Follow Up On Baning Football, Now SI's Peter King Is Thinking About Banning FB

[Benny B]

1) If/when football's popularity begins to diminish, soccer's popularity won't increase proportionately.  Keep in mind that nearly half of the NFL's audience is female, and I would opine that most women will simply turn off the TV rather than turn on another sport.

2) Football won't be "banned" as in made to be illegal.  It simply will cease to be a varsity sport at many of the universities who currently carry the sport.  If you want to get a bunch of guys together and play a game in your backyard, the police aren't going to stop you.

3) When you only have one state in the US where there are more entry-level attorney openings than people passing the bar exam, you better be prepared for the wave of wannabe Habushes and Grubers who need to make a name for themselves.

[WarriorInNYC]

Things change as attitudes change, but "banning" is (and should be) anathama in the U.S. We learned our lesson with alcohol. If parents are moved in droves to forbid their children from playing or if enough fans are turned off by the violence/injuries then football will gradually lose its appeal (see boxing). But banned? If that happens, what's next? I'd be very, very scared.

But has boxing really lost its popularity due to the violence and injuries??? I think not.  While it is sad to see all time legends like Ali struggle to get around, I don't think that this has anything to do with the decline of the sport.  The example of this is the rising popularity of MMA, which is much more violent than boxing.

Bars sell out on Saturday night for pay-per-view events and many people host parties to watch the big MMA fights.  People cannot be naive to think that these fights will not have long-term effects on those in the ring.  It definitely will, perhaps more so than playing football.  But we still watch.

It is sad to see some of the things that happen to those players that play this long, but I do agree with Brew and others here.  A lot of the depression following football I think is figuring out what to do after football, and not quite as much the physical wear-and-tear they have taken over the years.  I'm sure all of the hitting has negative effects, and on some players more than others, it might be completely detrimental to them.  But this is a risk these players take when they start playing the game, just as those who compete in MMA know the risks they are getting into.

I'm a big Steelers fan, and our FS Ryan Clark tweeted this earlier about Jacob Bell, the offensive lineman that just retired because he wanted to maintain his long-term health, "I respect Jacob Bell for his decision to retire. We all have that choice. For those of us who choose other wise we know the risk!"

Football will not die, it will evolve. 

[RushmoreAcademy]

I don't think logic follows that if football were to somehow disappear, that soccer would have to take its place.  If people in this country wanted to watch soccer, they would. Those that want to, do so. It's not as if it's not available and doesn't have a chance to get popular.  I understand that soccer's popularity is growing some, but honestly, I'm more likely to hear about the results to an MMA fight, and that sport is comparably brand new.

[mu_hilltopper]

It's in MU's best interest if football died off.

Death to football.

[Spotcheck Billy]

if football starts a to die a slow death, the BBall only schools in the BEast are ahead of the curve

as long as ESPN is paying BIG $$ to the BCS conferences under long term contracts, college football will be around at least as long as the contracts run

[Lennys Tap]

And while I disagree with Lennys about soccer being more fun to play than watch (it's far more TV friendly than American football), I don't disagree that there's a massive popularity gap that won't be overcome any time soon.

Far more young adults in this country grew up playing soccer than football. Many predicted that the participation numbers would translate into young people wanting to watch soccer. They haven't. In general, those same young people prefer watching "American football" on TV.

[Lennys Tap]

But has boxing really lost its popularity due to the violence and injuries??? I think not.  While it is sad to see all time legends like Ali struggle to get around, I don't think that this has anything to do with the decline of the sport.  The example of this is the rising popularity of MMA, which is much more violent than boxing.

Bars sell out on Saturday night for pay-per-view events and many people host parties to watch the big MMA fights.  People cannot be naive to think that these fights will not have long-term effects on those in the ring.  It definitely will, perhaps more so than playing football.  But we still watch.

It is sad to see some of the things that happen to those players that play this long, but I do agree with Brew and others here.  A lot of the depression following football I think is figuring out what to do after football, and not quite as much the physical wear-and-tear they have taken over the years.  I'm sure all of the hitting has negative effects, and on some players more than others, it might be completely detrimental to them.  But this is a risk these players take when they start playing the game, just as those who compete in MMA know the risks they are getting into.

I'm a big Steelers fan, and our FS Ryan Clark tweeted this earlier about Jacob Bell, the offensive lineman that just retired because he wanted to maintain his long-term health, "I respect Jacob Bell for his decision to retire. We all have that choice. For those of us who choose other wise we know the risk!"

Football will not die, it will evolve. 

All good points, but boxing isn't the "mainstream" sport it once was. When I grew up the Friday Night fights were live, prime time network TV. When Ingemar Johansson knocked out Floyd Patterson it was on the front page of the Chicago Tribune. Now it's a niche sport, with UFC and mixed martial arts closing in.

[brewcity77]

Far more young adults in this country grew up playing soccer than football. Many predicted that the participation numbers would translate into young people wanting to watch soccer. They haven't. In general, those same young people prefer watching "American football" on TV.

I didn't dispute that at all. I agree. What I disagree with is the assertion that American football is a more "TV friendly" sport. It's only more TV friendly for the advertisers. When you watch a 2-hour soccer game, you are watching 90 minutes of action, about 8-10 minutes of injuries and stoppages, about 8-10 minutes of halftime show, and about 10-12 minutes of commercials. When you watch a 3-hour football game, you are watching 11 minutes of action, 119 minutes of injuries, stoppages, replays, and halftime show, and 60 minutes of commercials.

We may watch more football, but it's certainly not because it's more of a TV friendly sport, at least not for the viewer who is spending 6.1% of his time watching action versus the viewer spending 75% of his time watching action.

[WarriorInNYC]

All good points, but boxing isn't the "mainstream" sport it once was. When I grew up the Friday Night fights were live, prime time network TV. When Ingemar Johansson knocked out Floyd Patterson it was on the front page of the Chicago Tribune. Now it's a niche sport, with UFC and mixed martial arts closing in.

Understood, the point I was trying to make is that I do not believe that boxing's popularity has died off due to the physical nature and violence of the sport.  Otherwise, MMA, which is more violent than boxing, would not be increasingly more and more popular.

[CTWarrior]

We may watch more football, but it's certainly not because it's more of a TV friendly sport, at least not for the viewer who is spending 6.1% of his time watching action versus the viewer spending 75% of his time watching action.

I suppose it depends on what your definition of action is, since 80-90% of the action in a soccer match is inconsequential as it doesn't lead to a goal or even the threat of one.  I find soccer tough to watch for that reason.  Goals are very rare and seem to be the result of a defensive screw-up at least as often as an inspired play by the offense. 

So I feel about soccer the way I do about opera.  I have great respect for the talent of the participants, but I don't want to watch it.

[martyconlonontherun]

I really hope I'm not completely stepping in it here, and if so, I apologize, but is this that much different than PTSD? These guys lived their lives for the excitement and rush of the NFL and didn't have an adequate plan as to how to adjust to real life. Similar to soldiers coming back from Afghanistan or Iraq and committing suicide (in far greater numbers than ex-NFL players). No one is calling for a ban on the military, are they?

Some people commit suicide. It's unfortunate, it's tragic for the families, but it's also something that is a part of life. Would Seau and Duerson have been well-adjusted, normal functioning members of society if not for the NFL? My guess is that football was a band-aid on an already damaged psyche.

And while I disagree with Lennys about soccer being more fun to play than watch (it's far more TV friendly than American football), I don't disagree that there's a massive popularity gap that won't be overcome any time soon. Even if the NFL did go away (which it won't), I think it's more likely that basketball and hockey would fill the popularity void than soccer would.

1. Having a military is nec so it would neve be banned. Football is entertainment that can easily be replaced.

2. PTSD is more mental. The 'mental' problems affecting players are due to physical damage to their brains. You can't be adjusted back to society I you are mentally impaired. Suicide isnt th main problem because it was the players 'choice'. The real problem is that players were affected before their suicides with brain problems. The suicides just brought the real problems to light.

[brewcity77]

I suppose it depends on what your definition of action is, since 80-90% of the action in a soccer match is inconsequential as it doesn't lead to a goal or even the threat of one.  I find soccer tough to watch for that reason.  Goals are very rare and seem to be the result of a defensive screw-up at least as often as an inspired play by the offense. 

So I feel about soccer the way I do about opera.  I have great respect for the talent of the participants, but I don't want to watch it.

People that don't like the sport don't like the sport. I get that. But the buildup is not inconsequential, and just because they give 7 points for a touchdown doesn't make it any more valuable than a goal.

Regardless, all I'm saying is that it's more TV friendly. 93.9% of the time spent watching an American football game is spent not watching live action. For some reason, we like that. But if any other television program only had 6.1% of the event spent viewing meaningful portions of the show, no one would watch it. Hell, of that 6.1%, how much is spent between the 20s, which is the "inconsequential" portion of the game. The NFL Network is able to break the entire meaningful portion of a game down to 7 minutes. When you're spending 3 hours on the couch for 7 worthwhile minutes, that's not good television.

[lab_warrior]

TOTALLY.    You and I both know that is EXACTLY where he was going with that post.    Stone Cold is clearly a racist/misogynist calling for the legalization of slavery and an end to women's suffrage.   He probably won't admit to it, but you and I are super duper smart and know what he really meant.   

Yes, THAT SURE WAS THE POINT.    Uh, you are aware of what the teal color means, right?  Since you're super duper smart?  Or is setting up an absurd, slippery slope counter-argument for the punchline that follows supposed to be in a different color?  Let me know what you decide.  In the meantime, stay away from New Yorker cartoons.   

Speaking of irony, you getting worked up over that comment is contributing to Stone Cold's observation of the "growing pussification of America". 

[CTWarrior]

When you're spending 3 hours on the couch for 7 worthwhile minutes, that's not good television.

I agree with this, too.  I don't watch a lot of football, either.  I watch the Jets (my team) every week, but don't watch other games or pregame shows or post game shows and I'm usually flipping to a movie or something between plays of the Jets game.  I watch a lot of college basketball that doesn't involve Marquette, though.

[Blackhat]

Yes, THAT SURE WAS THE POINT.    Uh, you are aware of what the teal color means, right?  Since you're super duper smart?  Or is setting up an absurd, slippery slope counter-argument for the punchline that follows supposed to be in a different color?  Let me know what you decide.  In the meantime, stay away from New Yorker cartoons.   

Speaking of irony, you getting worked up over that comment is contributing to Stone Cold's observation of the "growing pussification of America". 

Get off me.

[brewcity77]

I agree with this, too.  I don't watch a lot of football, either.  I watch the Jets (my team) every week, but don't watch other games or pregame shows or post game shows and I'm usually flipping to a movie or something between plays of the Jets game.  I watch a lot of college basketball that doesn't involve Marquette, though.

Basketball is a far more television friendly sport than football. It surprises me that it hasn't become more popular over here. Not sure I want to open that can of worms, though.

[🏀]

Get off me.

Momentum is a bitch.

[mu03eng]

I haven't seen a good counter argument made to the point someone brought up about what happens if the high school game is reduced due to insurance companies being unwilling to cover them. This, more than any national shift in preferences is the biggest danger to the NFL's behemoth status.

I don't think it would be a death knell, but it would drastically change the way the system works. Can anyone imagine a development academy system like those for Barcelona and United popping up? AAU run by teams themselves? It's happening a bit with soccer as it is (and in the process killing it since the best players in the next few years will skip high school sports altogether).

I think football is untouchable in places like Texas where Friday night is about as important as Sunday morning, but I'm not convinced many other states feel the same way.   

The counter argument is that these injuries don't manifest themselves at the high school level at a rate any higher than any other sport.  We're talking about NFL players that have been hitting things for at least 16 years(4 pee wee, 4 high school, 4 college, 4 NFL) and even then it seems take time after retiring to see the effects.  High schools won't ban it because they make money off of it and the effects are too far down the road.

I agree with Brew that there is a lot of parallel to PTSD and head traumas in the military.  There is both a mental and a physical element to this.  There is enough attention now that perhaps a "cure" will be found that makes all this moot.

[brewcity77]

The counter argument is that these injuries don't manifest themselves at the high school level at a rate any higher than any other sport.

Not only that, but from a clinical standpoint when it comes to legal matters, you need the burden of proof. When the problems from concussions do manifest, how do you prove they were from organized football, and not a car accident, a fall, another sport, or playing football in the backyard?

The assertion being made is that there's a sudden rash of football-related deaths. But there aren't, not any more than we've seen in past years. Seau committed suicide years after he left the game. So the NFL, NCAA, and high schools across the country should start ponying up money? That's like saying the record companies should start paying out because Kurt Cobain shot himself.

There's no way anyone can prove that Seau or Duerson killed themselves because they played football. Thousands of people commit suicide each year. In the past few years, 2 of them were retired NFL players. I don't think you can even make a sound correlation, much less prove anything conclusively, that either of their deaths had anything to do with playing in the NFL.

When it comes to the kids that die on the field, then there's a case, but those numbers are actually on the decline. On average, fewer than 5 people die on the football field per year. Compared to 18+ pre-1970, that's pretty darn good.

[lab_warrior]

Okay, I've let this low hanging fruit be for a while, but the title of the post talks about the "Baning" of football.  BANEING of football?  If so, WAYYYYYYY COOOOOOL.  No way we should ban that. 

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/0bnzCnhsCQM&amp;fs=1&amp;source=uds" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/0bnzCnhsCQM&amp;fs=1&amp;source=uds</a>

[Tugg Speedman]

But has boxing really lost its popularity due to the violence and injuries??? I think not. 

I disagree as explained here

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=32449.msg391635#msg391635

[brewcity77]

I disagree as explained here

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=32449.msg391635#msg391635

First of all, using wiki answers as your primary source might not be the best way to support an argument. Second, while I was only 5 at the time, I have never heard of Doo Duk Kim. I would imagine most people in their 30s have no idea who he is, and certainly wouldn't blame him for boxing not being popular.

But third, and most important, you are trying to compare a guy dying in the ring to guys taking their lives years after their careers ended. That isn't apples to oranges, it's apples to couches. Do you really think the families of Duerson or Seau would stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting a dime out of the NFL for a wrongful death suit? If 5-10 NFL players were dying each year on the field of play, you might be on to something. But 2 guys committing suicide years later? Sorry, but that argument has less than zero traction. Unless you can prove the suicide rate of NFL players is wildly higher than the suicide rate of the average citizen (about 12/100,000), there's simply nothing to this but sensationalism.

[mu-rara]

I think some of you are basing your opinion on your personal biases.

" I love football, therefore it will never go away."   

[brewcity77]

I think some of you are basing your opinion on your personal biases.

" I love football, therefore it will never go away."   

Not me. I hate football. But it sure as hell ain't going anywhere in any of our lifetimes.

[mu03eng]

I think some of you are basing your opinion on your personal biases.

" I love football, therefore it will never go away."   

Disagree.  I love football, I don't think there is a chance in hell it goes away.  Having said that I'm fully aware the game will change.  It has evolved over the last 100 years there is zero reason it wouldn't continue to evolve.  In fact, the only way the game dies in my opinion is if it stops evolving