
N.F.L. Tried to Influence New Concussion Research, Congressional Study Finds - jstreebin
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/sports/football/nfl-tried-to-influence-concussion-research-congressional-study-finds.html
======
cheeze
The problem that I see with the NFL is that they are essentially a monopoly on
American Football.

As a fan, I don't really have any choices. I detest many things that the NFL
does, can't believe some of the players are allowed to play the game after
what they do outside of work, etc. yet I have no option if I want to watch
football. Combine this with the fact that NFL football is culturally ingrained
in many peoples lives and you end up with a behemoth that can't be stopped.
Even if I wanted to boycott the NFL (more than I do as-is), the game will be
on at literally every food/drink establishment I enter, people will be talking
about it (and playing fantasy) at work, and on Thanksgiving, my family is
going to watch football, that's just how it is.

I really wish there was some alternative. I would gladly support a league of
slightly worse players if it wasn't as scummy as the NFL has proven itself to
be.

~~~
some-guy
The real question is: if this information about the link between health and
playing football becomes more widespread, will people stop playing? People
certainly wouldn't stop watching due to the culture that you describe, but I
assume that young would-be players may second-guess their decisions.

The smaller the talent pool of a sport, the less competitive and skillful it
becomes. I'm not convinced that the NFL as an organization would completely
suffer though.

~~~
chc
I don't think an up-and-comer aiming for a career in the NFL is someone who
really cares about the odds or the downsides of that choice. The most likely
outcome of that career path is failure even if you don't get injured.

~~~
brndn
There have been a few recent cases of NFL players retiring early due to the
long-term health concerns of concussions, but it's certainly not common.

------
dluan
In 200 years, when we look back on how science was funded, it will seem
backwards and poorly designed.

Big money has infiltrated politics, media & journalism, and of course science,
but for some reason the public regards scientific research as still somewhat
authentic and immune to corruption. This is far from the truth, especially in
the U.S., there is hardly any authentic science left. Even those well
intentioned researchers play into the system of perverse incentives; publish
or perish.

Climate science, tobacco research, energy (see fracking), sugar, pharma (see
IP), the field of macroeconomics, etc there need to be changes if not at least
different avenues for how research is funded. Otherwise it will lead to what I
like to think of as intellectual inequality.

~~~
cmsmith
>there is hardly any authentic science left

I'm sorry, but what? You list a half dozen of the hottest-button research
areas, but those represent (with the exception of pharma) probably less than
2-3% of non-proprietary research. The rest of the iceberg is just normal
scientists working on hard problems that aren't going to make anyone rich, and
scraping by on whatever money they can find. And keeping the 'science=corrupt'
idea out there doesn't make it any easier.

~~~
Retric
Hot button issues, like toxicity, health care, education, evolution, weight
loss, endangered species, sleep, habitat, oral hygiene, etc. Just about
anything related to either people, land, products, processes, faith, or stuff
has someone who would like to influence the results.

Even if it's simply do the experiment 100 times until you get the result you
want. Or just quietly pull the plug when it's not going the way you hope.
There are many ways to manipulate even honest research done in good faith.

~~~
dexterdog
If you do the experiment until you get the result you want you are never doing
it in good faith.

~~~
Retric
This assumes only one group gets funded. Bad actor A vs 100 grad students or
whatever.

Alternatively, same experiment with slightly different formula.

------
snarfy
With 80% of basic cable bills going to pay for ESPN, NFL as a non-profit
organization, and all of tax breaks and stadiums paid for with taxes, it is
absolutely disgusting the level of subsidizes going into football. They'll
cancel band class and shop class, but the high school football team will still
get new uniforms. There are so many better things the money and energy could
be used for, things that actually improve society. Instead we have a method of
crowd control that goes back to the Romans.

~~~
samfisher83
Espn costs about 6.61. Not 80% of the cable bill.
[http://www.whatyoupayforsports.com/numbers/](http://www.whatyoupayforsports.com/numbers/)

------
KevinEldon
When this issue of safety comes up I wonder why the NFL is being assigned
responsibility for protecting the players when the players have the ability to
define rules to protect their own safety through their union. The union should
fund studies, provide their own doctors and trainers, and fight for the rights
to ensure the rules of the game align to their findings and keep their members
as safe as they want to be.

~~~
balls187
It's a good question, and I suspect that it's because the players who could
influence that decision (the leaders and highly paid super star athletes), are
not incentivized to sour their relationship with the NFL and the team owners
over the health and well being of all players.

That is, their individual goal is to maximize the money they make while they
play, and fighting for better working conditions may run orthogonal to that.

The NFLPA has a lot of good intentions, but without the support of the league
stars, it's difficult to make any reason progress.

~~~
KevinEldon
I think you're probably right and wonder then if it's not the players
themselves who are to blame (at least when the fans/public gets "outraged"
about this issue). It's awkward to assign (some) blame to the same class that
contains the victims, but it seems in their own pursuit of wealth they might
be forfeiting their own safety. Owners would care about the short-term safety
of players so that they can realize their investments, but really don't have
any long term incentive to care care about player health.

~~~
balls187
When you factor in that many of these athletes are young it makes sense why
they aren't necessarily looking out for the long term self interest. It
doesn't take too much searching to find once highly paid athletes having to
work menial jobs post career, as they didn't take care of their finances.

And, I'd say there is blame all around:

Team owners (and by extension the League) wanting to maximize profits.

Players want to maximize salaries.

And the fans willing to continue to support the NFL as is.

------
tacojuan
The NFL is trying it's damned hardest to become as corrupt as FIFA

------
patrickburke
The Frontline on this issue was good.
[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/league-of-
denial/](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/league-of-denial/)

------
m0llusk
This sport will be dead in a generation or two. Parents don't want their kids
doing something that demonstrably causes brain damage. Without a full cohort
of kids involved the level of competition will starve off interest in the
sport.

~~~
wiseleo
There will still be plenty of broke parents who will want to give their
children that one shot at stardom. Take a look at backgrounds of fighters in
boxing and MMA. These sports are explicitly about hurting the other person and
people still volunteer to participate.

~~~
mindcrime
FWIW, MMA is likely much less brutal than boxing or football. Lighter gloves
provide less hand protection, and many fights end in a submission instead of a
knockout. And assuming you tap out appropriately, there's no serious injury
from a knee bar, or a heel hook, or even a rear naked choke.

------
DannyBee
"“A series of misunderstandings and disputes might have been avoided had
F.N.I.H. reminded the N.F.L. of its obligation to fund the study” under the
original agreement years before, the study concluded."

Yeah, i mean, i can't count the number of times basically threatening someone
who wants to pull out of funding has avoided "misunderstandings" and
"disputes".

Oh wait, no, it's done the exact opposite.

------
tosseraccount
NFL is pretty tame. This is tougher : [http://deadspin.com/crazy-ass-italian-
sport-combines-rugby-w...](http://deadspin.com/crazy-ass-italian-sport-
combines-rugby-with-bare-knuckl-1612721772)

------
stanfordkid
follow the fucking money don't listen to words ... when will people learn?

------
ArkyBeagle
The NFL is probably going to be subject to an RJR vs. United States thing soon
enough.

------
cwilkes
Why didn't they go to Paul Allen's brain institute for research?

------
tn13
Private parties trying to influence research in a way that it benefits them ?
I am not surprised at all.

I think the worse trend is when government authorities do this. Then it
becomes witch-hunt.

"Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker used Greenpeace list to target
climate change skeptics"
[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/4/virgin-
island...](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/4/virgin-islands-
attorney-general-claude-walker-used/?page=all)

