
What Would The End Of Football Look Like? - tptacek
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7559458/cte-concussion-crisis-economic-look-end-football
======
bo1024
I doubt football will end anytime soon, but it should.

Especially thinking about universities -- to me, college football is not much
more than a tragic exploitation system. Kids are recruited from age 14 and get
promised the moon by coaches/staff, spend 5 years getting banged up
(concussions etc) for life, and most wind up scraping through with a useless
degree if they graduate at all. A tiny percentage go pro and the rest are left
out to dry with few career prospects having missed out on their education.
Most pros don't make _that_ much during their career and don't have great
quality of life after it's over (run out of money, lack of marketable skills,
head damage).

The big media companies love it, and heads of universities like the "school
spirit" and brand appeal (even though most schools lose money on football).
But for the players involved, it's basically a scam. Even though they're
getting a free education.

You might make similar arguments for other college sports (not sure how I feel
about that having been part of one), but for football I think it's the most
clear-cut.

~~~
jm4
I don't think it's as dismal as you make it look. My brother just accepted a
football scholarship at a highly academically rated BCS school. I think there
are 66 BCS schools and each one gives out about 20-24 scholarships each year.
It's a huge opportunity to get a free education, play a sport he loves and
make lifelong relationships with his teammates. A football locker room at the
highest levels is about as exclusive a club as there is. I don't know how much
tuition is or the other things the scholarship includes, but I wouldn't be
surprised if it approaches $200k.

He can be a fool, get beat up and leave without a degree or he can take
advantage of an opportunity many people only dream of. The coaches aren't
telling him what classes to take. He can take whatever he wants. He can choose
a useless program, a great program or anything in between. He can choose to
meet the minimum requirements to stay on the team and keep his scholarship or
he can choose to excel academically.

On the field, he can choose to hide a concussion or take some time off. He
won't lose his scholarship over it. Most players feel pressure to play through
injuries, and although it can come from peers and coaches, they often place
most of it upon themselves. They are incredibly competitive and don't want to
be sidelined for anything.

My point is all the choices are his to make. The same applies to other
players. There are few victims in this who aren't victims of their own
decisions. If a kid washes out of some dumbass cake walk program for kids who
don't give a shit about school, sustains injuries in a sport he would play
with or without a scholarship and has zero career prospects is that the fault
of the system? I don't think so.

There are ways to twist it around to make it look like a scam, and it's true
there are plenty of things wrong with college football, specifically the BCS.
It's a feeder system for the NFL, a bunch of people make piles of money and
the kids don't make anything. It may be all of those things, but it is also an
opportunity for the lucky recipient of a football scholarship to change his
life, either for good or bad.

~~~
Zimahl
Sorry to be a Debbie Downer but much of what you say is completely inaccurate,
some of it factually, the rest logistically.

First, scholarships aren't guaranteed. They are only for 1 year and renewed at
the team's discretion. A team can cut you if you get permanently injured. They
typically don't because that would look bad to future recruits but if you
can't continue with school they aren't going to keep you on scholarship. They
can move you to a medical scholarship but that happens less often than you'd
think.

Second, I don't think you realize the amount of time it takes to play a
college sport. There's a reason a lot of athletes take something like General
Studies, and it's not because they are all 'dumb jocks'. The college and
university will be accommodating but the fact is that there's a lot of
practice time (4+ hours a day) and travel. The football season is longer than
most, even longer if the team is good (bowl games). Any hard science that has
a lab or field work is probably out.

I just don't think you are realistically looking at what your brother is
getting himself into and your expectations seem way off. He'd have to be one
of those rare individuals to get a high-end degree and play a scholarship
sport. Choosing to be a scholarship athlete is choosing to work on a sport
instead of working on a degree of 'substance'.

~~~
jm4
Completely inaccurate? Are you speaking from experience or pretty much making
this up based on what you think happens?

I read through the paperwork for the scholarship that was provided to my
brother by the university so I understand how it works. He's spent the past
year visiting schools and talking to various people about this. People have
visited the house and his school to go over it all. I've been hearing all
about it the whole time. This is exciting for the whole family. It's not like
a letter showed up in the mail out of the blue one day saying he could go to
school for free. I understand the year to year thing and how it works with
injuries. In practice, it is uncommon to lose a scholarship unless you are a
screwball.

I also realize that it takes time to play a college sport. Four or more hours
of practice every day is nothing new. My brother has been doing it for the
past four years at a school that demands a high academic level. He also has
his own personal coaches that he works with. Half of the games he played in
required travel-- quite a few of them three or four hours each way on a bus.
This is all piled on top of hours of homework that always got done. Hell, his
days are longer than mine and I have a full time job and a toddler. Granted,
he never had to stay overnight anywhere, but playing football was still a huge
time commitment. He made many sacrifices to do it.

My brother loves playing football and also places a high value on education
and future career opportunities. I think it's every college football player's
dream to play in the NFL, but he is realistic about the possibility and
planning to make his money doing a regular job like everyone else.

There are plenty of kids that make this work. There are also many that don't.
For some of them it's too difficult. Others didn't care much about school in
the first place.

In the end, I'm just not buying the argument that the whole system is a scam
designed to make a ton of money off the hard work of these kids that get
nothing. Both sides benefit. One side gets the money. The other gets the
opportunity of a lifetime. Besides, no one is forcing these kids to accept
scholarships, and if they are playing at the kind of level to even be
considered for one they know damn well how hard it is.

~~~
Zimahl
I'll give you the short answer. I did NOT play D1 football, I didn't play
football at all. I did do IT work for a D1 university and talked with the
athletic administration folks many times. I know a lot about the athletic
scholarship process. But don't just take my word for it:

[http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/nli/document+library...](http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/nli/document+library/athletic+scholarship)

I'm sure your proud of your brother, I get that. And I'm sure he's a smart
individual. But how many of us skated through high school? I played 3 sports
in high school and graduated at the top of my class without even trying.
College ain't high school.

Take the money out of the equation. Let's talk about time because that's all
that matters. The coach will come by the house and tell you you can be pre-med
and play football. Consider them as car salesmen. They need to sell you a
product and will say just about everything to make that happen.

But one of two things will happen with a heavy class load AND a season of D1
football: either grades will suffer or the sport will. Do you think the coach
is going to tell you to skip a couple practices to catch up? Nope, he's going
to ask you to take some easier classes and you'll have to to keep your
scholarship, otherwise you'll get replaced by someone who will.

Here's a great article about the athlete turnover even at a school like
Stanford:

[http://paloalto.patch.com/articles/stanford-football-
players...](http://paloalto.patch.com/articles/stanford-football-players-
trading-game-time-for-good-grades)

------
compay
Interesting read. But the authors assume that most people would move from
obsession with football to watching no sports at all. It seems more likely to
me that people would simply replace football with some other sport.

I saw this firsthand in Seattle when the Sonics left for Oklahoma City.
Several of my friends who were lifelong fans swore they would never watch NBA
basketball again and became hardcore MLS (Major League Soccer) fans.

~~~
imjk
The authors cover this twice. Once when they briefly mention soccer, may
perhaps, take more prominence among Americans, and much more thoroughly, when
they posit that the collapse of football would most benefit basketball, as it
would be the next substitute.

But regardless, their points about the potential resulting benefits outside of
the sporting world still has merit in my eyes. For example, there are large
universities that derive much of their funding and student enrollment based
heavily on the marketability of their football programs. Schools like Ohio
State, Oklahoma, Alabama, and LSU come to mind. Without the marketing strength
of their football teams, perhaps the schools would be forced to put more
effort into enhancing and promoting academic achievement.

~~~
bo1024
The schools you named have it good -- the football revenues in some cases help
fund academic programs.

But for most universities, the opposite is true. The football team runs a big
deficit and is subsidized by the university (as are most sports, but football
is by far the most expensive). Those smaller or less successful schools are
the ones really hurting themselves by devoting so many resources to football.

------
troymc
The authors mentioned CTE but didn't spell it out, so I looked it up: Chronic
Traumatic Encephalopathy

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopath...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy)

------
philwelch
The US would finally pay attention to soccer, like the rest of the world?
That's practically the only other thing we can use the stadiums for, and since
we've collectively invested billions of dollars in public funds to build the
damn things it wouldn't make much sense to just demolish them.

Maybe without football, we'd be closer to finally decoupling youth sports from
the education system.

~~~
huggyface
_Maybe without football, we'd be closer to finally decoupling youth sports
from the education system._

Going off track, but by _finally_ are you saying that's a positive thing?

I'm a nerd. I've always been a nerd. I had the absolute minimum mandatory
participation in sports during school. That is one of my biggest _regrets_.
Sports have incredible importance in so many ways.

~~~
spodek
I feel the same way except that I changed my ways in college.

How old are you, because you probably have time to make sports a part of your
life.

My mother, never having run more than five kilometers at once, ran her first
marathon at 66 -- <http://joshuaspodek.com/redefining_possibility> \-- and she
talks about running more. Plenty of other sports are available to people of
every age.

I'm proud to have inspired her. I'd love to inspire others!

~~~
drcube
Totally off topic, but what about team sports? I played teeball when I was six
and flag football in the 5th grade, but other than that, I totally missed out
on organized sports as a kid. (I played a lot of "unorganized" sports in the
back yard though). I run, but that's an individual thing.

Where would an adult go to learn to play baseball, basketball or football? I
know there are after-work adult leagues, but do they let people with no talent
and experience play? What about coaching?

------
joshmlewis
I live about 30 minutes from Clemson (the football town mentioned.) Football
is huge in the south. I'm not used to it, and have, in fact, never been to a
football game. Except maybe once, but that was for the girls.

It's quite crazy though how much these football towns rely on a sport. The
rivalries, the competition, and the booze. I always said if you wanted to rob
a house, a friday night would be ideal because literally 50% of the town is at
a football game. I really think it's just something everyone can relate to. In
these towns where textiles and industry are prominent and there isn't much
innovation, looking forward to that friday night football game with the guys
is something that gives peoples lives meaning. I'm not sure my point, but I
figured I should but in and say that there are such things as these towns and
football is very real in the south and without it I would be very interested
to see what people cling to next.

Basketball is big-ish, but most schools either have one or the other. I'm a
big fan of Kentucky basketball, but everyone knows their football team sucks.
That's usually how it goes. So maybe it would go like the article said and
basketball just gets huge and more rounded in all towns.

~~~
kellishaver
I was just about to say the same thing about Basketball here. I'm in KY and
our local high school team always does well, and our college team, while never
great, had a good season last year, as well, and has a few bright stars
amongst its roster. March is crazy here. It's nothing but basketball,
basketball, basketball, and my Facebook and Twitter feeds fill up with
commentary every time there's a game. The local community gets behind it, even
at the high school level. The school district closes school for the day if the
team has an out-of-town game in the state tournament, so people can attend,
etc. (As a parent, I don't agree with this action, but none the less, it is
interesting from a social perspective).

I'm not a huge fan of the sport, but even I find it hard not to get sucked in.

------
PerryCox
Concussions aren't going to cause the "end of football". A lot of people
forget that football used to be a MUCH more dangerous sport. Take for example
that in 1905 there were _18 football related deaths_ with 20 times fewer
players than there are today. If it weren't for Teddy Roosevelt pushing for
rule changes and the use of leather helmets then we probably wouldn't have
football today.

Football is a dangerous sport, I'm not denying it. But the players know the
risk when they start playing. The risk is why they make as much money as they
do.

Source: <http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/kidscorner/football.htm>

~~~
vishaldpatel
The risk isn't why they make so much money. It's the crowds. If tomorrow
everyone started watching soccer in America instead of football, then the
players would make a lot less money, despite the risk to bodily injury.

~~~
andrewflnr
The crowds and risk might actually be linked, though, i.e., it's more fun to
watch because it looks riskier. I think the reason sports are popular is
because they provide an outlet for warlike instincts, and football provides an
exceptionally good war simulation, short of paintball or airsoft.

~~~
jacques_chester
Wars tends to be a tad more dynamic than gridiron. Out of the major ball
sports it's by far the most dragged out: 5 seconds of mayhem, 60 seconds of
faffing about. Repeat for 3 hours.

Soccer, god rot its socks, is probably a better model. Hours of furious
sprinting and jogging, lots of posturing and almost nobody ever wins
convincingly.

~~~
dagw
_Wars tends to be a tad more dynamic than gridiron. Out of the major ball
sports it's by far the most dragged out: 5 seconds of mayhem, 60 seconds of
faffing about._

I have never been to war, but I have friends who have, and your description of
gridiron sounds just like their description of war. 2 month faffing around at
base, 2 hours all out mayhem and intense fire fights, repeat for 12 month.

~~~
jacques_chester
I was thinking more at the top level, rather than a private's "Hurry up and
wait" perspective.

------
guelo
The thing that American football provides that is absent in most other sports
is the strategic match up on every down between offense and defense. That
strategic part adds a whole other level to the game which adds huge depth to
the analysis that fans can dig into. The game that the coaches are playing by
selecting plays against each other is more involved than in any other sport.
Any replacement sport that I know of would be missing this important element.

~~~
thrill
The thing that American football brings that is absent in other sports in
immense flexibility and opportunity for advertising between every down.

~~~
brudgers
Futbol has continuous scrolling advertising along the boards in the stadium
and often advertising next to the score when broadcasting. And of course there
is advertising on the player's jerseys and other apparel - something which is
anathema to American football.

For NFL games, there are exactly three commercial breaks per quarter by
broadcast contract - college is similar. After the contractual number of
breaks, the broadcasters simply do not cut away.

------
josephcooney
When reading the headline I thought for a second they were talking about the
'other' football...the one that 90% of the world are infatuated with. I
imagine the end of that would occur roughly the same time as the extinction of
the human race.

~~~
10dpd
You mean that 'other' football where players kick a _ball_ with their _foot_ ?

~~~
rsanchez1
Players kick footballs with their foot too. It's called a field goal.

~~~
10dpd
I was thinking 'handegg' would be a more appropriate name.

------
itmag
Little known fact: Sweden has a bunch of American football (and cheerleading!)
teams.

<http://www.amerikanskfotboll.com>

<http://www.cheerleadersofsweden.se/>

(That's right people: free money, blonde women, socialism, cheap Ikea
furniture, cheerleaders, AND proper football. Paradise on Earth?)

If the sport can survive in a country where there is absolutely no tradition
for it...

------
locusm
Plenty of other contact team sports exist (Rugby, AFL etc) - how is American
Football different? How does an American Football player get tackled
differently to say a Rugby Union player?

~~~
marknutter
Having played both, there are some key differences:

\- American Football allows blocking, whereas rugby does not. This means it's
perfectly legal to blindside someone as hard as you can, often helmet to
helmet.

\- Football allows tackling above the waist without wrapping your arms around
the other player, whereas rugby does not. This means people can launch
themselves at the other player as hard as they want without wrapping up,
basically turning themselves into large projectiles. The goal, up until
recently (since the league started cracking down), was to have a helmet-to-
helmet collision in order to knock the other player out (most often happening
to wide-receivers). Knocking out another player is a point of pride and a
strategic advantage as well.

\- Football has armor, Rugby does not. This actually works against Football.
It encourages harder hits and head-to-head collisions. Football helmets
protect against skull fractures but not concussions. The brain moves
independent of the skull in a high impact collision despite how shock
absorbant the helmet may be. In rugby, players are a LOT less likely to crack
each other's heads together because of the risk of fracture.

I played rugby for 7 years through high school and college, and Football 2
years in high school. I never received any concussions in Rugby (let alone any
serious injury at all), but did receive them in my short experience playing
football, and at the Junior Varsity level no less.

If I ever have a son, as much as I love the sport, he is banned from playing
American football.

~~~
look_lookatme
All great points.

For people that never played, it might be interesting to hear that at all
levels, many programs institute reward systems for hard hits, amongst other
accomplishments. It's mostly pride based, coming in the form of a sticker on
the helmet, but it's part of the ethos of the game. When watching game film,
coaches will replay hard sticks over and over to the great amusement of the
whole team. Most embarrassing is being on the other end of one of those hits.

In pre-college football a certain class of players form their part of their
identity around the ability to inflict and take hard hits, amongst their other
duties. These also tend to be some of the most athletic kids. I'd assume just
about any non-kicking NFL player has at some point in their life been one of
those guys.

~~~
peteretep
Hard hits are also glorified in rugby (or were where I played it), but you
hard hit someone's legs with your shoulder.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7J-q6vCeus>

~~~
look_lookatme
Oh I have no doubt it's endemic to almost all contact sports, I was just
pointing out that programs across the country down to the ones that 12 year
old kids start playing in, often will introduce formal reward systems for the
behavior.

------
gdilla
Wouldn't institutions just ask players to sign a waivers to indemnify them?
Aren't there enough kids in the pipeline dreaming of stardom that will sign
such a waiver without thinking twice?

~~~
freehunter
Waivers still have to hold up in court. Just because they're waterproof
doesn't mean they're legal. Any contract can be overthrown if it understates
the risk or if there was gross negligence on the part of the coach.

------
tom_b
Startup opportunity for accelerometers in helmets/pads/shoes and real-time
data collection?

I imagine if you came up with the right visualizations, that fans would be
interested, e.g., "omg, did you see how the LB lit up that receiver coming
over the middle! 150 Gs of impact . . . "

And you know, since we are on HN, "Football Physics: The Anatomy of a Hit"
[http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/sports/physics/4212...](http://www.popularmechanics.com/outdoors/sports/physics/4212171)

~~~
openyogurt
There was also an interesting article in National Geographic that described
collision analysis using accelerometers in football at the college level.
[http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/02/big-
idea/concussio...](http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/02/big-
idea/concussions-text)

------
eftpotrm
An interesting article, but I can't understand why the author thinks the
current football code would wither and die in quite the way he proposes when
there are other codes with much better safety records and to which they could
transition relatively easily; why would the asset holders voluntarily wind up
rather than trying to maximise their returns?

* Rugby Union / Rugby League. USA already has a relatively decent national Rugby Union side - certainly not top drawer, but able to compete at World Cup level. The facilities could be relatively easily converted and while there are certainly game subtleties that are very different (a complete ban on forward passes, for example), it'd likely be an easier player transition than to soccer or basketball.

* International Rules Football. (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_rules_football>) An existing hybrid of Gaelic football (for which I'd be astonished if there weren't east coast teams...) and Aussie Rules Football. Again, American teams exist, the pitches would be relatively easily converted, the skills are based around ball carrying and throwing...

Universities make too much money from football to just kill it. Too many large
franchises make enormous sums from it, too many towns have it as a significant
percentage of GDP. No transition to a new code would ever be easy but, if the
writing was on the wall, the financial incentive for (say) one of the large
conferences to give 3 years notice of transition to a new code in preference
seem enormous in comparison with simply shuttering.

(Now, speaking as a Brit sports fan, if North America could only switch from
Baseball to T20 Cricket then.... ;-))

~~~
bugsbunnyak
There are probably too many vested interests for that to happen from the top
down. One issue the article raises is that the decline would be mostly from
the bottom-up as insurance cost and perceived risk respectively diminish high
school leagues, and participation. This decline would occur over a long enough
timeline that, by the time such a drastic action could be contemplated,
football would have transitioned from a cultural institution to an also-ran
(as the current soccer and rugby leagues).

~~~
eftpotrm
Probably, but....

Insurance and incidents of the sort outlined could push a turnaround in 2-3
years, quite easily IMHO. Insurance changes could make it extremely expensive
in the space of a single year if they're on annual policies. If school boards
are given the sudden option of running football at a substantial loss, pulling
athletics programmes altogether and losing their value while mothballing their
assets or trying to switch code, I'd bet on the latter.

Instinctively the elephant in the room is the different college conferences.
Varied enough to go in different ways if push came to shove, big enough that
they could impose a code change on their feeder systems. Plus, a big enough
bottom-line contributor that if the numbers turned around fast enough I
suspect administrators would try a roll of the dice rather than a mothballing.

(And I still want to see a greater uptake of cricket! :-))

~~~
philwelch
The problem with cricket is, first, that it's absolutely beyond most
Americans' comprehension, and second, that we already have an incomprehensible
sport that involves throwing a ball and hitting it with a stick.

~~~
eftpotrm
Oh, I know, I just think it's more fun than Baseball :-) ISTR that MLB had a
lock-out a while back which ended up with Cricket filling some of the
broadcast slots. Speaking as a cricket fan with any luck they can similarly
shoot themselves in the foot in the future and T20, as a faster form of the
game, can develop a foothold. One has to have dreams!

(Honestly, I've tried watching baseball and, well, incomprehensible covered it
well. Trying to work out what was and wasn't a strike a) confused and b) bored
me, what with the slowing effect on the game. Then, they keep doing hits which
get easily stopped and they're out before even making first base! Gimme T20
every day.)

------
checker
I see basketball, baseball, and soccer gaining more traction before track and
field ever becomes mainstream outside the Olympics.

------
ImprovedSilence
People would watch more Hockey!

I don't have much constructive to say about the issue, but this is a fun
comparison I came across the other day:
[http://proxy.espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/7550059/nhl-john-
buc...](http://proxy.espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/7550059/nhl-john-buccigross-
welcomes-back-nfl-fans-super-bowl)

~~~
rsanchez1
I'm not so sure about that. I think they would watch more basketball and
baseball first. It's part national pride, part familiarity. Basketball,
baseball, and football are all "American" sports. Baseball and football
evolved from cricket and soccer, and basketball was created in the US. There
are professional soccer and hockey leagues in the US, but neither sport has
really taken off. I'm not so sure that would change in the unlikely event that
the NFL folds.

~~~
ghaff
Professional soccer, true. But professional hockey is pretty big in a lot of
northern cities. Not at the same level as football or baseball, but big
enough. It's limited in cities where kids don't actually play the sport in any
numbers though.

~~~
ImprovedSilence
Definitely. I'm from the Northeast, hockey has become HUGE in every city from
DC to Philly to NYC to Boston, as well as Pittsburgh. The Pens have been
selling out every game for years, Flyers fans are rabid, Caps fans are new to
the hockey scene, but still sell out games. Try getting a Wizards or Nationals
game to ever sell out...

------
frankydp
The auther should have also mentioned the fast rise of the waiver sport UFC,
and the like.

------
Sembiance
One of the main points from the author is that high school and college players
will sue the school for injuries sustained in football, causing insurance
agencies to not insure the school, causing the death of football.

This is not possible because if this started to happen schools would require
you to sign a contract before being allowed to play. The contract will forbid
you from suing the school for any injuries. This will then become standard
practice.

Football is not going anywhere any time soon.

~~~
bryanlarsen
They already make you sign those contracts, yet schools carry insurance
anyways. Those contracts make it harder to successfully sue, but they do not
make it impossible.

------
robmcm
It would be interesting to see how this affected the MLS and therefore world
soccer as a whole. The best players in the world could move to the MLS rather
than the european leagues, and America could start to dominate at a national
level.

The world club championships would be more interesting, that's for sure.

------
Adrock
I think that football has too much value to the American military-industrial
complex to go away without a similar sport replacing it. Highschool football
is the real ROTC, where students learn to obey orders and sacrifice their
bodies for a common goal. In addition to being huge moneymakers, NCAA and NFL
are aspirational advertisement for highschool play.

------
tcarnell
Well, for 99% of the world, the end of American Football would probably go
unnoticed...

------
brudgers
It would look like rugby sevens.

~~~
wtn
I would be interested to see a version of American football in which the total
player weight per side was limited to one short ton (907 kg).

~~~
m_myers
That wouldn't necessarily be safer; smaller players tend to be faster, which
means the total momentum of an average collision might not drop much.

------
jwallaceparker
I don't think football is going away. It's by far the most popular sport in
the USA and it's gaining fans all over the world.

All my friends in the UK are obsessed with the NFL.

Concussions are a major concern. This will lead to better helmets and more
rules changes to protect player's heads. It will not mean the end of football.

------
bravenewdude
"In the first half of the 20th century, the three big sports were baseball,
boxing, and horse racing, and today only one of those is still a marquee
attraction."

Which one?

~~~
raldi
The one that sold 73 million tickets last year, at the major league level
alone.

------
andyl
Rugby doesn't seem to generate the same types of severe head injuries as
football. Is that true? If so, why?

~~~
dotBen
Rugby rules are orientated around 'safe tackle' (eg no above the waist).

The defensive side of American Football is very much brute force orientated
especially for the larger players.

~~~
jacques_chester
That said, the whipsaw effect of hitting the ground still causes concussions
and traumatic blows. Neither code of rugby is gentle; Union is particularly
brutal.

