|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Sept 19, 2020 10:57:22 GMT -6
*Allegedly* (we still do not have enough data to say one way or the other), a player being involved in repeated collisions in football can contribute to the player developing CTE.
*Allegedly*, the collisions that can contribute to a player developing CTE include not just those that are a part of a tackle (that's what most people have been hung up on, and think of when they think of the CTE issue), but also those which are a part of offensive blockers engaging defenders, and especially collisions between offensive and defensive players in the trenches.
3 questions for you all; try to answer them the best you can with the understanding that A) we are working with limited scientific data, B) you are not medical experts (unless otherwise noted), and C) you are NOT offering advice or instruction in any way, but are just giving what you think is your best answers to these questions
Question 1) At the high school level, do you think that any collisions that happen during pass blocking (EXCLUDING play action blocking [as that is usually run blocking], blocking schemes which are a part of plays that move the QB outside the pocket, and screen plays, and INCLUDING draw blocking) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE?
Question 2) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking, that involve players on the move for a significant amount of time before engaging in the block (such as a lineman pulling to block the "sidewalk", "alley", or "wall", a back running from the backfield to the perimeter to block a defender, a receiver running downfield and blocking a defender after a forward pass is thrown, etc), on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE?
Question 3) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking without offensive blockers gaining much speed (such as perimeter run blocking, blocking a corner on a screen, etc) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE?
Keep in mind that with the three above questions, I am asking about this concerning not just the offensive players initiating and making the block, but also the defensive players that the offensive players are attempting to block.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Sept 19, 2020 14:48:27 GMT -6
*Allegedly* (we still do not have enough data to say one way or the other), a player being involved in repeated collisions in football can contribute to the player developing CTE. *Allegedly*, the collisions that can contribute to a player developing CTE include not just those that are a part of a tackle (that's what most people have been hung up on, and think of when they think of the CTE issue), but also those which are a part of offensive blockers engaging defenders, and especially collisions between offensive and defensive players in the trenches. 3 questions for you all; try to answer them the best you can with the understanding that A) we are working with limited scientific data, B) you are not medical experts (unless otherwise noted), and C) you are NOT offering advice or instruction in any way, but are just giving what you think is your best answers to these questions Question 1) At the high school level, do you think that any collisions that happen during pass blocking (EXCLUDING play action blocking [as that is usually run blocking], blocking schemes which are a part of plays that move the QB outside the pocket, and screen plays, and INCLUDING draw blocking) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 2) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking, that involve players on the move for a significant amount of time before engaging in the block (such as a lineman pulling to block the "sidewalk", "alley", or "wall", a back running from the backfield to the perimeter to block a defender, a receiver running downfield and blocking a defender after a forward pass is thrown, etc), on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 3) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking without offensive blockers gaining much speed (such as perimeter run blocking, blocking a corner on a screen, etc) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Keep in mind that with the three above questions, I am asking about this concerning not just the offensive players initiating and making the block, but also the defensive players that the offensive players are attempting to block. I think you are trying to view this as is there is a magical bright line level that is safe, and that simply isn't going to be the case. Rattling the brain is not a good thing. That is all that we can be almost certain off. With regards to football and CTE I think an analogy can be made to nutrition and the standard American Diet. If Americans started to eat whole food plant based diets at the conclusion of HS, I am fairly certain that the incidences of coronary artery disease, Type II diabetes and hypertension would be far less prevalent later in life just as the incidences of CTE in men who stopped playing football at the HS age or lower appear to be far lower than those whose who continue their participation in the sport. Essentially, eating whoppers and fries 2 to 3 times a week during your teen years and stopping at 18 has a much lower likelyhood of leading to health issues than continuing to do so until you are 35. So with that in mind to answer your questions : 1) If pass protection is executed correctly, there is less brain rattling. That combined with the beliefs expressed above probably point it being a minimally risky behavior if stopped at the age of 17/18. 2) Increased force at collision would lead to more brain rattling. So that behavior is probably more risky than pass protection, however again it seems that if such collisions stop relatively early in life, the risk seems to be minimal. 3) Blocks with minimal force due to lack of speed and that do not involve contact to the head probably present minimal risk, particularly if the activity stops at an earlier point in life. |
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Sept 19, 2020 17:58:48 GMT -6
*Allegedly* (we still do not have enough data to say one way or the other), a player being involved in repeated collisions in football can contribute to the player developing CTE. *Allegedly*, the collisions that can contribute to a player developing CTE include not just those that are a part of a tackle (that's what most people have been hung up on, and think of when they think of the CTE issue), but also those which are a part of offensive blockers engaging defenders, and especially collisions between offensive and defensive players in the trenches. 3 questions for you all; try to answer them the best you can with the understanding that A) we are working with limited scientific data, B) you are not medical experts (unless otherwise noted), and C) you are NOT offering advice or instruction in any way, but are just giving what you think is your best answers to these questions Question 1) At the high school level, do you think that any collisions that happen during pass blocking (EXCLUDING play action blocking [as that is usually run blocking], blocking schemes which are a part of plays that move the QB outside the pocket, and screen plays, and INCLUDING draw blocking) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 2) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking, that involve players on the move for a significant amount of time before engaging in the block (such as a lineman pulling to block the "sidewalk", "alley", or "wall", a back running from the backfield to the perimeter to block a defender, a receiver running downfield and blocking a defender after a forward pass is thrown, etc), on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 3) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking without offensive blockers gaining much speed (such as perimeter run blocking, blocking a corner on a screen, etc) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Keep in mind that with the three above questions, I am asking about this concerning not just the offensive players initiating and making the block, but also the defensive players that the offensive players are attempting to block. I think you are trying to view this as is there is a magical bright line level that is safe, and that simply isn't going to be the case. Rattling the brain is not a good thing. That is all that we can be almost certain off. With regards to football and CTE I think an analogy can be made to nutrition and the standard American Diet. If Americans started to eat whole food plant based diets at the conclusion of HS, I am fairly certain that the incidences of coronary artery disease, Type II diabetes and hypertension would be far less prevalent later in life just as the incidences of CTE in men who stopped playing football at the HS age or lower appear to be far lower than those whose who continue their participation in the sport. Essentially, eating whoppers and fries 2 to 3 times a week during your teen years and stopping at 18 has a much lower likelyhood of leading to health issues than continuing to do so until you are 35. So with that in mind to answer your questions : 1) If pass protection is executed correctly, there is less brain rattling. That combined with the beliefs expressed above probably point it being a minimally risky behavior if stopped at the age of 17/18. 2) Increased force at collision would lead to more brain rattling. So that behavior is probably more risky than pass protection, however again it seems that if such collisions stop relatively early in life, the risk seems to be minimal. 3) Blocks with minimal force due to lack of speed and that do not involve contact to the head probably present minimal risk, particularly if the activity stops at an earlier point in life. Thanks for your input! I like your point about the lack of a sharp line. |
|
|
|
Post by pvogel on Sept 19, 2020 20:25:52 GMT -6
Question 1) At the high school level, do you think that any collisions that happen during pass blocking (EXCLUDING play action blocking [as that is usually run blocking], blocking schemes which are a part of plays that move the QB outside the pocket, and screen plays, and INCLUDING draw blocking) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 3) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking without offensive blockers gaining much speed (such as perimeter run blocking, blocking a corner on a screen, etc) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? I believe that one of the most dangerous plays in HS football is a RB picking up a blitzing LB. Poor kid has to just take a dude running with a 7+ yd head start. And I believe that if our concern is head injuries (which is a fair and legitimate concern) then we should consider allowing college cutting rules. But that belief gets discussed about as much as eliminating the penny and paper dollar. And no one seems to care or want to listen to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2020 6:06:21 GMT -6
Question 1) At the high school level, do you think that any collisions that happen during pass blocking (EXCLUDING play action blocking [as that is usually run blocking], blocking schemes which are a part of plays that move the QB outside the pocket, and screen plays, and INCLUDING draw blocking) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 3) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking without offensive blockers gaining much speed (such as perimeter run blocking, blocking a corner on a screen, etc) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? I believe that one of the most dangerous plays in HS football is a RB picking up a blitzing LB. Poor kid has to just take a dude running with a 7+ yd head start. And I believe that if our concern is head injuries (which is a fair and legitimate concern) then we should consider allowing college cutting rules. But that belief gets discussed about as much as eliminating the penny and paper dollar. And no one seems to care or want to listen to me. We have already learned that the concussion thing is only an obstacle to playing, much like the beer, corona. |
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Sept 20, 2020 9:22:04 GMT -6
Question 1) At the high school level, do you think that any collisions that happen during pass blocking (EXCLUDING play action blocking [as that is usually run blocking], blocking schemes which are a part of plays that move the QB outside the pocket, and screen plays, and INCLUDING draw blocking) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? Question 3) At the high school level, do you think that collisions that happen during blocking without offensive blockers gaining much speed (such as perimeter run blocking, blocking a corner on a screen, etc) on a regular basis are severe enough to contribute to players developing CTE? I believe that one of the most dangerous plays in HS football is a RB picking up a blitzing LB. Poor kid has to just take a dude running with a 7+ yd head start. And I believe that if our concern is head injuries (which is a fair and legitimate concern) then we should consider allowing college cutting rules. But that belief gets discussed about as much as eliminating the penny and paper dollar. And no one seems to care or want to listen to me. Well, I for one care and am willing to listen! Haha. Good point about the RB picking up a pass rusher. And, in MY OPINION, it doesn't matter if head contact is made or not, a collision with enough force involved can cause the brain to smack against the inside of the skull for one or all players involved in that collision. Thanks for your input! |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Sept 21, 2020 0:30:14 GMT -6
This is one of those things where the answers for now would have to be based on common sense, which unfortunately doesn't always make actual sense.
It stands to reason that the most likely hits to cause someone's head to bobble are hits high on that person's body when that person doesn't have much time seeing the hit coming. Pass blocking, even when the rush starts from some distance away, both players involved can usually anticipate the hit pretty well.
Hits that occur downfield, whether initiated by the attacker or defender, do often occur with one player having a long run into contact, but the reason the head bobbles is not so much that, but rather that whoever's relatively stationary is less likely to see the hit coming. So, for example, when an end or flanker crosses into the middle at linebacker level and either throws a block or takes a hit in being collisioned off a pass route, whichever player takes the hit is likely looking elsewhere.
By contrast, hits received low on the body don't as often rattle the head, even if they're of a blind side nature. The point of contact being far from the neck means there's that much more that the neck joints can "give" before transmitting the impact to the head. Hit low enough and you can chop the legs out while the upper body has hardly any internal torque applied to it at all; that is, the neck stays in the same relationship to the shoulders.
However, people now are thinking in addition about what happens when a head hits the ground -- and heads are likeliest to hit the ground as a result of those low hits that hardly disturb the head directly at all. But still, the head usually doesn't hit the ground hard, because the player who's going down can usually prevent that from happening.
But whether any of these hits are enough to lead to being punch-drunk, I can't say. Clearly there must be other factors, or woodpeckers couldn't survive; maybe if the animal is small enough, the impulse can never be great enough to cause CTE.
|
|
|
|
Post by bulldogsdc on Sept 21, 2020 12:31:07 GMT -6
no
no
no
|
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Sept 23, 2020 14:06:25 GMT -6
This is one of those things where the answers for now would have to be based on common sense, which unfortunately doesn't always make actual sense. It stands to reason that the most likely hits to cause someone's head to bobble are hits high on that person's body when that person doesn't have much time seeing the hit coming. Pass blocking, even when the rush starts from some distance away, both players involved can usually anticipate the hit pretty well. Hits that occur downfield, whether initiated by the attacker or defender, do often occur with one player having a long run into contact, but the reason the head bobbles is not so much that, but rather that whoever's relatively stationary is less likely to see the hit coming. So, for example, when an end or flanker crosses into the middle at linebacker level and either throws a block or takes a hit in being collisioned off a pass route, whichever player takes the hit is likely looking elsewhere. By contrast, hits received low on the body don't as often rattle the head, even if they're of a blind side nature. The point of contact being far from the neck means there's that much more that the neck joints can "give" before transmitting the impact to the head. Hit low enough and you can chop the legs out while the upper body has hardly any internal torque applied to it at all; that is, the neck stays in the same relationship to the shoulders. However, people now are thinking in addition about what happens when a head hits the ground -- and heads are likeliest to hit the ground as a result of those low hits that hardly disturb the head directly at all. But still, the head usually doesn't hit the ground hard, because the player who's going down can usually prevent that from happening. But whether any of these hits are enough to lead to being punch-drunk, I can't say. Clearly there must be other factors, or woodpeckers couldn't survive; maybe if the animal is small enough, the impulse can never be great enough to cause CTE. Outstanding post, coach! Very detailed and thought out, and good points and ideas to think about. |
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Sept 30, 2020 9:54:13 GMT -6
at the last school I coached at ... we were VERY well funded and had a trainer with a doctorate at every practice who was able to access every single player who ever "got his bell rung", each kid was given a virtual concussion assessment test and will be reassessed if the took a blow to the head. so needless to say if a kid was actually concussed the trainer would put him in protocol...
we limited concussion to like 3 total in 5 years by emphasizing taking the head out of the game. (1 was a FREAK accident on special teams)
1. on pass blocks we taught to keeping a full range and use hands
2. a kick return block or kickout block type deal was taught with the shoulder and we coached up not using the head
3. run blocking was taught with an emphasis of the use of hands and keeping the head out of it.
with that being said the few concussions or kids put in concussion protocol were because they put their own head down on contact. With the freshman I would teach them that "it takes 2 to tango" on contact.
*P.S. I like the legal use of "allegedly" however just an fyi CTE can only be discovered after the person is dead and you disect the brain so we would not be able to know until it is too late. I have also seen studies that in reference to the Junior Seau or Chris Benoit level effects ... highschool football is completely safe and it is solely a pro football issue where you go helmet to helmet with a 240 lb who runs a 4.4 40.
|
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Oct 5, 2020 19:59:28 GMT -6
at the last school I coached at ... we were VERY well funded and had a trainer with a doctorate at every practice who was able to access every single player who ever "got his bell rung", each kid was given a virtual concussion assessment test and will be reassessed if the took a blow to the head. so needless to say if a kid was actually concussed the trainer would put him in protocol... we limited concussion to like 3 total in 5 years by emphasizing taking the head out of the game. (1 was a FREAK accident on special teams) 1. on pass blocks we taught to keeping a full range and use hands 2. a kick return block or kickout block type deal was taught with the shoulder and we coached up not using the head 3. run blocking was taught with an emphasis of the use of hands and keeping the head out of it. with that being said the few concussions or kids put in concussion protocol were because they put their own head down on contact. With the freshman I would teach them that "it takes 2 to tango" on contact. *P.S. I like the legal use of "allegedly" however just an fyi CTE can only be discovered after the person is dead and you disect the brain so we would not be able to know until it is too late. I have also seen studies that in reference to the Junior Seau or Chris Benoit level effects ... highschool football is completely safe and it is solely a pro football issue where you go helmet to helmet with a 240 lb who runs a 4.4 40. Coach, thanks for your response! Good thoughts, like what you had to say about how you have done stuff. Just so it's clear, I wasn't talking so much about concussions (not that they are not bad), but more about many sub-concussive events that will slip through concusssion detection and protocols. People keep talking about concussions and don't talk about the sub-concussive events possibility (sometimes I think this is intentional, because some folks know good and well you can do a lot to minimize concussions, but there's not a lot you can do to eliminate sub-concussive events and still have the same game; just so it's clear, not saying that's what you did here). Are you gonna sit there and try to tell me that on the HS level, when a guard or FB pulls and blows up the EMLOS on a kick out block that one or both of them are not going to have their brain smack against the inside of their skull with at least some force? IF football and CTE are tied up, I'd say that it is much more likely that the many sub-concussive events issue is the major contributing factor, not concussions... To me, this is just basic physics, with a signficant enough collision, a brain will smack against the inside of the skull. That can't be good, that's just common sense...Lol. As for the NFL, actually, I'd say it's more likely that, IF football caused CTE in a player, it's from their combined years of playing going back to HS. I think the poster example of this is Aaron Hernandez. When his brain was examined after his death, his brain supposedly looked like that of a 60-70 year old man. How many seasons did he play in the league? 3. Yup. 3 seasons. 2010-2012. Only 3 seasons did that kind of damage? Nah, I don't think so... |
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Oct 5, 2020 22:40:01 GMT -6
(1) Are you gonna sit there and try to tell me that on the HS level, when a guard or FB pulls and blows up the EMLOS on a kick out block that one or both of them are not going to have their brain smack against the inside of their skull with at least some force? (2) To me, this is just basic physics, with a signficant enough collision, a brain will smack against the inside of the skull. That can't be good, that's just common sense...Lol. (3) Aaron Hernandez I get it, to use a boxing analogy the theory of CTE isn't that it its caused by the knockout blow, but that its caused by the 75 jabs to the head that lead up to it. To address your propositions (1) if the guard is initiating contact with his arms and shoulders and having ZERO contact with his head, there his no helmet to helmet contact involved, and thus no brain smacking around. You can still "blow people up" without using your helmet (2) basic physics would tell you that if you don't make contact with the helmet you don't get hit in the head. I am assuming what you are trying to get at here is maybe the brain is getting smacked around from the unpredictable jerking of the neck and head? if that is the case then football is as dangerous as riding a rollercoaster, driving in traffic, or ballroom dancing. (3) Aaron Henandez also played 4 years at Florida in the SEC which many of us would argue is comparable to going against the NFL players. So that's 7 years of high level brain contact. I am not a neurologist but I wouldn't doubt that the **** ton of drugs he did didn't accelerate his brain deterioration. My point is do a better job coaching up not using the head and it will lower the risk of head related trauma. Statistically speaking there is no significant decrease in brain function between highschool football players and non highshool football players... FROM THE 1950's from a recent study. (linked below) imo yes, some good came out of these recent awareness in the concussions/cte effects that have made necessary changes to make the game more safe. However majority of their efforts are just typical gaslighting and political grandstanding. If the people behind the "anti-football to prevent brain injury" crowd actually gave a sh*t about the health of our children... they would be scaring parents away form McDonalds parking lot instead of youth football practice. www.sbnation.com/2017/7/11/15952184/cte-study-wisconsin-high-school-football |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Oct 6, 2020 9:53:12 GMT -6
(1) Are you gonna sit there and try to tell me that on the HS level, when a guard or FB pulls and blows up the EMLOS on a kick out block that one or both of them are not going to have their brain smack against the inside of their skull with at least some force? (2) To me, this is just basic physics, with a signficant enough collision, a brain will smack against the inside of the skull. That can't be good, that's just common sense...Lol. (3) Aaron Hernandez I get it, to use a boxing analogy the theory of CTE isn't that it its caused by the knockout blow, but that its caused by the 75 jabs to the head that lead up to it. To address your propositions (1) if the guard is initiating contact with his arms and shoulders and having ZERO contact with his head, there his no helmet to helmet contact involved, and thus no brain smacking around. You can still "blow people up" without using your helmet (2) basic physics would tell you that if you don't make contact with the helmet you don't get hit in the head. I am assuming what you are trying to get at here is maybe the brain is getting smacked around from the unpredictable jerking of the neck and head? if that is the case then football is as dangerous as riding a rollercoaster, driving in traffic, or ballroom dancing. Neither driving in traffic (unless you have a collision) nor ballroom dancing would produce that much acceleration. However, a vibrating massage bed/chair, maybe even the bouncing on your lap that kids love, might do so. Even if it hadn't, we have no idea what other factors (such as genetic) might produce such an aging effect in one single case. |
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Oct 10, 2020 10:06:09 GMT -6
(1) if the guard is initiating contact with his arms and shoulders and having ZERO contact with his head, there his no helmet to helmet contact involved, and thus no brain smacking around. You can still "blow people up" without using your helmet Your brain is floating around inside your skull, and if your body is moving but then suddenly stops due to a collision with another object, your brain will smack against the inside of your skull. That is regardless of whether or not there is helmet to helmet contact. This is like what happens in a car crash, if the car suddenly stops due to a collision with another car, and a passenger is not secured with a seat belt, they can get thrown forward into the windshield... See what I see above about sudden stops due to collisions. Also, as far as what you said about the unpredictable jerking of the neck: 1) The unpredictable jerking of the neck from ballroom dancing and normal driving is going to be far far less severe than from playing football. And even if it was as severe, driving in traffic instances over a 4 year period would not be as frequent as they would be for a HS football player over that same time period. As for ballroom dancing, if it was as severe, I don't know how often it would happen over a 4 year period. 2) With roller coasters, that depends on the roller coaster as to the severity, but it does not happen as often over a 4 year as it would for HS football players. Sure, don't disagree with the SEC point. I find it iffy that the drugs contributed THAT much to deterioration, but who knows. A few things about the study 1) 3,904 people in the study, good to see they used a large number of participants. That said, it is only of players from Wisconsin, wouldn't it be better if this study had 82 participants from each of the lower 48 (as I don't know if Alaska and Hawaii had significant HS football presences in the 1950s, as they did not become states until 1959)? 2) Shouldn't this study have taken into account how much contact each player had over their high school career? Did this study have people in it who played only 1 or 2 years? IMO this study should have included only people who played all 4 years. If you have players in this study who were backups or rode the bench for 4 years, that could affect the results. Sure, players almost certainly are involved in more collisions in practice than in games over their time playing high school football. Maybe the difference wouldn't be large enough to significantly affect the results? |
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Oct 11, 2020 20:15:12 GMT -6
Your brain is floating around inside your skull, and if your body is moving but then suddenly stops due to a collision with another object, your brain will smack against the inside of your skull. That is regardless of whether or not there is helmet to helmet contact. This is like what happens in a car crash, if the car suddenly stops due to a collision with another car, and a passenger is not secured with a seat belt, they can get thrown forward into the windshield... A few things about the study 1) 3,904 people in the study, good to see they used a large number of participants. That said, it is only of players from Wisconsin, wouldn't it be better if this study had 82 participants from each of the lower 48 (as I don't know if Alaska and Hawaii had significant HS football presences in the 1950s, as they did not become states until 1959)? 2) Shouldn't this study have taken into account how much contact each player had over their high school career? Did this study have people in it who played only 1 or 2 years? IMO this study should have included only people who played all 4 years. If you have players in this study who were backups or rode the bench for 4 years, that could affect the results. Sure, players almost certainly are involved in more collisions in practice than in games over their time playing high school football. Maybe the difference wouldn't be large enough to significantly affect the results? obviously the traffic and ballroom dancing points were a joke... So do you believe that even if you play as safely as possible and just have some jerking of the neck you are still getting CTE? and as for your comments on the study: 1. Imo the state has no bearing on the study. 2. it was done posthumously (as all CTE data) so no, it was impossible to ask the brain donors (lol) 3. maybe an older coach can clarify but even if a kid played scout defense for 2 years, the full contact 3-4 hour practices of the 1950s are a lot rougher on the head and neck then modern football's "more safer" version. Again posthumous study. 4. Again, posthumously done. imo outside of an outlier like a runningback who would lead with his head every play, I don't see a difference. Overall, not withstanding any new scientific developments, I still stand with my original point that CTE is a NFL/upper level college issue. I hope my input has helped your research. |
|
