Why isn’t youth football a big sport around here?

[Anonymous]

It is big - DC youth football frequently has teams in the pop warner championship.

I guess when you ask the question - why is youth football not a big thing around here - you meant ....
why do white kids not play pop warner in DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

No. Unfortunately, poorer, less-educated people are not yet aware of the risk of CTE. Hence, youth tackle football being a popular sport in PG County.

You're assuming that the people that let their kids play tackle in PG county are poorly educated?

What about the wealthy counties in other parts of the country? There are many that have successful youth football programs.

It's almost as if youth tackle football has become part of the culture war. That if you let your kid play tackle football, you're uneducated conservative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is big - DC youth football frequently has teams in the pop warner championship.

I guess when you ask the question - why is youth football not a big thing around here - you meant ....
why do white kids not play pop warner in DC?

BINGO!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

How many of those girls ended up with CTE?

Who knows? How many youth football players will end up with CTE? We also don't know that, given the changes to helmets/safe tackling that have been implemented in the last 10 years.

The point isn't whether football is dangerous; it very clearly is. The point is that the smug parents that condemn football families but let their daughters play soccer should probably take a moment to reflect.

The difference in risk is not as great as they like to tell themselves

The difference is that football is inherently dangerous. Regardless of the protective gear and precautions, it will always be dangerous because what makes it dangerous, tackling and other contact is what makes it football. You take that stuff out and you have flag football.

In soccer, while girls concussion rates are almost as high as football players, the football players still have those high rates wearing helmets!

In addition, the boys soccer concussion rates is significantly lower. So it’s unlikely that it’s the sport that is the issue, and that girls soccer playing, training, etc. can still be changed to make it safer, as the article also discusses. I don’t think that’s the case for tackle football.

I totally agree. But until girls soccer leagues starting requiring soft padded helmets to play, the reality is that those athletes are at the same risk as the boys that play tackle football.

So the parents that don't let little Larlo play tackle (and boast about it on DCUM) but do let Larla play soccer are just fooling themselves.

My point ISN'T that since girls soccer also poses a similar risk, then tackle football is safe.

It's that parents are doing a poor job of risk assessment by prohibiting tackle football but allowing other activities that have a similar risk profile

I don’t disagree with your point about parents needing to make a more critical risk assessment.

But perhaps parents of female soccer players have decided there’s less risk bc there is some control/room for change as to how their girl can train or play soccer that will minimize the risk.

I don’t have a female soccer player or a football player and fwiw, I just assume parents have made a risk assessment that they and their kids are comfortable with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m in N Arlington and my DS and a lot of the sporty kids at school do play in a flag football league (in addition to other sports throughout the year). A friend of mine near Bethesda has a son who plays flag football and lacrosse. These are wealthy families, so definitely not just a sport for the “poor” or “uneducated” as some PPs suggest.

It does tend to draw in the pretty competitive sports-loving kids. I’m less inclined to let mine play tackle, but he really loves the sport and I need to research it more compared to other risks we let him take.

But those kids playing flag and lacrosse don't play tackle? So I'm not sure how that refutes PP's point

She said youth football, didn’t specify tackle or flag. And most the leagues for young kids are flag. I think tackle starts around middle school here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

How many of those girls ended up with CTE?

From your article:
Some have attributed the gender differences to girls’ greater likelihood to report their symptoms. These theories suggest that boys are more likely to hide their concussion symptoms so they can return to play sooner. Parents may also contribute to this phenomenon by encouraging sons to be tough and to downplay injuries. If this is the case, boys may suffer from concussions in similar or greater numbers to girls, but their injuries are not reflected in the statistics, because they go unreported.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is big - DC youth football frequently has teams in the pop warner championship.

I guess when you ask the question - why is youth football not a big thing around here - you meant ....
why do white kids not play pop warner in DC?

BINGO!

Have you ever been to a Pop Warner practice/game? I do not allow my Black son to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

How many of those girls ended up with CTE?

Who knows? How many youth football players will end up with CTE? We also don't know that, given the changes to helmets/safe tackling that have been implemented in the last 10 years.

The point isn't whether football is dangerous; it very clearly is. The point is that the smug parents that condemn football families but let their daughters play soccer should probably take a moment to reflect.

The difference in risk is not as great as they like to tell themselves

The difference is that football is inherently dangerous. Regardless of the protective gear and precautions, it will always be dangerous because what makes it dangerous, tackling and other contact is what makes it football. You take that stuff out and you have flag football.

In soccer, while girls concussion rates are almost as high as football players, the football players still have those high rates wearing helmets!

In addition, the boys soccer concussion rates is significantly lower. So it’s unlikely that it’s the sport that is the issue, and that girls soccer playing, training, etc. can still be changed to make it safer, as the article also discusses. I don’t think that’s the case for tackle football.

The girls soccer is dangerous because of contested headers. Unless you ban head balls, I don't see how you make it safer.

Ban headers (which would probably make people furious) or require something similar to rugby helmets, which which make make headers less effective and people would object to "the look"

Heck, we were watching college softball last night and it amazed me that some of the pitchers still dont wear face masks. No way, they'll get the older athletes to wear the helmets. It has to start at the youth level.

But the reality is that youth tackle football is trying to take steps to reduce head injuries. The helmet technology has improved greatly over the past few years. Youth soccer has done almost nothing.

It's entirely possible that girls soccer will have a high concussion rate than tackle football within 5-10 years.

And again, I'm NOT saying that tackle football risk is exaggerated. I am saying that other sports should be getting the same scrutiny.

Youth soccer has banned headers through age 11

[Anonymous]

The wealthy kids in the suburbs do play football. First it’s flag and then around 7th grade many move on to tackle and then play at the high school level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m in N Arlington and my DS and a lot of the sporty kids at school do play in a flag football league (in addition to other sports throughout the year). A friend of mine near Bethesda has a son who plays flag football and lacrosse. These are wealthy families, so definitely not just a sport for the “poor” or “uneducated” as some PPs suggest.

It does tend to draw in the pretty competitive sports-loving kids. I’m less inclined to let mine play tackle, but he really loves the sport and I need to research it more compared to other risks we let him take.

But those kids playing flag and lacrosse don't play tackle? So I'm not sure how that refutes PP's point

She said youth football, didn’t specify tackle or flag. And most the leagues for young kids are flag. I think tackle starts around middle school here.

No. Tackle starts around 2nd grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

How many of those girls ended up with CTE?

Who knows? How many youth football players will end up with CTE? We also don't know that, given the changes to helmets/safe tackling that have been implemented in the last 10 years.

The point isn't whether football is dangerous; it very clearly is. The point is that the smug parents that condemn football families but let their daughters play soccer should probably take a moment to reflect.

The difference in risk is not as great as they like to tell themselves

The difference is that football is inherently dangerous. Regardless of the protective gear and precautions, it will always be dangerous because what makes it dangerous, tackling and other contact is what makes it football. You take that stuff out and you have flag football.

In soccer, while girls concussion rates are almost as high as football players, the football players still have those high rates wearing helmets!

In addition, the boys soccer concussion rates is significantly lower. So it’s unlikely that it’s the sport that is the issue, and that girls soccer playing, training, etc. can still be changed to make it safer, as the article also discusses. I don’t think that’s the case for tackle football.

The girls soccer is dangerous because of contested headers. Unless you ban head balls, I don't see how you make it safer.

Ban headers (which would probably make people furious) or require something similar to rugby helmets, which which make make headers less effective and people would object to "the look"

Heck, we were watching college softball last night and it amazed me that some of the pitchers still dont wear face masks. No way, they'll get the older athletes to wear the helmets. It has to start at the youth level.

But the reality is that youth tackle football is trying to take steps to reduce head injuries. The helmet technology has improved greatly over the past few years. Youth soccer has done almost nothing.

It's entirely possible that girls soccer will have a high concussion rate than tackle football within 5-10 years.

And again, I'm NOT saying that tackle football risk is exaggerated. I am saying that other sports should be getting the same scrutiny.

Youth soccer has banned headers through age 11

Yup, that's why I said "almost nothing" that's all they've done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

No. Unfortunately, poorer, less-educated people are not yet aware of the risk of CTE. Hence, youth tackle football being a popular sport in PG County.

You're assuming that the people that let their kids play tackle in PG county are poorly educated?

What about the wealthy counties in other parts of the country? There are many that have successful youth football programs.

It's almost as if youth tackle football has become part of the culture war. That if you let your kid play tackle football, you're uneducated conservative.

Yes and yes.

Lots uneducated rich people in TX, Mississippi etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

How many of those girls ended up with CTE?

Who knows? How many youth football players will end up with CTE? We also don't know that, given the changes to helmets/safe tackling that have been implemented in the last 10 years.

The point isn't whether football is dangerous; it very clearly is. The point is that the smug parents that condemn football families but let their daughters play soccer should probably take a moment to reflect.

The difference in risk is not as great as they like to tell themselves

The difference is that football is inherently dangerous. Regardless of the protective gear and precautions, it will always be dangerous because what makes it dangerous, tackling and other contact is what makes it football. You take that stuff out and you have flag football.

In soccer, while girls concussion rates are almost as high as football players, the football players still have those high rates wearing helmets!

In addition, the boys soccer concussion rates is significantly lower. So it’s unlikely that it’s the sport that is the issue, and that girls soccer playing, training, etc. can still be changed to make it safer, as the article also discusses. I don’t think that’s the case for tackle football.

This whole post demonstrates a fundamental lack of logic, but this sentence takes the cake. If the end result is the same, the fact that one group is wearing a helmet and the other isn't makes absolutely no differencev--- unless they change the sport. But the same can ABSOLUTELY be said for football.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People around here think football is for poor people. They cite CTE and concussions while driving their kids to equally dangerous sports.

like what?

Lots of sports are equally or more dangerous than football. Cheerleading, gymnastics, basketball, boxing, skateboarding, hockey, equestrian...

Also this: " new study, published in the journal Pediatrics, found that girls who play high school soccer are at nearly the same risk for traumatic brain injuries as boys who play high school football"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2019/11/07/the-concussion-gender-gap-why-girls-suffer-more-head-injuries/?sh=5a2f4e026937

But meanwhile, DCUM has a whole forum dedicated to soccer.

The hate on youth tackle football is rooted in classism and racism, lets be honest. The posts on this thread prove it. People say they are "too educated" to let their kids play, and that the tackle football isn't really a thing in the DMV (go check out Saturday afternoons in PG county; youth football is doing great there), but they really mean that they don't want to associate with either poor white or black people.

And then they drive to their soccer tournaments where little Larla has virtually the same risk

How many of those girls ended up with CTE?

From your article:
Some have attributed the gender differences to girls’ greater likelihood to report their symptoms. These theories suggest that boys are more likely to hide their concussion symptoms so they can return to play sooner. Parents may also contribute to this phenomenon by encouraging sons to be tough and to downplay injuries. If this is the case, boys may suffer from concussions in similar or greater numbers to girls, but their injuries are not reflected in the statistics, because they go unreported.

The quote you cite above is not talking about CTE which much longer term impact and the manifests itself much later in life.

The other mistake you and others in this thread are making is attributing concussions as the only or main cause of CTE and adverse impact on long-term brain health. The latest research indicates that the repetitive sub-concussive blows, which are a unique aspect of football that isn't shared by other sports such as soccer, hockey, lacrosse, etc, that may be as big of a factor, or more of a factor, on adverse long-term brain health and CTE as concussion events, which are less common.

[Anonymous]

Tackle can wait:





▶PLAY VIDEO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th1uN3Pjawo