Head Injuries a Challenge to the Sport Industry? You Betcha!
Most of you will know by now that recent research studies and media coverage by programs such as 60 Minutes are shedding new light on the risk of young football players suffering from concussions and then later in life learning there was significant scarring of their brains.
The concussion part is not new and most men who have played football at the high school level have known someone who suffered a concussion. The rate of concussive injury increases, of course, if football is played at the faster, harder-hitting NCAA level (particularly Division 1) or in professional football via the NFL or CFL.
In a different age, the concussion – having your bell rung – was a virtual badge of manhood. It took tough dudes to play a sport where helmet to helmet contact was a by-product of a game so physically angry that protective headgear was ultimately invented.
The Wikipedia sound bite on helmets runs as follows: “One of the first instances of football headgear dates to 1896 when Lafayette College halfback George "Rose" Barclay, began to use straps and earpieces to protect his ears. Many sources give credit for creation of the helmet to Dr. James Naismith, inventor of basketball. Additionally, other sources credit the invention of the football helmet to U.S. Naval Academy Midshipman Joseph M. Reeves (later to become the "Father of Carrier Aviation"), who had a protective device for his head made out of mole skin to allow him to play in the 1893 Army-Navy game.”
This heady material all came to mind for me recently as I toured the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Ohio. At Syracuse, we have the Hall of Languages. In Canton, they essentially have the Hall of Helmets where you can clearly see the way the football helmet has evolved from padded leather and nose shields to energy wedges, air cushioning and complex face guards.
But those of us who work in this industry mustn’t believe football is the only sport where head injuries are possible. Baseball and lacrosse players have been killed while playing and soccer players use their heads on corner kicks and direct kicks all the time. Sports where bats or sticks are used for contact (ice hockey, field hockey, lacrosse, baseball, softball) or where fighting is the principle act of the sport (boxing, MMA, tae kwon do) or sports where athletes are thrown to the ground (wrestling, judo, sumo) all run the risk of physical injury and potential head trauma.
I doubt any in our field would suddenly call for the termination of contact sports so I think we all must seek ways to make sports safer for the youth and high school participants. It seems unlikely anyone would want football/soccer (in any form) abolished or the head ball outlawed in soccer (especially since the players can’t use their hands as it is). But let’s also be honest that this issue is not going to go away with logic that runs along the lines of “kids need to tough that stuff out” or Hell, when I was playing …”
Like cars without seat belts, smoking and steroids, the greater good must always be sought. And despite spirited rebuttals, that undoubtedly will come from good and informed folks, change – where brain damage is possible – is generally a foregone conclusion.
Or as the great singer-songwriter Sam Cooke once noted, “a change is gonna come.”
By Rick Burton
David B. Falk Professor of Sport Management
Syracuse University
Monday, November 9, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
What Chicago’s Loss Might Mean
Was sitting in class the other night -- my SU International Sports Relations course for those of you keeping track at home -- and asking what Chicago’s loss in bidding to host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games might mean to America. After all, Chicago and the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) had spent more than $50-million dollars and asked President Obama and the First Lady to drop everything (Health Care, Afghanistan, Economic Reform, the White Sox) and jet off to Copenhagen to inspire a few International Olympic Committee (IOC) voters to pick the Windy City. Most folks thought Chicago was a lock to make the finals.
As you know, it didn’t work. Chicago lost in the first round, Rio won big and America quietly went back to the NFL, baseball playoffs, college football and the start of the NHL season.
So I asked, in that Socratic way, (think ‘So-Crates’ blowing his dust into the wind during Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure), whether America was slipping as an international sports power and even, more broadly, as an empire.
We ended up with an interesting discussion. On some levels, undergraduate students of the early 21st century are not too worried about whether America is going to follow the historic arc of the Romans, Ottomans and British when we talk empires. Their America is one of freedom, IPods and cheese pizza. It’s a pretty good gig and even better if their basketball team is ranked in the pre-season Top 20.
And I’m not too sure they were overly concerned about the U.S. not hosting a global sports party like the World Cup or Olympics for possibly the next 13 years. In their minds, the FIFA World Cup in 1994 and the Atlanta Summer Olympics (1996) and Salt Lake Winter Olympics (2002) were proof enough that every so often the sports world comes to the U.S.
In time, they suggested, it will come again.
But here’s the rub: With the U.S. out of 2016 and 2018 (the U.S. will not bid for those Winter Games) and unlikely to bid for the 2020 Summer Games after losing 2012 to London and 2016 to Rio, it falls to U.S. Soccer to bid for the 2018 or 2022 World Cup. My sources tell me that the U.S. is a decent chance for 2022 but of course anything could happen. For the sake of this blog, though, let’s just say America gets the 2022 Cup. That means 20 years will have passed since 2002 for America to host something globally significant (with no disrespect intended for rugby, yachting or cricket).
Twenty years is a long time in a digital age and it suggests we are entering a time when America is no longer the optimal choice. That despite our wealth and financial influence, the world’s decision makers believe other places are better or more deserving. That they can live without Uncle Sam paying for the balloons and party hats.
Is that symbolic of something larger? Something creeping out there in the night just beyond the perimeter?
Sure, you can write off sports events as a means to provide good things for elite athletes. Maybe there is even some economic benefit to the local stakeholders. But what does it mean if, to quote Wayne and Garth, “we’re not worthy.” Does it mean America is falling behind? Does it portend a subtle, even subliminal undercurrent that Americans are starting to sense but can’t yet articulate? To paraphrase that little old band from Texas (ZZ Top), ‘we might be bad, even nationwide … but we’re no longer the sharpest dressed dudes.’
To their credit, my students didn’t think the world was ending or the sky falling but they did recognize (or at least suggest) that America has lost much global currency in the last decade. And could lose more if something doesn’t change. Evidence of their hope was supported just that morning by President Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. It suggested America might climb back on top after a long winter hibernation.
To my way of thinking, though, it certainly means that U.S. sport management programs need to prepare the next generation of David Sterns (NBA), Gary Bettmans (NHL) and Don Garbers (MLS) who can bring the world’s athletes to North America but we also need intelligent graduates to volunteer to help build up global sport federations that drive sport at the grass roots level worldwide.
Let’s also hope that U.S. Soccer and the USOC can get America back in gear by 2020 or 2022. That’s only 11-13 years from now and by then a lot of my students will have had their first children and that Generation Next might, if we do our job well in the decade to come, potentially see America as a global sports hub again.
That, my friends, is the final word … for now.
As you know, it didn’t work. Chicago lost in the first round, Rio won big and America quietly went back to the NFL, baseball playoffs, college football and the start of the NHL season.
So I asked, in that Socratic way, (think ‘So-Crates’ blowing his dust into the wind during Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure), whether America was slipping as an international sports power and even, more broadly, as an empire.
We ended up with an interesting discussion. On some levels, undergraduate students of the early 21st century are not too worried about whether America is going to follow the historic arc of the Romans, Ottomans and British when we talk empires. Their America is one of freedom, IPods and cheese pizza. It’s a pretty good gig and even better if their basketball team is ranked in the pre-season Top 20.
And I’m not too sure they were overly concerned about the U.S. not hosting a global sports party like the World Cup or Olympics for possibly the next 13 years. In their minds, the FIFA World Cup in 1994 and the Atlanta Summer Olympics (1996) and Salt Lake Winter Olympics (2002) were proof enough that every so often the sports world comes to the U.S.
In time, they suggested, it will come again.
But here’s the rub: With the U.S. out of 2016 and 2018 (the U.S. will not bid for those Winter Games) and unlikely to bid for the 2020 Summer Games after losing 2012 to London and 2016 to Rio, it falls to U.S. Soccer to bid for the 2018 or 2022 World Cup. My sources tell me that the U.S. is a decent chance for 2022 but of course anything could happen. For the sake of this blog, though, let’s just say America gets the 2022 Cup. That means 20 years will have passed since 2002 for America to host something globally significant (with no disrespect intended for rugby, yachting or cricket).
Twenty years is a long time in a digital age and it suggests we are entering a time when America is no longer the optimal choice. That despite our wealth and financial influence, the world’s decision makers believe other places are better or more deserving. That they can live without Uncle Sam paying for the balloons and party hats.
Is that symbolic of something larger? Something creeping out there in the night just beyond the perimeter?
Sure, you can write off sports events as a means to provide good things for elite athletes. Maybe there is even some economic benefit to the local stakeholders. But what does it mean if, to quote Wayne and Garth, “we’re not worthy.” Does it mean America is falling behind? Does it portend a subtle, even subliminal undercurrent that Americans are starting to sense but can’t yet articulate? To paraphrase that little old band from Texas (ZZ Top), ‘we might be bad, even nationwide … but we’re no longer the sharpest dressed dudes.’
To their credit, my students didn’t think the world was ending or the sky falling but they did recognize (or at least suggest) that America has lost much global currency in the last decade. And could lose more if something doesn’t change. Evidence of their hope was supported just that morning by President Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. It suggested America might climb back on top after a long winter hibernation.
To my way of thinking, though, it certainly means that U.S. sport management programs need to prepare the next generation of David Sterns (NBA), Gary Bettmans (NHL) and Don Garbers (MLS) who can bring the world’s athletes to North America but we also need intelligent graduates to volunteer to help build up global sport federations that drive sport at the grass roots level worldwide.
Let’s also hope that U.S. Soccer and the USOC can get America back in gear by 2020 or 2022. That’s only 11-13 years from now and by then a lot of my students will have had their first children and that Generation Next might, if we do our job well in the decade to come, potentially see America as a global sports hub again.
That, my friends, is the final word … for now.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
About the Department of Sport Management
The academically rigorous sport management curriculum combines program-specific courses with professional electives and liberal arts requirements, providing students with the tools to pursue a career--or even graduate study--in sport. Coursework covers areas including marketing, management, communications, societal influences and impacts, ethics and law.
The 124-credit bachelor of science (B.S.) program includes up to 15 elective credits, allowing students to pursue a concentration or minor tailoring their studies according to their professional interests.
For example, to enhance business skills, students can minor in accounting, finance, marketing or management studies. If students have an interest in the outdoors, they can minor in outdoor recreation and tourism. Or, they may wish to sample Syracuse's multitude of courses in communications, law, social sciences, and foreign languages tailoring a program that meets their interests and needs.
In addition, the required 12-credit senior capstone experience provides students with the opportunity to gain hands-on experience in the industry before they graduate.
The 124-credit bachelor of science (B.S.) program includes up to 15 elective credits, allowing students to pursue a concentration or minor tailoring their studies according to their professional interests.
For example, to enhance business skills, students can minor in accounting, finance, marketing or management studies. If students have an interest in the outdoors, they can minor in outdoor recreation and tourism. Or, they may wish to sample Syracuse's multitude of courses in communications, law, social sciences, and foreign languages tailoring a program that meets their interests and needs.
In addition, the required 12-credit senior capstone experience provides students with the opportunity to gain hands-on experience in the industry before they graduate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
