Archive for the ‘football’ Category

Concussions, Cigarettes, and Liability: The Cover-Up is Worse than the “Crime”

July 27th, 2011 2 comments

In my latest piece for Slate, I look closely at the complaint recently filed by a group (75!!) of former NFL players against the league and the manufacturers of the helmets the players wore.

The comparison to tobacco is this: the cover-up (danger of long-term consequences of even mild concussions for the NFL, the health risks and addictive nature of tobacco for the cigarette companies) is usually worse than the crime. Everyone knows this, and at least pays lip service to it, but it continues as a catch phrase because it still happens…again and again.

They’ve moved the piece up near the top (in the band of stories just below the headline group), which is a first for me. It would help if you’d wander over there and “like” (or even better, comment) on the piece.

The NFL on Defense

February 2nd, 2011 No comments

I’m now officially a contributor to Slate! Here’s my latest article, where I assess the prospects of suits against the NFL for failing to disclose the long-term neurological consequence of repeated head injuries.

Happy Super Bowl!

What’s Wrong with CBS, the Super Bowl, and Football

January 29th, 2010 No comments

This will be the official Grouch Post for January. One of them, anyway.

Maybe you’ve heard by now about CBS’s decisions on ads for the Super Bowl. They’ve decided to “relax” their policy against advocacy ads to allow one from Focus on the Family that uses NFL star Tim Tebow and his mother to condemn  abortion. (The message: “He wasn’t aborted! Therefore no one should be, ever!” What were you expecting in thirty seconds, sophistication?) It turns out that their policy had been evolving, but we just didn’t know it until now. Very convenient.

Meanwhile, an ad from an entity known as ManCrunch has been rejected, with the following explanation: “the creative is not within the Network’s Broadcast Standards for Super Bowl Sunday.” It might help to know what those standards are, but CBS isn’t saying.  Here’s the rejected video:

No, the Super Bowl isn’t being aired on April 1 this year. There’s a great deal that can be said about CBS’s decision. I begin with the obvious question: Would they have rejected a similar dating service ad for an opposite-sex couple? But that’s the easy observation. I’ll bet that the real reason had something to do with the way the ad brings to the surface the simmering homoeroticism in male contact sports (and here extended to the jersey-wearing couch potatoes who watch them).

I can’t say I’m sorry to see the ad go, though. I have no idea why a gay dating site would want to run this ad. The two guys don’t seem to know they’re even gay until they find their hands together in the chip bowl (yuck, btw). Worse, it closes with a pan over to the flummoxed friend who, one thinks, might be checking out other Super Bowl parties within the next few minutes. And do not get me started about the production values. I’m not the first to suggest that ManCrunch is offended like a fox, as they (never) say. They couldn’t have expected CBS to actually run this thing; but now they’re getting tons of free publicity. My tastless ad submission for this blogsite will soon follow.

As the Janet Jackson warbdrobe malfunction moment that will live forever reminds us, the Super Bowl has long been an uneasy mix of family entertainment, statement on the current culture, and — lest we forget — controlled violence.

It’s this violence that makes me so not a fan of professional football. As I’ve written before, distressing numbers of pro football players sustain long-term neurological and physical problems,  often leading to early death and disability. (One might say, uncharitably, that it’s too bad that Tim Tebow’s mom’s concerns about her son don’t seem to extend to his life after football.)  And watching the level of aggression that leads to such serious issues is itself a producer of violence: Domestic violence, fueled by alcohol and the negative emotions sustained by the fans of the losing team, spikes on Super Bowl Sunday. Enjoy the game, everyone!

“Lmao. U don’t stop my checks.”

October 30th, 2009 1 comment

I know my readership includes many fans of pro football. After reading this post, I invite you to tell me why you support this sport.

Whether or not you’re a fan, you’ve by now likely heard of the flap concerning Larry Johnson, a successful Kansas City Chiefs running back. After yet another crushing loss last weekend, Johnson “tweeted” his disrespect for the team’s coach. His nasty provocation drew responses from some outraged “followers,” who couldn’t help pointing out Johnson’s history of violent run-ins with the law (including domestic violence, throwing a drink at a woman in a nightclub, and pushing another woman’s head).

Johnson decided, in that way that Twitter seems to have been created to foster, to kill the messenger. According to outsports (much of the rest of the blogosphere has maddening in its reserve), Johnson responded as follows:

“[T]hink bout a clever diss then that wit ur fag pic. Christopher street boy. Is what us east coast cats call u.”

Actually, this troubles me less than the rest of the story. I don’t expect civility (or…anything) from Twitter exchanges, and one might charitably laugh this off as part of a nasty, fleeting exchange. But then Johnson closed his tweet with this epigram:

“Make me regret it. Lmao (“Laugh my ass off”). U don’t stop my checks. Lmao. So ‘tweet’ away.”

U don’t stop my checks. That’s really it, isn’t it? Translation: “I make the big money, and I’m the sh*t,1 so I’m above your criticism (and the law itself.)” And of course the NFL enables this sort of thing: not so much by its reaction to the event (Johnson received a two-week suspension, which will  only result in one missed game because of a “bye” week), but by its ceaseless glorification of these men who, for several hours each Sunday, collide with each other with force sufficient to…I’m coming to that.

Why wouldn’t Johnson, along with every other major football star, feel himself entitled to do whatever he wants, including this follow-up with the press the very next day: “Get your faggot asses out of here.”

Of course, the obligatory acts of contrition followed, but it was really no apology. It began: “I  did not intend to offend anyone…” Are there responsibility-acceptance programs alongside those in anger-management? (Inexplicably, GLAAD applauded the statement.)

But it’s  the NFL that has the last laugh, not the unrepentant players. For all pro football players strike a Faustian bargain: A few years of glory and almost limitless license, in exchange for a shorter life — and a cognitively and physically crippled one, at that. In this New Yorker article, Malcolm Gladwell raises this provocative question: How different are pro football and dogfighting, really? Is Michael Vick’s conduct (which ranks high on the reprehensibility scale, to be sure) any worse than what the NFL, and indirectly, millions upon millions of fans enable each week? Let’s end with this somewhat lengthy excerpt from the article, where Gladwell considers the case of now-retired offensive lineman Kyle Turley. Then let’s hear from the defenders of football:

He knew all the stories about former football players. Mike Webster, the longtime Pittsburgh Steeler and one of the greatest players in N.F.L. history, ended his life a recluse, sleeping on the floor of the Pittsburgh Amtrak station. Another former Pittsburgh Steeler, Terry Long, drifted into chaos and killed himself four years ago by drinking antifreeze. Andre Waters, a former defensive back for the Philadelphia Eagles, sank into depression and pleaded with his girlfriend—“I need help, somebody help me”—before shooting himself in the head. There were men with aching knees and backs and hands, from all those years of playing football. But their real problem was with their heads, the one part of their body that got hit over and over again.

“Lately, I’ve tried to break it down,” Turley said. “I remember, every season, multiple occasions where I’d hit someone so hard that my eyes went cross-eyed, and they wouldn’t come uncrossed for a full series of plays. You are just out there, trying to hit the guy in the middle, because there are three of them. You don’t remember much. There are the cases where you hit a guy and you’d get into a collision where everything goes off. You’re dazed. And there are the others where you are involved in a big, long drive. You start on your own five-yard line, and drive all the way down the field—fifteen, eighteen plays in a row sometimes. Every play: collision, collision, collision. By the time you get to the other end of the field, you’re seeing spots. You feel like you are going to black out. Literally, these white explosions—boom, boom, boom—lights getting dimmer and brighter, dimmer and brighter.”

“Then, there was the time when I got knocked unconscious. That was in St. Louis, in 2003. My wife said that I was out a minute or two on the field. But I was gone for about four hours after that….”

“They cleared me for practice that Thursday. I probably shouldn’t have. I don’t know what damage I did from that, because my head was really hurting. But when you’re coming off an injury you’re frustrated. I wanted to play the next game. I was just so mad that this happened to me that I’m overdoing it….That’s football. You’re told either that you’re hurt or that you’re injured. There is no middle ground. If you are hurt, you can play. If you are injured, you can’t, and the line is whether you can walk and if you can put on a helmet and pads.”

  1. Johnson apparently is closing in on a Chiefs’ career rushing record, although that’s not much better than closing in a Washington Nationals record in baseball.