Do fans bear any responsibility for athlete injuries incurred during games?

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by mckerney

The Real 'Deflategate' Scandal Is That Anyone Cares - TIME

So as fans, are we morally obligated to stop watching football so that we don't play a part in these players sustaining terrible injuries?


---------

I posted this in the deflate-gate thread and got no responses. I thought maybe a dedicated thread might spur some discussion. Basically, sometimes I wonder if I am part of the problem when it comes to the debilitating injuries, particularly brain injuries, that football players incur during their careers. I know without a doubt that I wouldn't want my son to play football at any level. Mike Ditka said the same thing the other day. Is it okay for me to enjoy other people's sons being put at risk?

What do you think? Are fans who watch the sport and support it through buying jerseys, hats, tickets, watching advertisements, etc. in some part responsible for the often life-ruining injuries some players suffer? I realize that football will go on with or without me watching it, but I'm not sure that absolves me of any guilt for watching the modern equivalent of gladiator combat.

[ISiddiqui]

That is actually a difficult question. Obviously you are feeding the monster when you watch the NFL. So if you think that the players are subject to horrible risk, then you may have some liability in that.

Who knows, it may be like the gladiators. Down the line people may look and say how in the Hell did people cheer for that?

[saldana]

i have to say no.

first, the risk vs. reward scenario is monumental. the league minimum is $420,000...so yes, they may get busted up, but if they dont, even the 53rd guy on each team is making over 9X the national average salary of $44,888, and are arguably doing much less work. if the average career is 3 years in the league, thats a lot more money than most of us will ever see, and if managed well, is all they will need for the rest of their lives.

second, they are 100% aware of the risks of being a professional football player...they have been playing their entire lives and if they dont know that their career and future physical condition could change drastically on every single play, then the only thing i feel bad about is how dumb they are (and i dont really feel bad about that either).

so i guess what i am saying is, they go into it with their eyes wide open and make the choice to do it anyway, so they are responsible for their own selves.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

That is actually a difficult question. Obviously you are feeding the monster when you watch the NFL. So if you think that the players are subject to horrible risk, then you may have some liability in that.

Who knows, it may be like the gladiators. Down the line people may look and say how in the Hell did people cheer for that?

+1

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by saldana

i have to say no.

first, the risk vs. reward scenario is monumental. the league minimum is $420,000...so yes, they may get busted up, but if they dont, even the 53rd guy on each team is making over 9X the national average salary of $44,888, and are arguably doing much less work. if the average career is 3 years in the league, thats a lot more money than most of us will ever see, and if managed well, is all they will need for the rest of their lives.

second, they are 100% aware of the risks of being a professional football player...they have been playing their entire lives and if they dont know that their career and future physical condition could change drastically on every single play, then the only thing i feel bad about is how dumb they are (and i dont really feel bad about that either).

so i guess what i am saying is, they go into it with their eyes wide open and make the choice to do it anyway, so they are responsible for their own selves.

+1

[nol]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I know without a doubt that I wouldn't want my son to play football at any level. Mike Ditka said the same thing the other day. Is it okay for me to enjoy other people's sons being put at risk?

I stopped watching in light of the mounting evidence about CTE and the NFL's attempts to cover it up. My rationale at the time was along the lines of "It'd be one thing if the league had been up front about being the modern equivalent of gladiatorial combat since the players are well-compensated and could very well have decided that the health risks, though significant, were worth it", but stuff like this would have made me uneasy even if the NFL hadn't tried to pass itself off as a tax-free, morally upstanding institution.

From you to Mike Ditka to Barack Obama to LeBron James and so forth, the common thread among people saying they wouldn't want their sons playing football is that they are in a position where their sons (hypothetical or otherwise) will not be lacking in opportunities to get an education and eventually earn a good living for themeselves, so why jeopardize that with brain injuries? Increasingly, those "other people's sons" will be even more disproportionately represented by the poorest/least-educated sectors of society.

[NobodyHere]

Do fans bear any responsibility? Sure

Do I personally give a shit? No

[Julio Riddols]

The players know the risks more now than ever. They are often the ones complaining about the rules making the game soft. When you decide to spend your early life making a career out of a sport like football, you are taking that risk upon yourself.

So, in my opinion, fans are entirely not responsible. These players aren't slaves, they can decide to do something else with their lives, it is entirely up to them.

[Julio Riddols]

To say that the fans bear responsibility is like saying it is one mans fault that another man has free will.

[Abe Sargent]

Not at all.


We have a lot of jobs in America, and elsewhere, that people take in order to get paid and contribute to the economy. Many have some levels of danger attached - coal mining, police work, logging, construction work, and so forth. Just because some people can suffer injuries from a spectator sport, rather than some of these other jobs, doesn't mean that one is wrong and the other okay. Many people have these sorts of careers, and professional athletes often get paid a lot more than a coal miner from West Virginia (who still makes really good money, btw) for a job with a lower death rate.

One man's black lung is another man's brain injury.


I don't see one as better or worse, ethically, than another, simply because I enjoy watching it weekly on TV.

[molson]

I think we all just have different lines about what we're comfortable supporting. The "they knew what they got into" idea works for most of us when it comes to football, but the more violent and dangerous the activity gets, and maybe the less the participants get paid, the more of us wouldn't feel that way. And I definitely know people whose lines are much lower than mine, and don't want to watch or support football, and I get that.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Kodos

So as fans, are we morally obligated to stop watching football so that we don't play a part in these players sustaining terrible injuries?

Nope.

But thanks for asking.

[cuervo72]

I am intrigued by Kodos' Phil Donahue turn.