consistent albeit small profit, and in any given year another 20 to 30 break even or do better. The rest-over 2,300 institutions-lose anywhere from a few dollars to millions annually.

http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Myth-College-Sports-Are-a-Cash-Cow2.aspx

What sets UGA athletics apart is that it can pay for its expenses without turning to the university for help.
Only seven other athletics programs at public universities broke even or had net operating income on athletics each year from 2005-2009, according to data provided by USA Today to the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics (for which I consult). The others were Louisiana State University, The Pennsylvania State University, and the universities of Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas at Austin.

 

[RagingBITCH]

sigh...not this myth again. 🙄

football brings money to football programs, not to the colleges. In fact, most barely break even after all athletic expenses are considered.

the very few programs that actually manage to pump profit into the university after taking care of their own cut, provide such marginal and meaningless revenue compared to the real revenue from major universities: Research.

Yikes...I said the wrong word and said college vs program. Oh noes. Yet another value adding post from zin.

 

[SP33Demon]

Uh, no, PSU isn't even in the top 10: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...largest-fan-basesaccording-to-bleacher-report

And that's 2 years old, they have probably dropped off quite a bit given their recent troubles. Last one I saw had Ohio State #1, Texas A&M #2, Notre Dame #3

But college has very few (maybe 5 a year) teams turn a profit for the school. But I was speaking HS teams, where coaches aren't likely to hit $100k, let alone the 5 million some college coaches get.

And it's not that the sport isn't profitable, I think a lot more college teams could be if they really wanted to. Colleges tend to waste alot of money on staff bloat and other Athletic department perks that aren't neccessary.

Texas pulls in the most revenue out of all college football after they got that fat Longhorn Network deal and didn't have to share much.

I could definitely see Texas high schools being profitable off of football. Hell, they made a TV show about it.

 

[rayfieldclement]

What about better helmets and padding?

 

[RagingBITCH]

LOL. Very few college football programs make money. HS are all money sinks. Can you name a single HS football program that makes money?

I live down the street from Plano East and Plano West. 10 minutes north is Allen, home to the $60 million stadium for HS football. I don't think there's publicly available numbers either way to say "it is profitable for the school directly", but the amount of money and revenue it brings into the surrounding area is undeniable. Football is king in this area (haven't even mentioned Southlake Carroll, Highland Park).

 

[mikegg]

Anyone denying the inevitable that we'll see a dramatic change in football in the next decade is not seeing the whole picture.

OP is correct. Parents will become more conscious about letting their kids play football. It's going to start at the bottom. The less kids play football, the less interest there is in middle school, then high school, then college, and finally the NFL.

You don't think the NFL is panicking about law suits? You gotta be crazy. The NFL is trying its best to create a safer game and these dumb players think it's not manly enough.

Two things need to happen to football:
-No more vicious hits
-Much more protective gear

Game announcers are trained to downplay game injuries. Can you imagine if the game announcers actually talk about injuries during games? It'll turn people off.

This is why the NBA is salivating on the NFL. The NBA is in a much better situation long term because it's the #2 team sport in the world and a close #3 in the U.S and it doesn't have the problems that the NFL(dangerous) and MLB(massive doping) have.

One more Michael Jordan and I expect the NBA to surpass the MLB in the U.S.

 

[SP33Demon]

Well to be fair Ed Reed is a loudmouth who says a lot of dumb things.

Ed Reed is a future HOFer and Pro Bowler who has been in the league for years. If he says it's becoming powder puff, his opinion holds more weight than the average player. Also consider that he is defending himself against hits that he's been doing his entire career but are now coined as "malicious".

 

[mikegg]

Ed Reed is a future HOFer and Pro Bowler who has been in the league for years. If he says it's becoming powder puff, his opinion holds more weight than the average player. Also consider that he is defending himself against hits that he's been doing his entire career but are now coined as "malicious".

Ed Reed needs to understand that everyone is going after the NFL - from researchers to players and soon, the government will try. The commissioner is doing his best to try to make the game safer - not because he cares about the players but because it'll protect the sport long term.

Ed Reed and all these players complaining need to understand that. It's not about how macho you look when you make a big hit. It's about the future of the sport.

 

[SP33Demon]

While the incidence rate is much less, soccer has it's own issue with concussions. The ACC did it's own study some years ago. Is there a concussion rate that we would be comfortable with?

I see no problem with soccer players wearing helmets. Also, the concussion rate is 0.6 per 1000 exposures for that ACC soccer study which is very low. With helmets, that rate would be even lower which I personally would be comfortable with for kids through college.

 

[SP33Demon]

What about better helmets and padding?

That is the next step. But then the question is, how many subconcussive hits equate to CTE in the brain? Padding and better helmets still won't prevent the brain from jarring against the skull unless they're wearing full absorption suits. Which would really make the game meaningless.

More research will need to be done but today's version of football will be a relic of the past, and this will also equal big changes to other major sports like wrestling (better helmets), Pro wrestling (helmets), basketball (possible helmets), baseball (pitchers/outfielders wearing helmets), and soccer (helmets). Hockey, major penalties/fines assessed for even checking someone hard. MMA and boxing, hell if I know.

 

[brandonb]

Who cares if it makes any difference in your life? What happened to simply enjoying something? It could probably be said that very few things make an actual difference in the grand scheme of things.

What is enjoyable about it though? Is it enjoyable because the receiver outwitted the defense and made a great play and scored a touchdown? Or is it enjoyable because your favorite team won the game?

I can enjoy the first scenario and I can watch the highlight clips. But that is about as far as it goes. I couldn't care less if my favorite team won the game. In the end, do I really care the receiever made a great play? No.

I'm not sure why such trivial nonsense is considered entertainment. Take it for face value?

The only reason its considered entertainment is because you have friends who watch it and you can talk about it. There is no substance to it otherwise. It's like watching 2 dogs playing tug of war over a bone. After a certain amount of time a dog wins. Is it entertaining to watch though? Maybe for 5 seconds. Not for 3 hours thats for sure.

Why is football entertaining to you?

 

[Phokus]

Ed Reed is a future HOFer and Pro Bowler who has been in the league for years. If he says it's becoming powder puff, his opinion holds more weight than the average player. Also consider that he is defending himself against hits that he's been doing his entire career but are now coined as "malicious".

Ed Reed isn't a scientist.

 

[Phokus]

You know what would be entertaining? If they made the 3 and 4 point stance illegal, but also got rid of holding as a penalty. Instead of linemen launching themselves at one another, they'd practically be wrestling each other. Plus it'd get rid of the problem of 'mini concussions' adding up.

 

[SP33Demon]

You know what would be entertaining? If they made the 3 and 4 point stance illegal, but also got rid of holding as a penalty. Instead of linemen launching themselves at one another, they'd practically be wrestling each other. Plus it'd get rid of the problem of 'mini concussions' adding up.

This would be akin to sumo wrestling. Have them each grab each other's arms before the whistle starts and try to move the other person. It'd be weird but I'm sure we'd get used to it. Maybe.

 

[HendrixFan]

You know what would be entertaining? If they made the 3 and 4 point stance illegal, but also got rid of holding as a penalty. Instead of linemen launching themselves at one another, they'd practically be wrestling each other. Plus it'd get rid of the problem of 'mini concussions' adding up.

Sounds kinky. Maybe have them wear less clothes too!

 

[Phokus]

Sounds kinky. Maybe have them wear less clothes too!

D:

In any case, it'd get rid of my pet peeve of holding being the most inconsistently called penalty in football.

 

[Miramonti]

That's never going to happen. As you know, concussions are caused by the brain slamming into the skull. No helmet will be able to stop that from happening.

That will definitely happen. Current helmets do not absorb enough impact and as a result transfer too much of the impact to the skull.

 

[rasczak]

The OP is not factoring in better equipment. The NFL is already cracking down on helmet to helmet contact.

Still though.. its very easy to blow out your knee so I try to encourage my son to play baseball and lacrosse instead.

If football becomes irrelevant it will for the same reasons that hockey and the NBA become irrelevant... at some point people will get tired of paying $100 for a ticket to see the game and having the opportunity to drink an $8 10oz beers.

The newest equipment can only prevent so much though. Almost each and every play there is some contact that causes the brain to jar. Even with PROPER tackling form, there is some degree of helmet contact.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

(Obligatory endorsement of rugby)

 

[bigdog1218]

What is enjoyable about it though? Is it enjoyable because the receiver outwitted the defense and made a great play and scored a touchdown? Or is it enjoyable because your favorite team won the game?

I can enjoy the first scenario and I can watch the highlight clips. But that is about as far as it goes. I couldn't care less if my favorite team won the game. In the end, do I really care the receiever made a great play? No.

I'm not sure why such trivial nonsense is considered entertainment. Take it for face value?

The only reason its considered entertainment is because you have friends who watch it and you can talk about it. There is no substance to it otherwise. It's like watching 2 dogs playing tug of war over a bone. After a certain amount of time a dog wins. Is it entertaining to watch though? Maybe for 5 seconds. Not for 3 hours thats for sure.

Why is football entertaining to you?

You can apply this to any form of entertainment on earth, asking someone why some form of entertainment is entertaining makes you look like an idiot . Why watch movies? Why listen to music? Why read books? Why play computer games?

Why do you have your computer specs posted? Granted taking the time to make sure a bunch of strangers online know what computer you have is important information and not trivial nonsense at all, it just seems strange to talk about a tool like it's a hobby or something. Where's the substance in talking about computer games and computers?

 

[digiram]

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Where do most of the football stars come from? The inner city and poor areas of the nation.

You think that will change because of concussion research? Parents have always been worried about their kids playing football and getting hurt, moms mostly, this is no different. As long as there is money to be made, there will be kids and the parents who are living through their kids vicariously, who will risk that for the money and fame.

Basically, what I'm saying is - as long as there are poor people there will be football. Or at least people struggling to get by.

I think that sums it all up.

Look how long boxing has been around. We all know Pacquiao wasn't the son of a king in the Philipines.

 

[brandonb]

You can apply this to any form of entertainment on earth, asking someone why some form of entertainment is entertaining makes you look like an idiot . Why watch movies? Why listen to music? Why read books? Why play computer games?

Computer games are interactive. They provide a challenge for your mind to overcome. The entertainment is the satisfaction in winning or accomplishing achievements/goals you set for yourself. Football doesn't provide any challenge for your mind, unless you are playing it.

So, are you going to "baaahh" again lilke the rest of the sheep?

 

[Muse]

helmets today are far far better then they were 20 years ago. now that they are actively looking to make them more concussion proof they are only going to get better.

Don't kid yourself that helmet technology is going to help a whole lot. The G forces on the head involved in football are still going to cause serious concussions.