Again, right on point.Paladin wrote: ↑Fri Oct 27, 2017 2:56 pm This is a classic case of Neanderthals vs. modern man. Unwilling to change and unbelieving of science. Here is a case where parents will vote with their feet to pull out their kids unless precautions are taken. You will have hard heads willing to shrink participation in order to maintain their testosterone level rather than use due diligence and err on the side of caution as a pragmatic approach . You still get to keep football. You'll be reading about how they "wussified" the game years into the future. This is more a reflection of our disgusting political problem today, but involves something valuable to us all -- our kids health.
Caution would indicate flag football first and limited tackle at Jr. Hi. Then H.S, college and Pros as is. Keeping the game transcends selfish immorality with other people's kids at risk if they wish to sacrifice their own. It's basically a no brainier.
Should Responsible Programs Eliminate Tackle Football at the Youth Level
Re: Should Responsible Programs Eliminate Tackle Football at the Youth Level
Re: Should Responsible Programs Eliminate Tackle Football at the Youth Level
this is directly from the Conclusions and reccomendations
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... 36/5/e1419
5. Delaying the age at which tackling is introduced to the game would likely decrease the risk of these injuries for the age levels at which tackling would be prohibited. Once tackling is introduced, however, athletes who have no previous experience with tackling would be exposed to collisions for the first time at an age at which speeds are faster, collision forces are greater, and injury risk is higher. Lack of experience with tackling and being tackled may lead to an increase in the number and severity of injuries once tackling is introduced. Therefore, if regulations that call for the delaying of tackling until a certain age are to be made, they must be accompanied by coaches offering instruction in proper tackling technique as well as the teaching of the skills necessary to evade tackles and absorb being tackled. It is unclear whether such techniques and the neuromuscular control necessary for performing them can be adequately learned in the absence of contact.
I agree 100% that coaching proper technique is important but do think football is getting a bad rap because of NFL stuff.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... 36/5/e1419
5. Delaying the age at which tackling is introduced to the game would likely decrease the risk of these injuries for the age levels at which tackling would be prohibited. Once tackling is introduced, however, athletes who have no previous experience with tackling would be exposed to collisions for the first time at an age at which speeds are faster, collision forces are greater, and injury risk is higher. Lack of experience with tackling and being tackled may lead to an increase in the number and severity of injuries once tackling is introduced. Therefore, if regulations that call for the delaying of tackling until a certain age are to be made, they must be accompanied by coaches offering instruction in proper tackling technique as well as the teaching of the skills necessary to evade tackles and absorb being tackled. It is unclear whether such techniques and the neuromuscular control necessary for performing them can be adequately learned in the absence of contact.
I agree 100% that coaching proper technique is important but do think football is getting a bad rap because of NFL stuff.