Violence in Pro Sports - Is there a trickle down to our youth events?

Violence "scandal" in the NFL?  Sure the Gregg Williams tape looks bad, but how bad is it really?  Most fans have not ever been a spectator inside of a high school or college football locker room or on the sidelines.  We like to watch our sports from the stands or on our tv sets in our plush living rooms, and most of us don't realize quite how brutal the talk can get.  Initially sure, I was shocked, but after thinking on the issue I realized that what Williams was telling his players isn't much different from what players tell each other.

The difficulty comes when we consider the example that this sets for our young athletes.  Sure, football is a sport that is based (generally speaking) on violent actions.  Tackling is a "violent" action, and often can result in injury.  We've come to accept this as a part of the game - which is why most high schools and colleges require athletes and parents to sign waivers acknowledging the fact that there is a very good chance they will be hurt playing the sport. How though do the actions seen in NFL games run down and influence younger players?

In all honestly I'm not sure that there is much of a trickle-down.  Middle school and younger football players play quite a different game from that of high school level and above.  Youth football programs see far less injury, likely because the kids are there for fun alone, and are not under the influence of outside factors like fans, peers, and of course the big one - testosterone!  Once our kids hit high school age, the locker room and sideline transform into a place where the encouragements of violence that Gregg Williams spouted are frankly commonplace.  What may surprise some people is the source - not the coaches but the players themselves. 

Williams' words might be shocking to some, but I have heard the same things on high school and college sidelines and in locker rooms, not from the coaches but whispered, spoken, and shouted by individual players and their peers.  I would be a millionaire if I had a quarter for every time I've overheard a player decide that they're going try and injure an opponent.  Emotions run high in football, as in many other contact sports.  I've seen it in soccer, football, ice hockey, lacrosse, field hockey, even basketball and baseball on occasion. 

Athletes learn these "violent" behaviors at the high school age, and rather than a trickle-down it seems to be a trickle-up.  Players establish an in-game pattern whereupon they reach an emotional high then following a bad play or an error of some sort, decide that they want to take it out on another player.  I would imagine that this behavior is learned based on a combination of observation of peers actions, encouragement of older teammates, and of course the heightened emotions that are brought on naturally in our teens.

When we realized that spear-tackling was dangerous and were seeking to ban it from the game, we started with youth sports.  When we needed to change the equipment rules, we started with youth sports.  If we do want to change the nature of the game and steer athletes away from seeking to remove their opponents from the game then starting at the pro-level will be unproductive.  Sure, we do need to continue to penalize NFL and NHL players for dangerous hits, especially with all of the new concussion knowledge we are equipped with, but if we really want to make the game safer we need to start where the action starts - in our high school sports. 

Coaches and other sideline personnel are aware of what their players are doing and talking about, but when a kid comes off the field and forcefully insists that they're going to injure an opponent, most of the adults on the sidelines turn a blind eye.  We'd all like to win our games, that goes without saying.  Sometimes a deaf ear is turned to the sideline conversations of players because of this.  We can't babysit our kids, and we certainly shouldn't coddle them, but perhaps we as adults should start encouraging our players not to go after their opponents with intent to harm them each time we overhear a threat of violence on our sidelines.  Yes, it's one of those things that takes extra effort, and yes we all probably have just about enough to think about during games without having to remember one more ridiculous thing, but it takes two seconds.  It might be a pain in the butt, but if we have any concern for the future of the game, especially when we factor in our steadily increasing knowledge of head injuries, it is probably something we should all heavily consider doing.

Should girls be allowed to play football with the boys?

The hot button topic for sports bloggers today is Mo Isom, star goalie for LSU's women's soccer team, as she begins her attempt at trying out for kicker on the football team. Personally I don't think that her trying out should be such a big deal.  Girls have been playing on boys teams for years now, and she is not the first female to try out for a D1 football team. 

Speaking from the experience of a woman who plays in a men's lacrosse league, I can definitely say that Mo (or any girl looking to play with the boys for that matter) will likely face some adversity at first.  It can be difficult to penetrate into the "boys club" that many male teams become, but if Mo is made up of as strong of stuff as she seems to be she should be fine.  Actions speak louder than words, especially where sport is concerned.  If a girl can prove herself on the field then she will generally be accepted by a team with no problems. 

If anything, I believe the greater challenge that faces not only Mo but any girl going out for a boy's football team at any level is acceptance of the public and the media.  While a lot of male athletes are more than ready to accept that some women can in fact compete on their level, the public is less willing.  Listening to discussion on the radio today, the main concern appeared to be that Isom wouldn't be able to take a hit or try for a tackle after kickoff.  I am inclined to disagree.  While she may be of a lighter build than the other guys, aren't most kickers?  As long as she's doing the same things in practice that the other kickers do (which, let's be honest, isn't a lot) she should be fine.

Having been to many a Cleveland Fusion game to watch my best friend play, I can absolutely say that there is no reason girls shouldn't play football.  The women who play in the Women's Football Alliance are tough and strong, and I could easily see most of them playing right alongside the guys. 

This all said, I do not believe that teams should have to give up spots that would have been going to better players if there is pressure to "allow" a female to play on the team.  Title 9 allows girls the option to try out for the football team if they so choose if their school does not have a comparable female sport.  Try out does not necessarily mean make the team.  If someone goes out for a team and is a good enough athlete to merit a position, it shouldn't matter what their gender is.  If they're able to compete at the appropriate level then they should be allowed to compete, period.

I've seen girls play at or better than the boys in wrestling, ice hockey, lacrosse, and yes even football.  Once a girl proves herself on a team, there is no need to be concerned about distractions or problems, she and the rest of the team are there to win games.  In short, yes, I think that not only should girls be allowed to play football with they boys, they should be encouraged.  Don't like it?  Then encourage enough girls to play football that we form all-female teams at the high school and college level.  We need more girls in sports!