Tyler Sash Mom speaks about his struggles

[tm3308]

Everyone knows the risks, and if you don't, that's pretty sad because its obvious. Everyone has a right to their own opinion and a right to make their own decision whether to let their kids play football. The answer isn't to eliminate the sport. The safety issues aren't as detrimental as people make it out to be IMO.

In fact, the new targeting rule is a joke. It's honestly one of the worst rules I think the NCAA has ever implemented. There is no accountability. I don't think I watched a single bowl game where there wasn't a targeting penalty, and most were absolutely bogus.

As a coach, I have no idea how you teach a kid how to tackle anymore, I really don't. Sports in general are becoming so soft and it's really painful to watch. I'm all for safety but you also have to be real and fix the rule. Some of these refs are keeping kids out of games for a completely legal hit that caused absolutely no harm to the other player, and refs are never held accountable.

The risks were hardly clearly 16 years ago when Sash first put on the pads, and it wasn't much clearer during his career at Iowa. Concussions were something you walked off, or maybe you missed the rest of the game and came back ready for practice on Monday. You came in knowing you might break bones or tear ligaments. But hardly anyone knew just how significant the risk could be with regards to the brain. As for whether this is all overblown or not, I guess I would ask how high the body count needs to be before you'd agree is a pretty big ******* deal? Keep in mind that Mike Webster was only the first to have been diagnosed with the disease; that doesn't mean he was the first to have it. I'd bet the house that there have been countless others who have suffered from this and were never diagnosed because nobody thought to consider that they were suffering from serious brain damage, and thus those players' brains were never examined.

And the biggest issue is that people don't seem to grasp that it's not about the helmet-to-helmet hits. Those are dangerous, for sure. But just as many concussions are caused from helmet-to-turf hits, and the sub-concussive blows in the trenches absolutely add up over time. There's no rule change that's going to fix that, and we are a long, long way from any equipment that will make any kind of meaningful difference.

The game will likely never disappear completely. But it's not going to remain the king of American sports forever. NFL players retiring (or at least considering it) at an earlier age and parents beginning to question whether their kids should play is what's happening right now. That's a trend that, barring some kind of scientific miracle, is unlikely to turn around over time. It's only just starting to snowball.

 

[westender]

I think the end of high school football is near.

At some point, a high school kid will develop problems down the road, and a lawsuit will happen, and that will start the end of high school football.

Just a matter of time.

College and NFL is a different beast, of course.

Not sure why his mom says she wants, "justice" though. The guy still chose to play football in college and the NFL.

There has to be a component to this that makes certain individuals more susceptible to it than others. Look at some other players who took brutal hits and suffered concussions that don't have the symptoms. Maybe they will find a gene that if you have that and you get concussions it makes you more susceptible to this CTE. Other people's brains just might heal better than others if they have certain genes. I don't understand how Terry Bradshaw can even speak now if everyone gets this from taking hits.

 

[homes]

That's the thing, though. The downfall of football is going to happen from below, not at the top.

The NFL isn't going to keep going (at least in any way resembling the NFL now) without high school football. I honestly think you're going to see declining numbers of football players (already do) at the junior club level and high school, and that can only translate into the NCAA and NFL. Participation in HS is down 2.5 percent since 2008, and that was before the CTE stuff started being made aware. The generation coming up in the next few years are going to be the ones with informed parents and it's only going to get worse.

Look at boxing. for 60 plus years it was one of the biggest sports there was. 99% of people can't name one boxer since Lennox Lewis retired in 2004, and only hardcore sports fans have even heard of Mayweather and Pacquiao. Yes, part of that is MMA, but ask Freddy Roach if youngsters should box.

You're viewing this through the prism of middle class suburbia.

 

[Jonrn]

Football is too big to fail at this point. If boxing and UFC are still around, football will stay. The real question is whether the quality of the game will suffer as elite young athletes choose other sports. Football will be around in 30 years, but it won't be the same juggernaut it is now.

 

[tm3308]

You're viewing this through the prism of middle class suburbia.

Because inner city kids just looking for a way out make up 90% of everyone who plays football at the college and NFL levels.

 

[tm3308]

Football is too big to fail at this point. If boxing and UFC are still around, football will stay. The real question is whether the quality of the game will suffer as elite young athletes choose other sports. Football will be around in 30 years, but it won't be the same juggernaut it is now.

While I agree with this, football and boxing isn't an apples to apples comparison. Boxing declined because people found sports that were more entertaining (mainly football), not major safety issues.

 

[lightning1]

To each his own. I don't understand the distinction you're making between college football and football at every other level.

College football is the only one I watch. So, there is no distinction.

 

[lightning1]

You're viewing this through the prism of middle class suburbia.

I don't think he is. How many multi-million dollar lawsuits can an inner city school system absorb before they stop becoming insurable? 1? 2?

 

[homes]

Because inner city kids just looking for a way out make up 90% of everyone who plays football at the college and NFL levels.

I think you're trying to be sarcastic, but you're missing the point.

 

[Fryowa]

There has to be a component to this that makes certain individuals more susceptible to it than others. Look at some other players who took brutal hits and suffered concussions that don't have the symptoms. Maybe they will find a gene that if you have that and you get concussions it makes you more susceptible to this CTE. Other people's brains just might heal better than others if they have certain genes. I don't understand how Terry Bradshaw can even speak now if everyone gets this from taking hits.

Speaking is just one part of it.

How do we know he doesn't go to the store and forget what he was supposed to get? How do we know if he doesn't sleep at night, or get headaches all the time? How do we know if he has anger problems?

To take it a step further, Bradshaw is well documented as admitting he has a lot of CTE-related symptoms and problems, and he also said if he had a son right now he wouldn't let him play football:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...ry-bradshaw-wouldnt-let-son-play-football-now

http://awfulannouncing.com/the-locker/terry-bradshaw-had-a-moment-on-fox-nfl-sunday.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2013/11/07/terry-bradshaw-memory-loss-fox-steelers/3469895/

You'll also notice he is quoted as saying the NFL won't be around in the same form 10-15 years from now.

 

[Fryowa]

You're viewing this through the prism of middle class suburbia.

The "middle class suburbia" and "first-world problem" retort is getting a bit cliche, no?

By your logic, if football was eliminated from schools because of CTE-related lawsuits, then they'd still let inner-city kids from broken homes play because it's their only chance? And thus the NFL isn't going anywhere?

 

[homes]

The "middle class suburbia" and "first-world problem" retort is getting a bit cliche, no?

By your logic, if football was eliminated from schools because of CTE-related lawsuits, then they'd still let inner-city kids from broken homes play because it's their only chance? And thus the NFL isn't going anywhere?

That's your logic, not mine. You made several leaps to get to your hypothetical. If football was eliminated, as you write, due to CTE related lawsuits, then no one would be playing football. Why would exceptions be made to that rule?

 

[tm3308]

That's your logic, not mine. You made several leaps to get to your hypothetical. If football was eliminated, as you write, due to CTE related lawsuits, then no one would be playing football. Why would exceptions be made to that rule?

Again, Fyrowa and I made the only logical assumption based on how you presented your point. Please elaborate on why the fact that we're viewing this through the prism of middle class suburbia matters.

 

[lightning1]

All school systems are insured against injury related lawsuits. When the claims outweigh the deductible...

 

[lightning1]

As crazy as it sounds, if Mrs. Sash wanted to make a difference, a lawsuit to bankrupt the local school system would do just that.

 

[HawkInATX]

To those saying "targeting rule is BS:"
- we know the risks every time we get into a car, yet we still have traffic laws, laws against drinking and driving and laws against using a car as a weapon. Do those laws always get applied appropriately? No. But it doesn't mean the law (or the targeting rule) is patently wrong.

To those saying "they knew the risks:"
-Only the most recent (in the last 3-5 years) groups of kids playing football knew the full risks regarding CTE. And even now, we still aren't fully aware of them. At first we thought it was just concussions and big hits that were a contributing factor. Now we know it's also sub-concussive, repeated hits. What else will we know tomorrow?

What we do know right now is that the sport is more dangerous than we knew 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. And that those dangers extended past the end of a football career and weren't just physical and don't just affect the person with CTE but everybody around them.

The real point here is that if we're going to say "the players know the risks," it means we have a responsibility to actually KNOW the risks completely. Otherwise we're just telling these kids a portion, in which case they DON'T know the risks. It also means that we have a responsibility, if we want the sport to continue, to make every effort to mitigate those risks where possible. The NCAA and the NFL and the universities and the teams and the players and we spectators and the coaches all have a duty to back up what we say in the form of research and development and teaching and learning.

Knowing the risks doesn't mean we have to bury our heads in the sand.

 

[Fryowa]

That's your logic, not mine. You made several leaps to get to your hypothetical. If football was eliminated, as you write, due to CTE related lawsuits, then no one would be playing football. Why would exceptions be made to that rule?

In a nutshell, yes, that's what I'm saying. If you remove football in high school then it no longer exists in higher levels.

My argument was this...

If people or entities somehow won judgments against high schools or universities, then it's reasonable to assume (and highly likely) that other high schools or universities would take note of that and stop offering football. Where does the NFL get it's players? From colleges. Where do colleges get their players? From high schools.

You mentioning "the prism of middle class suburbia" does nothing but derail the conversation by suggesting that economic status has anything to do with the subject. Are you of the opinion that inner-city high schools will keep the sport because it's the only way a child from a broken home of gang banger parents can make it?

Don't just take the easy way out and try to turn reasonable debate into some kind of class struggle where "the man" is trying to keep the po' kids down.

 

[Fryowa]

That's your logic, not mine. You made several leaps to get to your hypothetical. If football was eliminated, as you write, due to CTE related lawsuits, then no one would be playing football. Why would exceptions be made to that rule?

In a nutshell, yes, that's what I'm saying. If you remove football in high school then it no longer exists in higher levels.

My argument was this...

If people or entities somehow won judgments against high schools or universities, then it's reasonable to assume (and highly likely) that other high schools or universities would take note of that and stop offering football. Where does the NFL get it's players? From colleges. Where do colleges get their players? From high schools.

You mentioning "the prism of middle class suburbia" does nothing but derail the conversation by suggesting that economic status has anything to do with the subject. Are you of the opinion that inner-city high schools will keep the sport because it's the only way a child from a broken home of gang banger parents can make it?

Don't just take the easy way out and try to turn reasonable debate into some kind of class struggle where "the man" is trying to keep the po' kids down.

 

[homes]

Again, Fyrowa and I made the only logical assumption based on how you presented your point. Please elaborate on why the fact that we're viewing this through the prism of middle class suburbia matters.

The only logical assumption? You injected "inner city" into the discussion, not me. Your world view appears more narrow than mine.

 

[Chickenlounge]