Concussions and the Future of College Football

[JokermanVol]

The problem is designing a helmet that protects and that the players do not us as a weapon. Maybe leather with no mask was a better idea after all?

[tvolsfan]

I find this very unlikely, for a whole bunch of reasons.

[UT's#1Fan]

pub

[Spartacavolus]

Originally Posted by Orangesmokey

You would think with all the technology we have now that someone would have already been there or gotten close to something. I know the new helmets they have are supposed to be better but I don't know that its helping that much.

I don't think they studied enough, or didn't on purpose, the effects on protecting the skull but allowing the brain to clunk around on hits. We'll see new equipment, but a lot of the damage has already been done to a group that's been playing for 40 years and the cost of defending against these players and settling with them in the near future is going to be a big, big burden.

[UTMVol76]

Football survived Teddy Roosevelt, it will survive this.

[daj2576]

Originally Posted by OCIVol

With Junior Seau committing suicide, I thought I'd share some thoughts on the future of college football.

If you like football, you better enjoy it while it lasts because it's not going to be around in 20 years. With players getting bigger, faster, and stronger, the concussions will only increase. In addition, you are seeing a number of former NFL players commit suicide, and the studies on their brains are going to be devastating news to the NFL. The NFL, however, will survive longer than college football because the NFL will be able to get its players to sign assumption of risk and liability waivers in every contract. Because the NFL players are get paid, the law deems this sufficient consideration for the enforcement of the contract. Colleges, however, will not be able to require student-athletes to enter these contracts. All it's going to take is one former college football player to commit suicide or have other mental/physical disabilities related to concussions incurred during playing college football, and the player or his estate filing a lawsuit against the university. It's not really a question of if, but when the player or his estate prevails on the lawsuit, an insurance company will be forced to pay a substantial judgment for its insured university. As a result, insurance companies will refuse to insure universities against such claims and universities will begin pulling their football programs.

I enjoyed your analysis and agree to an extent. However your discussion of contract law is lacking in several areas, and the first is consideration. The courts rarely, if ever, question the idea of sufficient consideration and usually only test if consideration exists. In this case, a scholarship and its intrinsic value in monetary form would most certainly pass the consideration test. I forget whom this quote came from, but courts have long held that consideration is valid if it is more than "a mere peppercorn". The reality is that courts do not want to hinder the freedom of society to enter into contracts, as that is the basis for most of our dealings with each other.

I do agree that the game will continue to morph and change, but I wonder how the NFL would exist longer than college ball if that is the pipeline to the NFL? If kids cannot play football in college due to the danger, would high schools be allowed to play games? If high schoolers are not allowed to play, would middle schoolers be allowed to play? I think that is the second error in your analysis.

You are talking about the same courts who have outright denied banning smoking, to allow for personal freedom. There is no doubt of the connection between smoking and poor health, so even if somehow Junior Seau's brain injuries directly caused his suicide (another proximate causative link nightmare) I doubt you will see an end to football. But what do I know? Interesting debate!

[Yankee_Vol]

Football isn't going anywhere

[82_VOL_83]

Originally Posted by JokermanVol

The problem is designing a helmet that protects and that the players do not us as a weapon. Maybe leather with no mask was a better idea after all?

Originally Posted by Spartacavolus

I don't think they studied enough, or didn't on purpose, the effects on protecting the skull but allowing the brain to clunk around on hits. We'll see new equipment, but a lot of the damage has already been done to a group that's been playing for 40 years and the cost of defending against these players and settling with them in the near future is going to be a big, big burden.

As long as it doesn't hurt to hit someone with your head, this will be a problem. As far fetched as it may sound, less protection on the head would probably go a long way towards stopping the usage of the head as a weapon. They can make a helmet now that will absolutely let you knock someone nearly dead, but like Sparta said, it doesn't stop the brain from sloshing which is where the concussion comes from.

[bornbleddinorange]

football will be around as long as america is.

[OCIVol]

Originally Posted by daj2576

I enjoyed your analysis and agree to an extent. However your discussion of contract law is lacking in several areas, and the first is consideration. The courts rarely, if ever, question the idea of sufficient consideration and usually only test if consideration exists. In this case, a scholarship and its intrinsic value in monetary form would most certainly pass the consideration test. I forget whom this quote came from, but courts have long held that consideration is valid if it is more than "a mere peppercorn". The reality is that courts do not want to hinder the freedom of society to enter into contracts, as that is the basis for most of our dealings with each other.

I do agree that the game will continue to morph and change, but I wonder how the NFL would exist longer than college ball if that is the pipeline to the NFL? If kids cannot play football in college due to the danger, would high schools be allowed to play games? If high schoolers are not allowed to play, would middle schoolers be allowed to play? I think that is the second error in your analysis.

You are talking about the same courts who have outright denied banning smoking, to allow for personal freedom. There is no doubt of the connection between smoking and poor health, so even if somehow Junior Seau's brain injuries directly caused his suicide (another proximate causative link nightmare) I doubt you will see an end to football. But what do I know? Interesting debate!

The ol' peppercorn. You are correct, and I should've explained better. It's not that kids will not be allowed to play high school or college football, it's that the schools will no longer have football programs due to liability issues.

[82_VOL_83]

Originally Posted by daj2576

I enjoyed your analysis and agree to an extent. However your discussion of contract law is lacking in several areas, and the first is consideration. The courts rarely, if ever, question the idea of sufficient consideration and usually only test if consideration exists. In this case, a scholarship and its intrinsic value in monetary form would most certainly pass the consideration test. I forget whom this quote came from, but courts have long held that consideration is valid if it is more than "a mere peppercorn". The reality is that courts do not want to hinder the freedom of society to enter into contracts, as that is the basis for most of our dealings with each other.

I do agree that the game will continue to morph and change, but I wonder how the NFL would exist longer than college ball if that is the pipeline to the NFL? If kids cannot play football in college due to the danger, would high schools be allowed to play games? If high schoolers are not allowed to play, would middle schoolers be allowed to play? I think that is the second error in your analysis.

You are talking about the same courts who have outright denied banning smoking, to allow for personal freedom. There is no doubt of the connection between smoking and poor health, so even if somehow Junior Seau's brain injuries directly caused his suicide (another proximate causative link nightmare) I doubt you will see an end to football. But what do I know? Interesting debate!

Nice write up and nice thread OP.

[rheaco1123]

As long as MONEY is coming in, there will be football!

[Spartacavolus]

Originally Posted by OCIVol

The ol' peppercorn. You are correct, and I should've explained better. It's not that kids will not be allowed to play high school or college football, it's that the schools will no longer have football programs due to liability issues.

yep. Insurance and injury coverage will be too much for the schools to handle. Litigations will lead to ridiculous insurance rates and unprotected kids.

I could even see where parents might be required to get specific insurance to let their kids play football, which would weed out a ton of people.

[Spartacavolus]

I don't think we'll see peewee football in a couple of years. It will be the first one cut.

[JokermanVol]

If the parents had to get insurance football would be done.