|
Post by davecisar on Feb 15, 2017 10:10:44 GMT -6
This is a study on flag vs tackle: journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2325967116686784#pq=X2hXJCThe Conclusion: "Rates of injury in youth football are relatively low. Youth flag football has a higher injury rate than tackle football. A significantly different rate of severe injury or concussion between tackle and flag football was not identified, but players did return to play more slowly after an injury in the tackle leagues than they did in the flag league. Furthermore, we cannot conclude that youth flag football is a safer alternative to youth tackle football"
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Feb 15, 2017 11:02:06 GMT -6
If "safety" is the big issue on getting kids in flag vs tackle The data doesnt support it
|
|
|
Post by fballcoachg on Feb 15, 2017 19:12:50 GMT -6
But perception does and that is what a lot of this is about. Also, I believe many are advocating flag for the fun factor at a younger age. Whether it's real or not, many high school coaches see kids that got "run off" by playing youth tackle and some of the guys that coach it, searching for an alternative to keep kids involved.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 15, 2017 20:32:28 GMT -6
But perception does and that is what a lot of this is about. Also, I believe many are advocating flag for the fun factor at a younger age. Whether it's real or not, many high school coaches see kids that got "run off" by playing youth tackle and some of the guys that coach it, searching for an alternative to keep kids involved. And they think there aren't bad or discouraging coaches in youth flag football?
|
|
|
Post by fballcoachg on Feb 15, 2017 20:44:50 GMT -6
But perception does and that is what a lot of this is about. Also, I believe many are advocating flag for the fun factor at a younger age. Whether it's real or not, many high school coaches see kids that got "run off" by playing youth tackle and some of the guys that coach it, searching for an alternative to keep kids involved. And they think there aren't bad or discouraging coaches in youth flag football? There are bad and discouraging coaches everywhere, no one has ever said that's not the case. they are more detrimental/discouraging at younger ages some of the run off is from coaches some is from not having fun, if everyone is having this decline in participation why not introduce an idea and see if it can be a solution? That's what many see flag as, an alternative to try and keep kids out (through fun, involvement, or perception of safety).
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 15, 2017 21:05:28 GMT -6
And they think there aren't bad or discouraging coaches in youth flag football? There are bad and discouraging coaches everywhere, no one has ever said that's not the case. they are more detrimental/discouraging at younger ages some of the run off is from coaches some is from not having fun, if everyone is having this decline in participation why not introduce an idea and see if it can be a solution? That's what many see flag as, an alternative to try and keep kids out (through fun, involvement, or perception of safety). Is there a shortage of flag or touch football opportunities for children & teens? In how many parks do you not see them playing those games for many months of the year? I see plenty of those, so I don't see a vast opportunity for expansion there.
If you wanted to promote a near-thing substitute for tackle football for children, it'd seem there'd be far more opp'ty for expansion in rugby. But it's hard to believe that adults who are haunted by the fear of concussions in children would turn around and say of rugby, "Oh, that's different, that's OK." (Although a century ago when the concern was over injury danger in varsity football, there was a trend back toward rugby in Calif. for a few yrs., promoted as a safe alternative.)
|
|
|
Post by macdiiddy on Feb 24, 2017 10:37:32 GMT -6
While my confirmation bias would love to just read the headline and say absolutly this study is perfect, it isn't.
As much as they criticized other studies for having too small of a sample size, I do not think their population is nearly high enough to try and draw a relationship between the two groups.
Participants Three youth football leagues (2 tackle leagues and 1 flag league) with a total of 3794 players (3525 tackle football players and 269 flag football players) participated in this prospective cohort study.
The Tackle football leagues also spanned from 2nd grade to 7th grade. And as reported in the study there are far less injures in sub 6th grade football.
My point is I wouldn't take this to the bank and use this as the rock to build this argument around until more studies with preferably bigger population sizes with a more narrow scope (i.e. just 7th graders) comes out.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Feb 24, 2017 11:27:39 GMT -6
You're not wrong, there are issues with the study. But it's currently one of the few pieces available for the puzzle. We have the anecdotal observations of thousands of youth football coaches - almost all volunteers with no financial stake in the argument - that youth football is safer than many of the alternatives touted out there. And the Mayo Clinic study that injuries become more common and severe as kids age and move into HS.
And this is a LOT more than the anti-youth football crowd has; there is no data supporting their arguments whatsoever.
Realistically, it all comes down to perception anyway. We will not know anything about whether sub-concussive head trauma is an issue for youth sports until there is a significant breakthrough in medical technology. Everything else is just opinion and noise. And those opinions aren't really even educated opinions - there's just no data out there to be educated on. What we don't know dwarfs what we do know. NOBODY is an "expert" in this stuff - the knowledge simply isn't there to be learned.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 24, 2017 22:06:45 GMT -6
Realistically, it all comes down to perception anyway. We will not know anything about whether sub-concussive head trauma is an issue for youth sports until there is a significant breakthrough in medical technology. Everything else is just opinion and noise. And those opinions aren't really even educated opinions - there's just no data out there to be educated on. What we don't know dwarfs what we do know. NOBODY is an "expert" in this stuff - the knowledge simply isn't there to be learned. The same can be said for the protocols regarding patients who've been concussed. There's nothing behind them except, well, a committee agreed on this.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Feb 27, 2017 7:19:47 GMT -6
Realistically, it all comes down to perception anyway. We will not know anything about whether sub-concussive head trauma is an issue for youth sports until there is a significant breakthrough in medical technology. Everything else is just opinion and noise. And those opinions aren't really even educated opinions - there's just no data out there to be educated on. What we don't know dwarfs what we do know. NOBODY is an "expert" in this stuff - the knowledge simply isn't there to be learned. The same can be said for the protocols regarding patients who've been concussed. There's nothing behind them except, well, a committee agreed on this. That's actually what I'm referring to. NOBODY is an expert in youth concussions or sub-concussive trauma, such expertise doesn't exist. There's just nothing out there whatsoever because we simply don't have the medical technology to figure anything out. It's all observation based, and every one of us can do that just as well as some "expert" can...
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Feb 27, 2017 7:34:15 GMT -6
Club rugby has grown around my area. Parents love it.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Feb 27, 2017 7:59:00 GMT -6
My last post didn't quite come out right.
Certainly there are learned medical and scientific professionals who have studied the anecdotal evidence and come to some educated conclusions that we would be wise to pay attention to. I'm all in favor of some level of overreaction to something like this when the stakes are so high.
That said, I am against an extreme reaction that isn't based on anything but fear and hysteria. There is simply nothing out there that favors a ban of youth football over banning all football for individuals under 18 years old. That fact is, every piece of safety data I've seen would supports banning HS football to a greater degree than banning youth football. And I'm not for that either. I've lived it. I'm a player safety coach, been through all the USA football trainings and certifications, etc. and so forth. I'm a Dad whose son had 3 concussions between 8th and 10th grade. And made a decision based on his overall well-being to keep him in football despite that. Right decision? For now (he's 19 and soph in college), yes, long-term I have no idea.
That's all we can do - use the information we have and make the best decisions we can about life. Our decision - me, my wife, and my son - was that the good brought by football outweighed the very real risks. Others may make a different decision, and that's fine. But we should have the option to make that decision, absent more compelling data to act on.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 27, 2017 11:50:54 GMT -6
I've coached youth football a few times in my career and never had an issue with concussions. The kids don't generally generate enough force really wallop each other. Proper tackling form turns into a chick fight at the LOS and proper tackling form turns in popping, wrapping and dragging a guy to the ground.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 27, 2017 13:53:49 GMT -6
Club rugby has grown around my area. Parents love it. Where's your area, and what ages? I'm interested not only as a former rugger, but also because I've fantasized about what assemblyman Benedetto would think if he got his ban enacted & then all the youth football clubs in NY state converted to rugby. Actually I've thought more about how it'd be if the kids kept playing football, and just all the adult supervision went away. Or how it'd be if the clubs realized "tackle football" was undefined in the bill, and made some minor tweak to their game and said, "What we play isn't tackle football." And if Benedetto said it applied to any game with tackling, & then found out that meant it also outlawed adult-supervised youth rugby, soccer, wrestling, etc. Of course this is all just fantasy, because no type of adult-supervised (let alone unsupervised) contact sport has ever been, or ever will be, made illegal. If football goes away, it won't be because of statutes.
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Feb 27, 2017 16:38:50 GMT -6
Area north of Albany. It's not growing like crazy but I think they play @ 8 teams. There wasn't any of it a few years ago.
|
|