Hacker News Reader

Comment by untog | Hacker News Reader

To the extent that fans replace football with another sport (instead of meth or oxy), high-octane basketball is the natural substitute.

Meth or oxy? Interesting article, but I feel like it's, uh, brushing rural America in some very broad strokes.

That said, I found it interesting that it was discussing the collapse of sports TV in 2012. Just three years later I think we're inching closer and closer to that - the average cable subscription subsides ESPN when the majority of viewers don't watch it. With cable subscriptions declining, there is huge trouble ahead for ESPN, since they are tied into incredibly expensive multi-year contracts that they might find themselves unable to afford.

In totally unrelated news, ESPN shut down Grantland yesterday.

View on HN

Of course, the rest of the world has a football-like sport (rugby--sorry, Australia) which suggests that there's a fair bit of demand for that general type of sport--and not just in the US. Rugby has its own issues with concussions although probably not as much as American football.

In general, I agree with the article that football isn't "too big to fail." I'm not sure lawsuits is so much the path though as kids simply not playing. That doesn't seem to be happening however.

What's interesting is that in Rugby you wear basically no protective gear, which is probably why it has less injuries. With a helmet and armour you feel much more invulnerable.

Also tackles above the waist are forbidden. In American Football you can pretty much just throw your entire body anywhere, with unsurprising results.

this video disagrees with your claim about rugby: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ1Mt0LdCfY

You can't tackle someone around the neck in rugby or too high, it's a foul called a "high tackle"

Fouls happen. I don't mean to diminish that, but when the base of the game is to disallow bad tackles then there will be far fewer incidents of bad tackling.

It is tackles above the shoulder (not waist) that are forbidden (along with striking an opponent with a stiff-arm whilst tackling, tripping, picking up and dropping a player etc.).

Law 10.4 specifies what is considered 'dangerous play': http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=10.4

It's also that American football has a lot of downtime between the relatively short plays, whereas Rugby has a more constant style of play. An entire NFL game consists of roughly 11-12 minutes of actual gameplay -- the most recent numbers for rugby I could find put it at ~35 minutes. So, players are less fatigued and can hit harder and faster.

Also many more substitutions, which plays into exactly the idea you mentioned.

I'm not sure lawsuits is so much the path though as kids simply not playing. That doesn't seem to be happening however.

True, though the broader demographic shift interests me - soccer is increasing in popularity for kids, given its popularity among hispanic populations. Presumably to the detriment of something, and I can believe it would be football.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com