Reevaluating Youth Football: a Call for Change

Recent medical research has conclusively demonstrated a significant link between playing American football and alterations in participants' brain chemistry. Notably, emerging data suggests that the younger a participant is, the higher the likelihood that they might severely alter the makeup of their brains. This critical topic has been a long time coming, and I firmly believe that with the substantial body of evidence now available, American football should be banned for individuals under the age of 18, especially in high schools. These institutions are federally funded, implying that our government inadvertently supports exposing our youth to a sport that poses significant risks to their neurological health.

To clarify, I am not advocating for the complete abolition of football, as such an undertaking would be nearly impossible given the sport's deep cultural roots. However, I am arguing that banning youth contact football—from Pop Warner leagues up through high school—could save countless lives. The argument for removing the sport from schools and banning it for anyone under 18 hinges on the idea that adults should have the autonomy to assess the benefits versus the risks of playing the sport. In this way, a feeder league, akin to minor league systems, could be established to funnel players into the NFL once they are of legal age, allowing them to make informed decisions about their participation.

Research and Evidence

A study conducted at Boston University found that players who engaged in youth football before the age of 12 had a twofold risk of experiencing problems with behavioral regulation, apathy, and executive function, along with a threefold risk of clinically elevated depression scores (Belson 2). This research suggests that early exposure to full-contact football correlates with early onset changes in brain chemistry. While some argue that football has become safer through rule changes like those addressing targeting and kickoffs, concussions remain a prevalent issue. These injuries can significantly impede a student's ability to learn and may affect younger athletes for longer durations compared to their older counterparts.

Critics might argue that football provides critical exercise for youth, a valid concern given that over 35% of American youth are classified as obese. However, football is but one of many options available for physical activity, and the argument that removing football would drastically affect public health is unfounded. In fact, football poses a significant health risk to young participants, and there are numerous alternative sports that can provide the necessary physical exercise without the associated risks.

Reimagining Football's Role

The cultural significance of football as a component of American identity is undeniable. However, the proposal to ban football for athletes under 18 should be considered a viable solution. An alternative pathway for aspiring football players would encourage participation in other sports such as soccer or basketball until they reach an appropriate age for contact football. At that point, they could join private leagues that act as feeder systems to college and professional football, funded by the NFL to manage health and liability insurance. This would relieve taxpayers of the financial burden currently associated with high school football, allowing parents who are comfortable with the risks to support their children's participation.

Notably, numerous NFL and college coaches, as well as former professional players, advocate delaying tackle football until high school. University of Michigan head coach Jim Harbaugh, for example, recommends playing soccer until the eighth grade, then transitioning to football. Esteemed figures in the sport, including Mike Ditka, John Madden, Jim McMahon, Harry Carson, Nick Buoniconti, and Brett Favre, share similar views (Nowinski 1).

The Consequences of Early Exposure

The cognitive development of a child at age 9 is drastically different from that at age 12, and even more so at 18, as the brain continues to mature. A study by Chris Nowinski found that football players who began playing before age 12 were twice as likely to experience problems with behavioral regulation and three times as likely to struggle with depression in adulthood. To illustrate the severe repercussions of early exposure to football, consider the case of Teo-Nesheim, a former NFL player diagnosed posthumously with CTE. Starting his football career at age 11, Teo-Nesheim's life was marked by paranoia, disorientation, and depression, ultimately leading to his untimely death (Belson 3).

Given these findings, the question arises: would you allow your child to play such a violent sport even after understanding these risks? The evidence is overwhelming; permitting our youth to play football is akin to jeopardizing their lives. If banning football for those under 18 can save even one life, it is a measure worth considering. The continued existence of college and NFL football is feasible until more comprehensive evidence emerges. However, the current data already indicates that delaying the start of contact football significantly benefits athletes, as their brains are better developed and equipped to withstand the sport's physical demands.

Reforming Football for Health and Safety

Beyond the immediate physical risks, playing football from a young age can adversely affect academic performance, placing student-athletes at a disadvantage in the classroom. Considering that only 5.7% of high school seniors who participate in football make it to college-level play, and a mere 0.09% reach the NFL, why should the remaining 1.1 million athletes compromise their educational prospects due to the sport? Football is a double-edged sword; most players neither profit financially from the sport nor gain advantages in the real world, as injuries often hinder their cognitive potential.

While some argue that football instills invaluable life lessons, including accountability and teamwork, this does not justify the physical risks involved. As Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) notes, accountability in football often leads to someone getting hurt when even one player errs. While the sport undeniably teaches important lessons, it is problematic for college head coaches or other stakeholders benefiting financially from these young athletes to downplay the risks involved.

Public Perception and Declining Participation

The need for reform is underscored by the declining number of parents permitting their children to play football. Over the past decade, high school football participation has steadily decreased by 7% (Messer 2). Headlines highlighting both behavioral issues among star players and young athletes choosing to retire early for health reasons contribute to this trend. For instance, Chris Borland, a promising young player for the San Francisco 49ers, retired after just one year, citing health risks. Borland's decision is a powerful statement on the sport's long-term consequences.

Repeated concussions have been linked to severe long-term health issues, including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. If we restrict access to cigarettes, vaping, and alcohol for youth due to their detrimental effects, why allow them to play a sport known to cause brain damage? As experts like John Hardy from University College London point out, the evidence of football's dangers is compelling and necessitates immediate action. While some rule changes have been implemented, the sport's future remains uncertain, particularly as more parents withdraw their children from participation.

The Cultural Dilemma and Path Forward

Despite the mounting evidence against youth football, the sport's entertainment value and cultural significance often overshadow the risks. The NFL captivates audiences with its dramatic collisions and intense gameplay, even as we acknowledge the potential harm to players. Yet, the likelihood of a collective decision to boycott the NFL is slim, as is the chance that players or owners will prioritize health over profits. Therefore, addressing the issue at the youth level is imperative, with banning football for those under 18 being the most effective strategy.

In conclusion, banning football for individuals under the age of 18 is not only a precautionary measure but a necessary step to safeguard the health and well-being of young athletes. By taking this action, we can ensure that our nation's youth are not subjected to undue risks, allowing them to make informed decisions about their participation in the sport once they reach adulthood.

Did you like this example?

680

36