What I Saw as an NFL Ball Boy
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Maybe it's my own sports injuries that contribute to my difficulty watching the game now. Whenever someone's leg gets the wrong way I remember the feeling I felt when my arm got bent the wrong way.
The NFL feels like pro wrestling to me now. All the cheering the league does for the military and knowing that the league is a not for profit and doesn't pay taxes to support the troops makes me sick. The domestic violence and corresponding punishment over the last couple years also makes me sick. One day my entire commute home was sports talk guys reading off players that didn't get punished for strangling children, knocking out wives, etc. Then I open up the paper and it's football players rapes someone and doesn't get investigated. High school football players sexual torture freshmen. Ugh.
They're a 501c6, not a 501c3. C6 is not intended to be a charitable organization, but to act as a trade organization, business league, etc. They quite clearly meet the definition of what a 501C6 is intended to be, and it's also quite clear that they aren't "dodging" anything in the way of taxes.
If there's a discussion to be had on the matter, it's whether or not 501C6s even ought to exist, or whether there ought to be constraints on their existence (e.g., in order to encourage business development, a 501C6 may exist until captured revenues reach a fixed amount, or something to that extent) but it's clear that the NFL is not only eligible, but the very archetype for what a C6 organization ought to be.
"When you consider how many pro stadiums – like MetLife MET -1.23% Stadium in the swamps of Jersey – are at least partially subsidized by public dollars, a Federal tax exemption for the professional league – really a joint venture of 32 other businesses and their investors – seems obscene. As Nina Ippolito wrote in PolicyMic:
As a 501(c)6, the NFL isn’t supposed to engage in business “ordinarily carried on for profit.” Apparently, licensing exorbitantly priced apparel, granting broadcast rights, and running an entire television network don’t count as profitable endeavors."
That's confusing distinct concerns. The tax exemption status is federal, while each of those stadium negotiations is done at the state level, and in cahoots with the league owners and teams of those states, not the "NFL" organization at large.
> As a 501(c)6, the NFL isn’t supposed to engage in business “ordinarily carried on for profit.” Apparently, licensing exorbitantly priced apparel, granting broadcast rights, and running an entire television network don’t count as profitable endeavors."
The "NFL" organization doesn't do those things. It is, basically, just a payment gateway for the teams and owners. By that same argument, you could assert that Patrick Collision and Stripe are selling televisions (assuming at least one of their customers is selling televisions). They aren't, they're just the gateway.
The league entity is funded by the teams and the board, not as a rake from those teams.
I'm rather confused as to how you plan to convincingly argue that a company organizing a purely for entertainment sports league should be exempt from paying taxes.
Stripe pays taxes that they collect. So does the NFL. Stripe pays taxes on its earnings. So does the NFL. Stripe does not pay taxes on the billed amount. Neither does the NFL.
If a Stripe merchant pays taxes on a $5,000 television, does that count as $5,000 worth of taxable income for Stripe? No, it does not. Stripe collects their service charge, which works out to be $145.30. That is Stripe's taxable income.
You're acting like the NFL is somehow responsible for paying taxes on the billions of dollars that it collects revenues on. It isn't, nor is Stripe. If it weren't tax exempt, it would only be responsible for the fees it keeps, which is equivalent to the Stripe service fees. The NFL member teams are responsible for paying the taxes on the billions, which they already do, and don't appear to be evading, or even attempting to evade at all.
As for whether or not the portion of money that the NFL league 'keeps' (they don't actually keep any, they act as a clearing house for the teams, and pay out 100% of earnings minus overhead, which they make 0 profits from), the IRS seems to have created a class of business that matches exactly the "entertainment sports league" definition, and they have made that category tax exempt.
So long as the 501c6 exists under the definition that it does, the NFL clearly qualifies to be one.
So, recapping from my earlier reply, the issue isn't one of whether or not the NFL is tax dodging. They aren't. Not even remotely. The issue is whether or not there should be such a thing as the 501C6. I, personally, am of the opinion that it needn't exist at all. But it does, and it's tax exempt, and that's not the NFL's fault.
To reduce it to absurdity: If the IRS created a category of person that is caucasian, wears Threadless T-Shirts, wears New Balance shoes, and that enjoys drinking Victory Golden Monkey Ale, then I clearly belong to that category.
If the IRS makes that category of person tax exempt, then I guess I can stop paying taxes.
The argument that most people seem to make is that I don't deserve to belong to this tax exempt category, which is wrong. I meet all the criteria. I wear Threadless shirts. I am caucasian. I really love Victory Golden Monkey Ale. Saying I don't belong in this category is the wrong argument.
The right argument is either:
- this special category should not exist, or
- this special category should not be tax exempt
FWIW, I'm not trying to defend the NFL. But, if you're going to condemn them, i means understanding what you're condemning. If they NFL collected 12 billion dollars last year, then they paid taxes on $12 billion dollars. The teams then each put aside a certain amount of money, collectively totaling around $200 million, to fund the NFL league. The money's already been taxed once, but the $200 million that the league "earned" through these payments is not, because it's allocated to a trade organization, which the IRS considers tax exempt.
The NFL shouldn't qualify as a non-profit because they promote only NFL football, not football in general. It's qualified as a trade association, but it shouldn't be, as it's clearly a for-profit corporation managing a brand.
First of all, there are plenty of valid uses of 501C6 that the NFL could meet the definition for, but beyond that, they actually do promote a lot of football that has no ties (or at least, only tangential relationship) to the NFL, like Play 60, and working with Peewee league football, etc.
- Weight limits in the NFL. I know linemen need to get big but the average weight of linemen is way too high.
- The padding is almost too good, concussions will go up as they have with better equipment. Players feel too safe to unleash a hit. There needs to be more alerting/warning systems on collisions. i.e. if a player is about to get blindsided, alert them inside the helmet. Give them eyes all around.
- All linemen should use knee braces all the time or improved support. Players remove padding because others do to stay competitive. There needs to be more support for knees/ankles that is required. (smaller linemen will help this)
- Testing for HGH is finally in, this will help some.
- Allow players to use marijuana, for pain and for calming rather than DUIs. They treat players like children so they end up lashing out.
- Provide drivers free of charge for all NFL players for all activities. Require that they use the drivers (they can personally hire them) if they are having fun but DUIs should not be allowed.
Enforcing knee braces, putting weight limits for linemen and making an exception for marijuana will also never work IMO. Also, players have access to very strong pain killers via team doctors, they don't need marijuana for pain.
I meant some sort of visual system and/or possibly vibration. This would some how work in coordination with other helmets to be aware of distances and speeds of other helmets. Maybe even something like HUDs in games that have the indicator overlays in the corners or mini map type system for receivers. If we are alerting in our cars of collisions why not the same type of impact on the field? These can be life changing moments, split seconds matter.
The NFL should do some of the other items for safety/health (weight/padding/indicators) if they truly care more about the player on the field than treating them like a child off the field. I think many of the problems with athletes would be solved if they relaxed their harshness off the field and used that on the field. If every lineman that plays gets knee and ankle troubles for life, maybe they should limit weight and require braces and better equipment.
A) The difference between a clean hit and a dirty one is a matter of milliseconds. Players who dish out the hits can do very small things at the very last moment to try to hurt an opponent and I don't think any sort of warning system will help you with that. The time needed to react is way too long and you would need to be able to detect 'malice' in someone's intent, which is not exactly easy.
B) Pro sports players are known to hate additional equipment, gizmos, protection extras, etc. even if it means reducing their own safety. Hockey players get hit in the face with sticks and pucks going 100 mph all the time, but still prefer to not wear a visor because they find it "more comfortable". They don't care if they're completely toothless (they actually see this as an honor - many don't get work done until they retire), as long as they can play unobstructed. Same with braces and pads, players will never wear them (and players' associations will side with them) if it means gaining half an inch on the pitch.
Unfortunately, I don't think any amount of technology will help here. We need to change the way people think about contact sports (someone in this thread mentioned its likeness to wresting) and change the rules to protect the players better.
Rule 46.6 in the N.H.L. rule book: “If a player penalized as an instigator of an altercation is wearing a face shield (including a goalkeeper), he shall be assessed an additional unsportsmanlike conduct penalty.”
Some indicator would help get past the problem of the helmet obscuring player sense. Assisting the player back to the feeling of not having a helmet while they do, in terms of peripheral vision sense, behind you and around you would be nice. If you don't have a helmet on and someone rushes up behind you in a game they are easier to see without a helmet. Just knowing someone is there is enough to prevent concussions. It is the blind shots where someone doesn't expect it that can really cause problems. Head on collisions usually aren't as bad because of both players awareness. If there is some way to inform the player of players around them within a range I think would help immensely and if it is very out of the way the players would deal, especially the previously concussed.
It could be some pretty cool tech, almost drone/neural network like combined with gaming elements connecting player helmets and pads (they do have some indicators tracking players on shoulder pads now - http://mashable.com/2014/07/31/nfl-shoulder-pad-sensors/). But I agree it would have to be forced on the player by the NFL only, no team or player would do it without the NFL forcing the changes. Awareness of players on the field is one of the biggest deterrents to concussions, anything the NFL can do to help that would be good for their case.
Cycling also had that same thing,I think it was Andre Kivilev's death that turned it around. I can't remember that last time I heard apro complain about helmets in cycling. PBR bull riders are also rapidly embracing helmets and face guards. The cultures of these sports can rapidly change, the players don't want to be maimed when it's all said and done.
The bigger issue, honestly, fans want to see violence and the leagues want to please the fans and make money. Media surrounding the nfl has sold videos of big hits, they used to have a segment on the Sunday pregame on ESPN called "jacked up." The nhl isn't terribly different with fighting, games that aren't mass broadcast are different, if the score becomes too far out of balance it can become a different sport altogether. Lots of talk about teamwork, the sacrifices, the incredible strategies and tactics (aspects of football are beautiful and fascinating) but ultimately it's not much more than gladiator fighting.
In Australia, where I'm from, there is a NRL match between Queensland and New South Wales called "State of Origin". One of the key draws for it is the "grudge match" in-group bias that comes along with it, and the very high probability of big fist-fights breaking out (which they do, with regularity, though less so the past few years).
It's also one of the biggest games of the entire year. Those two things are not unrelated.
If players were allowed to smoke pot they might become generally calmer people, leading to less ground shattering hits and anger released on the field, ultimately leading to a decrease in profits for the NFL, since most of the people tuning into this sport watch for the aggressive nature of the game.
The fact that alcohol is allowed, which as a substance probably leads to increased anger, seems like it would fit the leagues agenda much better.
Marijuana is not a performance enhancing drug in sport unless you consider increased relaxation and pain relief an enhancement. I'm not advocating that the players should be using pot before gametime, but I can see it being a very effective way for players de-stress after games or during the off-season.
That would give teams a bit of wiggle room to use huge linemen if they want to, though the tradeoff is smaller ball-handling players.
I don't know about the padding. The players from an earlier and less protected era of pro football still ended up in pretty bad shape. Some may have escaped dementia simply by dying younger.
Most of what makes me like football more than other sports can be summed up into the following:
* Effort matters more than talent - talented teams that are not focused can be upset by less talented teams that are playing harder
* Team game - since it's 11v11 and not 5v5, with a few rare exceptions, no one player can make a team. Everyone has to be working together to win.
* Drama - every game is just a game. no best of 3, best of 5, etc. This combines with the first point to make every game worth watching.
* Strategy - The chess match of how an offense matches up against a defense, how coordinators will use their players' distinct skills to exploit the other team's weaknesses, etc, is fascinating.
* Variety of athletes - I was an offensive lineman when I played football in my younger years, and to put it nicely, I have an offensive lineman's build. So I've always enjoyed that football utilizes a variety of athletes that are skilled in more ways than just speed.
So would it be possible to put all of these, except maybe the last, into a new game that didn't cause brain damage? I think so, I'm just not sure what that game would look like. I sure hope football can get this figured out, because for all of the bad attention it's been getting lately, it is still a sport that brings a lot of happiness to a lot of people.
But in the NFL the level of athleticism is so high - obviously there aren't any bad athletes in there.
If you know exactly where to run beats running (a little) faster.
Beeing a defensive end / outside linebacker I can say that the bigger positions don't really translate to flag football. You can't really block other people without real contact. We are playing 5 on 5 - but I can't imagine how contact less football would work 11 on 11.
I enjoy playing some flag football, because it's a nice workout and some of the aspects of football are in (different coverages, beating routes...)
As a society, we need ways for people to get out aggression in a generally non-harmful way. Note that I'm not arguing against making football safer for players, but rather against the elimination of violent sport.
Maybe robo-football? There's just something fun about beating a consenting opponent to the ground.
BTW - The incidence of alcohol related arrest for NFL players mentioned, while in my opinion excessive, is probably below average for young US males which is prob over 2% per year for DUI alone. What's amazing is how common this is in general - 1 in 139 licensed drivers each year are arrested for DUI.
This is one of those cases where you have a seemingly infinitesimal probability of a seemingly infinite outcome. I think that folks just have a very hard time thinking about that kind of situation rationally.
Presumably the vast majority of football players in high school don't even intend to play in college, much less professionally. I don't have any data, and I know there have been some high-profile tragedies in high school football, but I would guess that injuries are much rarer in high school.
Instead, they're engaged in an activity with a roughly equal chance of professional success -- playing classical music. But at least I can send them to practice without wondering if it will set them back mentally, with symptoms that show up 30 to 50 years later.
I think I can at once support this guy's ability to make choices for himself and be saddened that our culture may have socialized him into making a tradeoff that I don't think was worthwhile, in some objective sense.
Perhaps the test I mean is, suppose football didn't exist and then you walked up to this guy in the present day, explained what football is, and then gave him the choice to relive his life starting from high school, but this time with football and all the (positive and negative) consequences he faced. It seems likely to me that he'd reject this out of hand.
There's a lot more to it than just 'playing football'
The sad truth is they are the modern gladiator and we are the spectator lusting for the violence. Why else would someone be able to make such incredible amounts of money to throw a ball around?
To be fair, there are lots of sports with crazy high salaries. And some of those (baseball, soccer) have hardly any violence at all in comparison to football, hockey, and maybe even basketball.
I can relate to the author though, I played five different sports throughout high school and football was just plain different. It definitely felt like battle when you went out there, fighting for your school/city against the 'enemy'.
Depends on the culture at your school/city though I suppose
I get that sports are about relationships as much as the game, but I don't understand how the potential trade offs are worth it in the big picture. This is not me trying to push my views on anyone - I'm simply curious.
That doesn't mean the articles aren't still interesting--just that they tend to tackle more diverse topics.
Writers and journalists can easily pick on these athletes because they generally don't have the literary facilities to defend the choices they've made in the same Op-Ed fashion and I'll be frank and say jealousy is playing a large role here. All jobs take a mental and physical toll. Most jobs aren't fulfilling or notable in any way and the existential terror of living like that is a much great strain on the psyche then getting a few concussions. The average overweight, underemployed American likes to believe he's better off then someone who has unflinchingly been same thing since freshman year of high-school, maybe he is, maybe he isn't, either way it's a consoling thought while distractedly surfing the net.
When it comes down to it these players are responsible for their own safety and unless you're willing to submit to the same diet and exercise regime as they do, don't criticize them they don't deserve it.
http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/2013/01/29/nfl-player...
The NFL seems to disagree. Do you have a citation to back up your claim?