Defending Football ?

Post Reply
BernardB
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Defending Football ?

Post by BernardB »

This post belongs in the book review section, but since other members are perhaps like me and rarely look in that section I will post it here.

James Freeman, in todays WSJ, gives a favorable review to Gregg Easterbrook's book on the NFL subtitled "In Defense of Football." The review, without criticism, quotes Easterbrook waxing lyrical about the virtues of football, as "aesthetically beautiful" and "the last bastion...where manhood can be celebrated." Many British were similarly romantic about the virtues of cricket, which Churchill once skewered, with a quote I cannot find but remember as, "pursuing a rolling ball teaches nothing but how to pursue a rolling ball."

On the controversy of concussion risk Easterbrook concludes, regarding NFL players, "Players know the risks and are well compensated." This frequently made argument I once attempted to skewer in this forum along the lines: voluntary consent does not make said argument just.

In regards to kids playing tackle football the reviewer cites evidence from Easterbrook that riding bicycles and skateboards cause more hospital ER visits than football. The reviewer does not ask the basic question: how many more kids ride bicycles and skateboards than play football?

In his last paragraph Freeman argues "that Easterbrook's analysis suggests that the [NFL] is becoming safer even as it becomes more compelling and competitive."

Perhaps the book is better than the review, but I doubt it.
Mark L. Ford
Site Moderator
Posts: 431
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:57 pm

Re: Defending Football ?

Post by Mark L. Ford »

BernardB wrote: In regards to kids playing tackle football the reviewer cites evidence from Easterbrook that riding bicycles and skateboards cause more hospital ER visits than football. The reviewer does not ask the basic question: how many more kids ride bicycles and skateboards than play football?
I agree, it's called lying with statistics-- 70% of boys and girls under 16 ride bicycles, but only a small percentage of that same age group plays tackle football, so a lot more people means a lot more ER trips. I'd add that tackle football at most levels has a person who treats minor injuries that might otherwise end up with an ER visit, whether it's an adult who knows basic first aid or the team physician, before the standard follow-up with the family doctor.

As far as skateboarding and rollerblading go, they're second to football for injuries serious enough to require hospitalization. On visits to the ER without admission, the guys on wheels are behind football, soccer and baseball when it comes to ER visits. http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/schooled ... asing.html
John Grasso
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 1:01 pm
Location: Guilford, NY

Re: Defending Football ?

Post by John Grasso »

I think modern society has a ridiculous overemphasis on personal safety. Can you imagine
the colonists being warned about unsafe conditions before they left from Europe for the New World.
Or any of the immigrants that followed? Or the pioneers moving westward? "Be careful, there's
wild Indians and wild animals and you might be scalped or be eaten or starve or freeze to death - better stay home
and be safe."

We're becoming a nation of Milquetoasts.
Risk is a part of life. We should be aware of risks but then go ahead and take chances.
7DnBrnc53
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Defending Football ?

Post by 7DnBrnc53 »

John Grasso wrote:I think modern society has a ridiculous overemphasis on personal safety. Can you imagine
the colonists being warned about unsafe conditions before they left from Europe for the New World.
Or any of the immigrants that followed? Or the pioneers moving westward? "Be careful, there's
wild Indians and wild animals and you might be scalped or be eaten or starve or freeze to death - better stay home
and be safe."

We're becoming a nation of Milquetoasts.
Risk is a part of life. We should be aware of risks but then go ahead and take chances.
Well, to be fair, we have more technology and knowledge than those people had, so why not use it to try to make things safer?

However, the players know the risks and play. The NFL should be held accountable (their actions with regards to the concussion issue are pathetic), but players should save their money and invest it wisely, and not waste it on frivolous things, like too many cars and women that just use them for their money.
mwald
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Defending Football ?

Post by mwald »

John Grasso wrote:I think modern society has a ridiculous overemphasis on personal safety.
Completely agree, but the media and personal injury and class action attorneys play a big part in this. It's a kill your heroes mentality now.

Goodell bashing has reached ridiculous proportions. In my view, his proactive changes are meant to keep forces at bay that would like nothing more than to win a big pile of the NFL's money, using issues like safety and domestic violence to try to make a name for themselves.

While Easterbrook is a sensationalist and I don't agree with all he's saying or how he's saying it, it's encouraging to see someone stick up for the league for a change for a change. I for one refuse to bag on something that has given me so much pleasure over the years.
User avatar
JohnR
Posts: 330
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Defending Football ?

Post by JohnR »

>"the last bastion...where manhood can be celebrated."

Oh really? That's a pretty narrow interpretation of manhood celebrating. I think the NHL, MLB, NBA, & MSL are all just still us guys.
Post Reply