Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Could football die as a bigtime sport?


wiegie
 Share

Recommended Posts

What Would the End of Football Look Like?

 

An economic perspective on CTE and the concussion crisis

By Tyler Cowen and Kevin Grier on February 9, 2012

 

The NFL is done for the year, but it is not pure fantasy to suggest that it may be done for good in the not-too-distant future. How might such a doomsday scenario play out and what would be the economic and social consequences?

 

By now we're all familiar with the growing phenomenon of head injuries and cognitive problems among football players, even at the high school level. In 2009, Malcolm Gladwell asked whether football might someday come to an end, a concern seconded recently by Jonah Lehrer.

 

Before you say that football is far too big to ever disappear, consider the history: If you look at the stocks in the Fortune 500 from 1983, for example, 40 percent of those companies no longer exist. The original version of Napster no longer exists, largely because of lawsuits. No matter how well a business matches economic conditions at one point in time, it's not a lock to be a leader in the future, and that is true for the NFL too. Sports are not immune to these pressures. In the first half of the 20th century, the three big sports were baseball, boxing, and horse racing, and today only one of those is still a marquee attraction.

 

The most plausible route to the death of football starts with liability suits.1 Precollegiate football is already sustaining 90,000 or more concussions each year. If ex-players start winning judgments, insurance companies might cease to insure colleges and high schools against football-related lawsuits. Coaches, team physicians, and referees would become increasingly nervous about their financial exposure in our litigious society. If you are coaching a high school football team, or refereeing a game as a volunteer, it is sobering to think that you could be hit with a $2 million lawsuit at any point in time. A lot of people will see it as easier to just stay away. More and more modern parents will keep their kids out of playing football, and there tends to be a "contagion effect" with such decisions; once some parents have second thoughts, many others follow suit. We have seen such domino effects with the risks of smoking or driving without seatbelts, two unsafe practices that were common in the 1960s but are much rarer today. The end result is that the NFL's feeder system would dry up and advertisers and networks would shy away from associating with the league, owing to adverse publicity and some chance of being named as co-defendants in future lawsuits.

 

It may not matter that the losses from these lawsuits are much smaller than the total revenue from the sport as a whole. As our broader health care sector indicates (try buying private insurance when you have a history of cancer treatment), insurers don't like to go where they know they will take a beating. That means just about everyone could be exposed to fear of legal action.

 

This slow death march could easily take 10 to 15 years. Imagine the timeline. A couple more college players — or worse, high schoolers — commit suicide with autopsies showing CTE. A jury makes a huge award of $20 million to a family. A class-action suit shapes up with real legs, the NFL keeps changing its rules, but it turns out that less than concussion levels of constant head contact still produce CTE. Technological solutions (new helmets, pads) are tried and they fail to solve the problem. Soon high schools decide it isn't worth it. The Ivy League quits football, then California shuts down its participation, busting up the Pac-12. Then the Big Ten calls it quits, followed by the East Coast schools. Now it's mainly a regional sport in the southeast and Texas/Oklahoma. The socioeconomic picture of a football player becomes more homogeneous: poor, weak home life, poorly educated. Ford and Chevy pull their advertising, as does IBM and eventually the beer companies.

 

There's a lot less money in the sport, and at first it's "the next hockey" and then it's "the next rugby," and finally the franchises start to shutter.

 

Along the way, you would have an NFL with much lower talent levels, less training, and probably greater player representation from poorer countries, where the demand for money is higher and the demand for safety is lower. Finally, the NFL is marginalized as less-dangerous sports gobble up its market share. People — American people — might actually start calling "soccer" by the moniker of "football."

 

Despite its undeniable popularity — and the sense that the game is everywhere — the aggregate economic effect of losing the NFL would not actually be that large. League revenues are around $10 billion per year while U.S. GDP is around $15,300 billion. But that doesn't mean everyone would be fine.

 

Big stadiums will lose a lot of their value and that will drag down neighboring bars and restaurants, causing a lot of them to shut their doors. Cable TV will be less profitable, and this will hasten the movement of TV-watching, if we can still call it that, to the web. Super Bowl Sunday will no longer be the best time to go shopping for a new car at the dealership.

 

Take Green Bay as a case study: A 2009 study of the economic impact of the Packers' stadium estimated "$282 million in output, 2,560 jobs and $124.3 million in earnings, and $15.2 million in tax revenues." That's small potatoes for the national economy as a whole, but for a small and somewhat remote city of 104,000, it is a big deal indeed.2

 

Any location where football is the only game in town will suffer. If the Jets and Giants go, New York still has numerous other pro sports teams, Broadway, high-end shopping, skyscrapers, fine dining, and many other cultural activities. If college football dies, Norman, Oklahoma (current home to one of us), has … noodling? And what about Clemson, in South Carolina, which relies on the periodic weekend football surge into town for its restaurant and retail sales? Imagine a small place of 12,000 people that periodically receives a sudden influx of 100,000 visitors or more, most of them eager to spend money on what is one of their major leisure outings. It's like a port in the Caribbean losing its cruise ship traffic. (Overall, the loss of football could actually increase migration from rural to urban areas over time. Football-dependent areas are especially prominent in rural America, and some of them will lose a lot of money and jobs.)

 

Outside of sports, American human capital and productivity probably rise. No football Saturdays on college campuses means less binge drinking, more studying, better grades, smarter future adults. Losing thousands of college players and hundreds of pro players might produce a few more doctors or engineers. Plus, talented coaches and general managers would gravitate toward management positions in American industry. Heck, just getting rid of fantasy football probably saves American companies hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

 

Other losers include anything that depends heavily on football to be financially viable, including the highly subsidized non-revenue collegiate sports. No more air travel for the field hockey teams or golf squads. Furthermore, many prominent universities would lose their main claim to fame. Alabama and LSU produce a large amount of revenue and notoriety from football without much in the way of first-rate academics to back it up. Schools would have to compete more on academics to be nationally prominent, which would again boost American education.

 

One of the biggest winners would be basketball. To the extent that fans replace football with another sport (instead of meth or oxy), high-octane basketball is the natural substitute. On the pro level, the season can stretch out leisurely, ticket prices rise, ratings rise, maybe the league expands (more great athletes in the pool now), and some of the centers and power forwards will have more bulk. At the college level, March Madness becomes the only game in town.

 

Another winner would be track and field. Future Rob Gronkowskis in the decathlon? Future Jerome Simpsons in the high jump? World records would fall at a rapid pace.

 

This outcome may sound ridiculous, but the collapse of football is more likely than you might think. If recent history has shown anything, it is that observers cannot easily imagine the big changes in advance. Very few people were predicting the collapse of the Soviet Union, the reunification of Germany, or the rise of China as an economic power. Once you start thinking through how the status quo might unravel, a sports universe without the NFL at its center no longer seems absurd.

 

So … Tennis, anyone?

 

Tyler and Kevin are academic economists who think the dismal science can shed some light on the inner workings of the sports world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

One of the biggest winners would be basketball. To the extent that fans replace football with another sport (instead of meth or oxy), high-octane basketball is the natural substitute. On the pro level, the season can stretch out leisurely, ticket prices rise, ratings rise, maybe the league expands (more great athletes in the pool now), and some of the centers and power forwards will have more bulk. At the college level, March Madness becomes the only game in town.

 

This paragraph tells you about all you need to know about the acumen of the writers when it comes to sports. The NBA will never replace football. The game is utterly boring to watch during the regular season as players bode bide their time through the first 43 minutes of games and then decide to start playing hard the last 5 minutes, and the league embraces thuggish behavior both by players and in the marketing of fans. The playoffs have all the sports drama of the WWE.

 

The statement that March Madness becomes the only game in town? What exactly does that mean? The only playoffs worth watching once the NFL is gone? That only the NCAA Tourney will be worth watching at the college level? I don't quite understand what that statement means - and I'm not sure the authors do either.

 

That football fans who won't gravitate to another sport are druggies?

 

Seriously, who the hell are these guys? I seriously can't even tell if this is supposed to be satire or not.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lower level injuries have been occurring for years. It would have to happen on such a wide-ranging basis and with such disregard for players safety that it simply wouldn't happen. In order for any team to have success, players need to have health, so it goes against the nature of the game not to protect its players.

 

Also, the game of football, unlike baseball or boxing, is consistently evolving. I watched the rerun of the Super Bowl between the Pats and the Rams last week in the run up to this year's game. While it's been 10 years, the TV broadcast was light years different and the way the players simply looked was different (physically, the way they fill out the uni's). So the game is shifting how it's played all the time and will continue to do so. That's unlike baseball for sure (at least in terms of the pace of the change), and boxing especially.

 

Also, there's a cultural imprint that exists with football in this country that is going to be difficult to replace. In many communities that aren't real big cities, the Friday night high school football games are part of the fabric of the community. This isn't the case everywhere, and it certainly isn't the case in urban environments, but something would have to replace the traditions that have sprung up over the last half-century.

 

I'm not naive enough to suggest that football is here forever, but look at the 20th century sports the article compares it to. Baseball is doing extremely well 140 years after organizing the sport, 110 years after the two-league model that exists right now, and 65 years after integrating the game, especially since they are continually seeking out new talents in different regions. Boxing has essentially evolved into MMA, I know there are great differences, but I'm talking about "fighting" as a sport. Horse racing was essentially the only legal form of gambling that was available in this country up until the 1970's and had nothing to do with being a "sport" as far as attracting spectators, and look at every casino that's sprung up along the interstate any where near Indian lands.

 

So, clearly, nothing lasts forever, and while we may not recognize the game in 50 years, and something more entertaining will have taken it's place, I guarantee the game of football is going to still be there on some massive level we'll all be watching.

Edited by godtomsatan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly injuries have always happened and for the greatest blame it is because of the players and not the coaches or teams. But football has a tremendous appeal because it is exciting to watch - far more scoring than most baseball games and yet without the constant scoring of basketball which leaves only the final minute or so of interest. Plus it only happens once a week on the weekend. Fans can relax on Sunday and watch their favorite team and be done with it until next Sunday.

 

Injuries are a true problem but they won't lead to the demise of football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus it only happens once a week on the weekend. Fans can relax on Sunday and watch their favorite team and be done with it until next Sunday.

 

This, however, is something that will not always be the case. Look at what ESPN is doing to the sport. Making it a seven night a week extravaganza. Eventually, as the sport evolves on the collegiate level into more and more weeknight type showcasing, there exists the potential for a burnout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another factor that goes against the nature of this article is the fact that the "minor leagues" of college football is nearly a completely different fan base than at the NFL level. And college football has been around way longer than the pros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Injuries are a true problem but they won't lead to the demise of football.

 

I don't know - some of those studies on CTE are worrying. There's a chance we're going to have a sea change and football and hockey will go *poof*.

 

What that means, I don't know - I don't see people just going "oh well, let's not watch sports then"; people will gravitate to other things, but it's difficult to say what. Lacrosse, for one, has many of the features football has without the concussion issue, but has never gotten beyond a niche (at best) foothold in the US, aside from some places out East.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think dark water water polo will be the next big thing. It is exactly the same as regular water polo but the water is very brown, cloudy, and is not illuminated. Each week a new and unannounced challenge is put into the pool. It is an "X" factor. It could alter the game, It could effect each team equally or one team alone by the luck of the draw. What is this challenge. Aquatic or semi aquatic carnivorous creatures.

 

Imagine one week things are going along well for your team when a bunch of coils are thrown around your goal keeper. It is only then that you realize this weeks challenge was an anaconada. What will next week bring, crocs, eels, piranha, sting rays, who can say, teeth, tenticle, stinger?

 

Hell, we could have fresh water leagues and salt water leagues. This is going to be big. The vegas books could set lines on the games and on the identity of that weeks "x" factor. ("I put a c-note down on box jellies". "You fool, the road dog has not faced two stinging "X' factors in a row in the last 2 years.")

 

 

 

 

As for football dying due to lawsuits I can definately see litigators out there right now making the effort to bleed the sport. Those folks do not take a view that they, as parasites, should not kill the host. They do not understand a symbiotic relationship. Off-setting their efforts are the fact that their clients are not going to be able to argue their condition is deteriorated vis-a-vis that of the general population because as we all know many of these guys were not of sound mind to begin with.

 

I imagine that without universities and teams protecting these young rapists, wife and girlfriend beaters, and dopers and drunk drivers, that the work of the courts will go up but that in short order crime rates would go down.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another factor that goes against the nature of this article is the fact that the "minor leagues" of college football is nearly a completely different fan base than at the NFL level. And college football has been around way longer than the pros.

I don't know that I'd say "waay" longer - significantly longer, yes. Anything resembling modern CFB started with Walter Camp in the mid 1880s or so; the first verfied pro, Pudge Heffelfinger, was paid in 1892, and town "pro" (paid to play) teams were around well before the NFL was founded in 1919.

 

 

I also disagree with you that CFB and the NFL have a nearly completely different fan base. I think there is TREMENDOUS overlap between the two. I'm pretty sure that liking HS football = liking CFB = liking NFL, though people may be more rabid about one or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boxing was destroyed by the greedy pigs running it and the plethora of bogus world championships. Horse racing was, as has been pointed out above, a means to an end (gambling) rather than a bona fide sport in and of itself (occasional household names like Secretariat and Seabiscuit notwithstanding).

 

I don't see how football could go down the same path to minority interest as either of these two, so that argument doesn't carry much weight, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also disagree with you that CFB and the NFL have a nearly completely different fan base. I think there is TREMENDOUS overlap between the two. I'm pretty sure that liking HS football = liking CFB = liking NFL, though people may be more rabid about one or the other.

 

How many season ticket holders for Wisconsin also have Packers tickets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many season ticket holders for Wisconsin also have Packers tickets?

:wacko: Tough to say, since GB season tickets are nigh-impossible to get.

 

I think a better question is how many people go to UW AND GB games, own paraphernalia for each, and watch them both play?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another factor that goes against the nature of this article is the fact that the "minor leagues" of college football is nearly a completely different fan base than at the NFL level. And college football has been around way longer than the pros.

 

This is an important factor. I dont really like college football. My buddy at work doesnt really like the NFL. The guys i play FF with dont really like college.

 

This seems to be the general trend among the majority

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live about 3 hours from GB and Madison and I can think of at least half a dozen.

 

I go to Washington games and I go to Seahawk games and I can tell you most definitely they are completely different crowds. Obviously, there is some crossover, but if it's more than 10% of the people at either game who have season tickets holders for both, I'd be shocked. Maybe it's a little different in Wisconsin for Badgers and Packers (technically, the Seahawks market consists of 3-5 other Division 1 football programs, and people travel a pretty fair distance for Hawks games), but by and large I don't think there are that many people who actively follow both levels of the game with season tickets.

 

My theory has always been, you have people who are college football fans, you have people who are NFL fans, and there's fans who don't give a Athena about the game on the field and are there for the tailgating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information