|
|
Post by NC1974 on Aug 20, 2015 20:34:59 GMT -6
espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13463272/how-former-san-francisco-49ers-chris-borland-retirement-change-nfl-foreverI did not really follow this story much when he retired. Came across this article today. A couple of the things that jumped out at me: -I was surprised by the way UW was portrayed in regards to injuries and use of Toradol. -"The game may be safer; you can make an argument about that. My experience over my five years at Wisconsin and my one year in the NFL was that there were times where I couldn't play the game safely. There are positive measures we can take ... but on a lead play, on a power play, there's violence."
|
|
|
|
Post by agap on Aug 20, 2015 22:55:16 GMT -6
He retired from football because of safety which is fine. But if he's that concerned about it, shouldn't he do what he can to improve safety in football?
The concussion that led Borland to retire came on a routine play, and that's precisely his point: Unlike riding a bike or driving a car, where head injuries occur by accident, in football the danger increases by doing everything right. During a preseason practice, he stuffed the lead blocker, 6-foot-4, 293-pound fullback Will Tukuafu. Borland -- 5 inches shorter
and 50 pounds lighter -- buried the crown of his helmet into Tukuafu's chin and stood him up. He walked away dazed for several minutes. He began to wonder how many times his brain would be subjected to the same injury and what the lasting effect might be.
Like in this example, how is he doing everything right? Some might still teach linebackers to bury the crown of their helmet into the fullback's chin, but to me that's not right or safe. Eliminate things like that in football and it becomes more safe.
|
|
|
|
Post by 33coach on Aug 21, 2015 13:32:25 GMT -6
He retired from football because of safety which is fine. But if he's that concerned about it, shouldn't he do what he can to improve safety in football? The concussion that led Borland to retire came on a routine play, and that's precisely his point: Unlike riding a bike or driving a car, where head injuries occur by accident, in football the danger increases by doing everything right. During a preseason practice, he stuffed the lead blocker, 6-foot-4, 293-pound fullback Will Tukuafu. Borland -- 5 inches shorter
and 50 pounds lighter -- buried the crown of his helmet into Tukuafu's chin and stood him up. He walked away dazed for several minutes. He began to wonder how many times his brain would be subjected to the same injury and what the lasting effect might be.Like in this example, how is he doing everything right? Some might still teach linebackers to bury the crown of their helmet into the fullback's chin, but to me that's not right or safe. Eliminate things like that in football and it becomes more safe. I agree completely. That's an example of unsafe technique...if he got his head to the side, wrapped and drove...the danger would have (almost) been completely avoided. |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Aug 22, 2015 7:29:35 GMT -6
ESPN is a {censored}.
They will do anything to make money, which makes them a {censored}.
How can they write articles about Oklahoma Drill and Borland, etc.?
And then give this an ESPY:
Leave your money on the dresser..... |
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Aug 22, 2015 7:30:41 GMT -6
BTW, that word I used rhymes with door.
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Aug 22, 2015 7:48:59 GMT -6
The average person does not realize the huge difference between HS Football and what they see on Sunday, or even Saturday.
In 1980 I took a graduate-level Coaching Football class from man who was OC when I played in college.
One of first things he said was, "Football's in trouble - be prepared to defend it."
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Aug 22, 2015 8:15:56 GMT -6
He retired from football because of safety which is fine. But if he's that concerned about it, shouldn't he do what he can to improve safety in football? The concussion that led Borland to retire came on a routine play, and that's precisely his point: Unlike riding a bike or driving a car, where head injuries occur by accident, in football the danger increases by doing everything right. During a preseason practice, he stuffed the lead blocker, 6-foot-4, 293-pound fullback Will Tukuafu. Borland -- 5 inches shorter
and 50 pounds lighter -- buried the crown of his helmet into Tukuafu's chin and stood him up. He walked away dazed for several minutes. He began to wonder how many times his brain would be subjected to the same injury and what the lasting effect might be.Like in this example, how is he doing everything right? Some might still teach linebackers to bury the crown of their helmet into the fullback's chin, but to me that's not right or safe. Eliminate things like that in football and it becomes more safe. I agree completely. That's an example of unsafe technique...if he got his head to the side, wrapped and drove...the danger would have (almost) been completely avoided. Head to the side, wrapped up and drove?? He was taking on an Iso Block not making a tackle. |
|
|
|
Post by blb on Aug 22, 2015 9:17:38 GMT -6
For over 30 years helmets have had warning stickers that advise players not to use helmet as a weapon, that no helmet can prevent all injuries, that possibility of serious even catastrophic injury exists.
If a player such as Borland "buries the crown of his helmet" into the chin of a 6-4, 293 FB he's using the helmet and thus his head in a way that is improper technique and unsafe.
Like doing a street drug, if you choose to play that way, the responsibility for consequences is on you.
In Football heads should be used only for thinking.
|
|
jaydub66
Sophomore Member
Varsity D-Line Coach
Posts: 223 
|
Post by jaydub66 on Aug 22, 2015 16:23:29 GMT -6
The helmet is designed to protect the face and that's pretty much it. There is virtually nothing you can do to prevent a concussion in terms of equipment. The way to help stop concussions is technique.
|
|
|
|
Post by 33coach on Aug 22, 2015 16:41:42 GMT -6
The helmet is designed to protect the face and that's pretty much it. There is virtually nothing you can do to prevent a concussion in terms of equipment. The way to help stop concussions is technique. Yea I mean a concussion is an internal injury. The only thing a good helmet does is shock absorption. |
|
jaydub66
Sophomore Member
Varsity D-Line Coach
Posts: 223
|
Post by jaydub66 on Aug 22, 2015 16:50:23 GMT -6
The helmet is designed to protect the face and that's pretty much it. There is virtually nothing you can do to prevent a concussion in terms of equipment. The way to help stop concussions is technique. Yea I mean a concussion is an internal injury. The only thing a good helmet does is shock absorption. Actually, the helmet probably does more damage because it makes the head bounce around. It's like a study on boxing, there was LESS brain damage in boxing before gloves and MORE since gloves. Of course you have guys with broken jaws, dislocated eye balls, etc with bare knuckle boxing but the face acted as a crumple zone. The pads in the helmet create like a pin ball effect on the head and it can cause more brain damage than if the kids had no helmets. I'm not saying we remove helmets but we need to redesign them for their intended and most effective use. Protect the face. Having a hard shell with pads creates a false sense of security and makes kids think they don't need good technique |
|
|
|
Post by natenator on Aug 22, 2015 16:53:15 GMT -6
Has anyone ever considered tackling drills without helmets? Eve just using bags?
I contemplate doing it but always fearful of the liability issue
|
|
|
|
Post by blb on Aug 22, 2015 17:05:14 GMT -6
Helmets were meant to protect players from accidental-unintentional contact that is going to occur.
Not as a point of contact or "weapon."
Jim McMahon is the latest poster boy for CTE and other effects of playing PRO Football.
His well-known penchant for partying and its impact on his brain aside - even the ESPN documentary about his current problems showed clips of him head-butting teammates to "fire them up" in Pre-Game and after big plays during.
Well, duh.
Gus Frerotte times...how much?
|
|
|
|
Post by funkfriss on Aug 23, 2015 0:16:16 GMT -6
Has anyone ever considered tackling drills without helmets? Eve just using bags? I contemplate doing it but always fearful of the liability issue I have considered it, but I have the same fears as you so therefore I don't |
|
|
|
Post by coachjm on Aug 23, 2015 6:16:20 GMT -6
Has anyone ever considered tackling drills without helmets? Eve just using bags? I contemplate doing it but always fearful of the liability issue I have considered it, but I have the same fears as you so therefore I don't We do instruct tackling without helmets at first this is all technique and fundamental based, we don't worry about liability because it is not full speed, it is safe, and we are teaching to ensure greater safety. We view no inherent risks and our instruction is based with the intent of future risks. We have not ever even had an abrasion with these drills and I do believe it has enhanced our tackling once we do get pads on to eliminate the head from contact. I read these articles with a bit of a different perspective, 1. The timing of their release have no irony and do have an objective to generate profit to the companies who produce them. 2. There is nothing shocking about a intelligent/cerebral college grad choosing a less risky career path, this is no different then me choosing not to be a skyscraper window washer or a boxer (not that I would have the aptitude for either). 3. Roosevelt many moons ago pushed for the elmination of our game if it couldn't be made safer it is still here and much much safer. 4. The focus on head trauma has made the instruction of our game and rules of our game a bit different however, it is safer for kids to play and this is a good thing for all of us, I know I'm a better coach due to this awareness and I know many many youth programs that have altered their focus to instruction and safety something that should have always been a priority IMO. 5. As long as there is big money in the sport there will be these reports and the sky is falling type information as folks will all try to monopolize these profits, the few researchers who are out there with good intentions of truly finding cause and effect I praise as they will be able to provide information on what potential risks that exist in time. Ultimately, if there is an age group that is at greater risk it is not the job of the researchers to prevent participation at those age groups but ensure that the participants know the risk that they are inherently choosing. 6. With no data or supporting information I deducted at a very young age there was some inherent risk in participation in the NFL.. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to deduct that. Of course, I have always also believe that this risk exist in many other sport and like the NFL I see great pride and purpose in all of these activities and do not see a reason for discontinuing them unless there is no longer people interested in participating. As I still see the purpose of sport being greater for the participant then the viewer. |
|
