My son, now a freshman in college, played football in 4th, 5th and 6th grade. He was pretty good at it, and he even attended a football camp in the summer before 7th grade in preparation for middle school football. Due to circumstances beyond his control (his school didn’t field a football team, and he was not able to play in a neighboring program), he never got to play. He turned his attention to interscholatic in cross-country for the next six years, and had a pretty run (“run” — get it?) at it, being part of two state championship teams, and serving as captain both his junior and senior years.
But, I confess, he loved playing football and I loved watching him play and I loved coaching him. On the other hand, knowing what I know now about the long-term effect of concussion, would I encourage him to play now? Good question.
You probably read that the NFL recently entered in a settlement with about 4,500 former players that will provide $765 million for concussion-related medical care and research. While the terms of the settlement specifically provide that the NFL will not concede that it is liable in any way for any injury (or, for that matter, that any of the plaintiffs sustained any football-related injuries), it allows the NFL to keep sealed the files they have on studies conducted on the NFL’s behalf linking head injuries to long-term neurological damage.
The settlement is the latest in a series of developments that have led me to question whether the good of football (and, believe me, there is a lot of good) outweighs the bad (of which there is also, alas, a fair amount). I was excited for my son as the 7th-grade football season approached, and shared his disappointment when he was unable to play. In retrospect, however, I can’t help but be pleased that he ended up becoming a successful runner. One thing he’ll never have to worry about is whether the blows to the head he otherwise would have sustained over the course of a middle- and high-school football career would have long-term effects.