That is hardly the first football lawsuit settlement.
Another dead high school football player:
Why do you hate America?
I was on a parents committee making up requirements for a new principal at our high school. After a long discussion on support for sports, I made this exact point. The other parents looked at me as if I was crazy. And it is a good, middle class school.
My high school didn’t have a football team. They decided to start one and started to sell season tickets to measure support. They sold six.
My graduating class was 1400. But we did send oodles of people to the Ivy Leagues and MIT, just none to the NFL.
Collegiate football is hugely profitable only for a small minority of schools. (Per the NCAA, just 20 of the 123 schools in the Football Bowl Subdivision were in the black; nobody in the lower ranks of division II or III turned a profit. Most schools are subsidizing football and basketball now, and expenses are rising quickly. With a few more big lawsuit payouts, the number of schools that can afford the subsidies is going to dwindle. The big storied programs (the Alabamas and Notre Dames and Floridas and Auburns) will continue, but smaller schools that can’t turn out 30,000 people every Saturday will drop football. With fewer college opportunities, I think fewer high schools will bother; they’ll move on to soccer or basketball or baseball or whatever other sports continue to offer college scholarships.
Texas, of course, will be different.
I’d be happy if they’d stop letting elementary aged kids play the game. To me, it’s criminal of parents to let them play, and I include my daughter in that.
Small towns in the Midwest - the only area in which I was raised - practically worship HS football.
Even when they can’t afford the insurance, they worship HS football.
The money ‘will be found’ sums it up.
Please note: the damage now being discussed does NOT involve concussions - the damage results from (it seems to appear) repeated blows which are, individually, not even close to concussion.
Think ‘punch drunk’ in boxers of yore - maybe including Muhammad Ali.
I fear football is in the same mindset as the ‘gun slingin’ cowboy’ of the heavily romanticized ‘old west’ which forms a large part of the American ethos.
As long as we worship the gun-slinging cowboy, we will worship football.
Let me know when politicians get booed when they mention ‘Second Amendment Rights’.
That’s when I expect to see HS football dry up.
Can’t happen soon enough. Stupid sport.
Seems to me like the Feds could press this if they desired. Schools with football programs don’t get Federal funding. It’s obvious that the sport can’t be made safe, and high school causes enough brain damage as it is. Texans can send their kids to private football clubs if they want to maintain their reputation.
Would it actually happen? I’m not sure, but I don’t think it’s impossible that it could happen in under 20 years.
But even in the midwest thats starting to change.
Yes, its still there but a growing number of schools are finding fewer players going out every year and some high schools have to combine with another high school to form a team. My old high school now plays 8 man.
I think part of this is the lesser clout of jockocracy that tends to rule schools. Before jocks were heroes and got away with anything but thats starting to change and more and more they are portrayed as baffoons. Plus since its darn near impossible to get a good football scholarship their is the real question of why put so much effort into it?
Today’s NYT: As Worries Rise and Players Flee, a Missouri School Board Cuts Football. They disbanded the team in June, even though they reached the championship five years ago. There are other examples of teams being cancelled due to lack of interest. Also five HS football players died last year.
Still male high school football players have only dropped by 2.4% relative to five years ago. Safety standards still vary: not all schools require trainers or emergency personnel at all games. I’m sort of hoping for better safety and maybe a 50% decline in popularity.
Is my school the only one that gets a significant part of its budget from football? What will the rich parents move on to instead of football, if their kids are no longer interested? If it’s not something in school, that’s going to decrease school funding.
These clubs will have to be just as liable for injuries and such, so I don’t see how that improves things, either.
Being too lazy to dig into the link, how is that figured? Is it just costs v. ticket sales and TV/radio revenue, or are contributions from loyal boosters included as part of the revenue calculation?
Because my impression is that one reason nobody talks about dropping their money-losing football programs is that they want to keep rich alumni contributing big money to the school. So ISTM that you’ve got to count that income stream as part of the determination of whether a program’s profitable.
According to this report, 69 of the 108 FBS schools that reported their finances to the NCAA in 2014 made money from their football programs if all income, including boosters and any funding from the university itself, is taken into account. I think the “12 schools” number is for those schools that make money even if you don’t count money provided by the school.
Since every Division II and III football program loses money, I don’t think it’s a case of “keeping it to keep the rich boosters happy.”
Also keep in mind that every Division I school has to have at least six men’s sports, and it may come down to which sport would lose the least amount of money - and only FBS football and Division I men’s basketball has any TV money that goes to the schools instead of into the NCAA’s treasury.
It’s hard to see how money provided by the school can possibly be factored in on the “revenue” side in any reasonable sense.
This. In a lot of places it’s more than a sport; it’s a weekly community event.
Grew up in a place very like that. However, the area has changed, and I can see football being phased out of school. A good thing in my grumpy opinion; sport should not take up as much of the schools’ time as it did when I was a younger bunny.
A lot of folks in the thread seem to be using the word “school” to mean anything between an elementary school and a university. As well as mixing public and private institutions. Clearly different particulars apply to each. So I suspect some folks are talking past one another.
IMO football will disappear from upper-middle class suburban high schools first, then spread up and down the age & socioeconomic ladders from there. It’ll be a century before it’s completely gone, if even then.
But the idea that 100% of US public high schools *must *field a boy’s / men’s football team is definitely fading now.
+1
I have always voted down any increase in funding for the local school if any of the money would go to sports, especially football. Until just a few years ago, a kid could flunk out of senior and still participate in the graduation ceremony, if s/he was a jock. Absurd.
I have to agree. It amazed me how little interest in football was shown in the upper middle class city where I worked, even during the year the team went to the state championship. Educated people are able to understand the injury risk. I believe that ice hockey is just another Bill Masterton away from dying at high school level in the US, too.
My generation still has the diehard pro and college fans, and the wealthy fans will attend those games. What I don’t see are people making huge alumni donations to ensure seats. But I don’t think any of my social circle would want to see their grandchildren taking risks in football or in hockey, even if their children did play.
The Alamo of football will remain in Texas. However, I am curious: what is the rate of participation in the large cities vs. that in towns under 10,000 population?
Larger cities have larger high schools. A high school of 4,000 students will not have 10 times as many students on the football team as a high school of 400 students–not because of lack of interest in participation but because the larger school can’t handle that many participants so will be much more selective.