Tweet
Speaking of the NFLPA, they weren't even mentioned in the Frontline special.
How do they escape any blame in any of this? Where were they?
How do they escape any blame in any of this? Where were they?
-
-
Again, like a Michael Moore movie. They presented one side of the story.... A very compelling story, but not the WHOLE STORY.Originally posted by ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR View PostComment
-
Agree. This "report" is nothing more than propaganda from the new breed of the attention whore media who will distort any story in the name of the almighty dollar.Originally posted by TBF View PostComment
-
Wow. I don't see it that way at all. I think they told one aspect of the story, the one they focused on. It's not like there is a flipside. There are just othe aspects or avenues that they didn't coverOriginally posted by captaind View PostHashtag thepowderbluesComment
-
That's what propaganda is. A one-sided story to influence public opinion. And in this case, an inconclusive one at best.Originally posted by oneinchpunch View Post
I'm pretty pissed they keep using Seau as their poster child.Comment
-
If its one sided what is the other side?Originally posted by captaind View PostHashtag thepowderbluesComment
-
The other side is the complicity of the NFLPA (Gene Upshaw) who didn't push the issue forward,especially with the cases of retired players basically ignored by the union and the NFL. Upshaw was too buddy-buddy and not proactive here. He probably didn't believe that concussions were all that bad either, but he also ignored the former players as far as chronic injuries go.Originally posted by oneinchpunch View PostComment
-
That there isn't a "concussion crisis"?Originally posted by oneinchpunch View Post
How many did Junior Seau have again? If this is a "concussion crisis," why does this Michael Kirk a-hole show him three different times in his minute-thirty trailer on YouTube? He wants viewers to draw that connection, even though there isn't one. He wants people to believe Seau killed himself because he suffered multiple concussions. Even though he didn't.
You think this Michael Kirk guy is doing this because he's concerned? Hell, no. He's in this for a paycheck. Fame. Fortune. Money. Why? Because he's just another attention whore in an attention whore society.
Why do you people fall for this crap so easily?Comment
-
NBC broke it down quite well.... The NFL took a ton of heat, NFLPA however????
There is a lot more blame to go around, and the piece threw it all on the NFL.
Last edited by TABF; 10-11-2013, 08:48 PM.Comment
-
I think there is a "flipside." It's clear from the example that I gave earlier in this thread. That is not to say that the NFL should be absolved of all blame or to be lauded for responding the way they should have. But in light of the (even still) lacking statistical evidence, the NFL's actions are not surprising. And those steps they did take to at least say that they didn't have complete information on the subject, that studies were ongoing and to make player protection more robust was completely downplayed. In fact, that would be giving it too much credit. They were wholly ignored.Originally posted by oneinchpunch View PostComment
-
The other sides:Originally posted by oneinchpunch View Post
- The science is directional. Not conclusive. Right now they are talking about 45 of 46 cases. That is strong reason to suspect causation. But not proof of causation. The piece assumes and argues that correlation is causation. Of course, we all suspect that it is probably true just like we always suspected that it was probably the case with boxers.
Yet after an international conference in 2012 in Switzerland, a consensus statement said that CTE represents a condition "with an unknown incidence in athletic populations." It also said "that a cause and effect relationship has not as yet been determined between CTE and concussions or exposure to contact sports." It recommended that interpretation of cause should "proceed cautiously."
Michael Collins, director of the Sports Medicine Concussion Program at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, addressed the uncertainty about CTE in an interview last summer with USA Today Sports. UPMC is the sports medicine provider of the Steelers.
"There's no proof at this point in time determining that concussion is an isolative favor in causing CTE. There are so many other factors that have yet to be controlled for," said Collins. " … We haven't looked at a bunch of control brains to see if that occurs in the normal population. We don't know if factors such as steroid use or alcohol use (play a role). … I think people generally think that concussion has been confirmed to cause this problem, when in fact the science hasn't proven that."
Barely touched upon, and contrary to the thesis of the entire book/documentary.
- The complicity of society. Of course all the rest of us get a pass except in a nuanced nod to the "big dollars" associated with the sport. If we all suspected boxers got "punch drunk" and we all suspect that football players get stupid from repeatedly banging their heads against a wall, where are we as a society to blame? Why do we expect the NFL to do more than any of us is willing to ask for? All we care about is that things kick off on Sunday.
- The NFL did take steps to make the sport more safe. The NFL did take steps to warn players about potential dangers of concussions. They did legitimately say that studies were ongoing and what precautions should be taken. The NFL actually HAD a committee on concussions. They did meet with McKee et al (although it has been reported their doctors were dismissive of that position). The NFL did have doctors on staff who were believed to be experts in the field and who advised them on these matters. If they were dismissive of emerging data, what is the story with those doctors? Were Tagliabue and Goodell supposed to over-rule or ignore the advice they were getting? Webster died in 2002. Since then, and particularly since 2007 the NFL has addressed rules, equipment, concussion protocol etc. Remember that this really started gathering speed after Duerson, who died in 2011. The NFL has donated large sums to BU and the NIH to continue and further study.
- What about players who will almost to a man tell you that they would have played at any cost even fully knowing the risks? There have been a lot of players who have said that publicly. This is a major aspect of this story and yet it was not discussed in any meaningful way.
- The NFLPA obviously has not been pushing for major reform any earlier than the NFL. Why? Why did Omalu, Cantu and McKee not go to the NFLPA with their research? Or did they? What was NFLPA's response? Were they equally as dismissive? More receptive? If the former, why? If the latter, why didn't they push the issue harder with the NFL? And why was none of this included in the report? Is it because it doesn't fit the narrative of player as victim? This of course circles back to the point above, which is that players probably did not want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg even knowing the risks....which is, after all, an issue completely central to the debate.
- What about the government? Did Omalu, McKee and Cantu go to the CDC? NIH? If not, why? What was the government's response? If the problem was so prevalent and the victimized players in such danger, why didn't the government take action? 2009 (7 years after Webster, 4 years ago) congressional hearings are one thing, but hardly a response by regulatory bodies charged with protecting the general population. Why is the NFL held to a higher standard on reaction time than the government?
I mean, you could go on. And I acknowledge that for TV there is only two hours. But I think you can still make a persuasive argument and perhaps present the issue with a lot more dimension. Frankly, the issues of societal and player complicity are the ones that are most compelling. "Gotcha" on the NFL is easy and sells media but it's typical American single-factor scapegoating on what is a multi-faceted problem.Last edited by ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR; 10-12-2013, 06:29 AM.Comment
-
That's not the other side but another aspect of the same side. I agree that the NFLPA should have been part of the story but that doesn't make the story they told one sided. It makes it narrow in focusOriginally posted by Bolt-O View PostHashtag thepowderbluesComment
Comment