AHC: in 1990s U.S. high schools start replacing football with imagined 'Ohio Rugby'?

And as part of the AHC, this springs directly out of concern about concussion. That if you stop the person abruptly there's no way to avoid the brain from colliding with the inside of the skull, unless you have a helmet big enough to maybe stop the head motion over distance of two inches. And so, the rules of the game are changed.

Now, please imagine 'Ohio Rugby' as still an energetic game, maybe seven downs. Maybe a fumble is redefined merely as end of a play, so you have some really wild open laterals and running. Maybe the only turnover is an interception, and this helps to re-establish a better balance between running and throwing.

Alright, please tell me more.
 
Last edited:
It's a game I'm envisioning. Sorry about that, I should have been clearer about it. And I went ahead and changed the title.
 
Last edited:
This doesn't sound like a game that would prevent CTE, which are mostly the result of the accumulation of sub-concussive blows. There's a reason linemen are often the most affected by it.
 
Yes, Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. And I've read that, too. That a lot of it is the accumulation of lesser blows.

Well, this is a game in which you corral an opponent rather than tackle. And maybe lineman more position and push on the side, rather than the full frontal head-on aspect.

And yes, the game would be designed to be considerably healthier than football. But at the end of the day, this new game would have to be viewed on its own terms.
 
I have found the ideal game. Few head injuries, forward passes, fast, exciting and quite good for TV.

Its called Association Football.
 
I have found the ideal game. Few head injuries, forward passes, fast, exciting and quite good for TV.

Its called Association Football.

Except for the concussions, micro and otherwise, from 'heading' the ball. Even with the lightweight, modern balls it still jars the brain inside the skull.
 
I don't think you need to change football all that much to make it safer.

I've said before (and at least one former NFL player - Hines Ward - agrees) that playing without helmets and with softer pads would reduce the number of concussions.

To go with that you modify the blocking and tackling rules to reduce the violence of collisions (obvious one, adopt the rugby rule that you have to use your arms in a tackle otherwise it's a penalty). Enforce dangerous tackles with ejections.
 

Driftless

Donor
How does Lacrosse fare in these head injury comparissons?

I can't help but think that the greater role specialization of American football, which favors increasingly massive and athletic linemen (300+ lbs/136+kg) plays a key role in the increase in head injuries. It's basic physics: momentum = mass x velocity. For the offensive lineman, the objective for every play is to put a "hat" on an onrushing opponent.
 
Key point. I've read that there's kind of an arms race in high school football, where players bulk up more and more.

I think there's been a newspaper article or two, where they compare the weight of offensive lineman just for high school district all-stars with the linemen of the Superbowl winning team from ten years ago, and Wow, sometimes the high school players weigh more.
 
I don't think you need to change football all that much to make it safer.

I've said before (and at least one former NFL player - Hines Ward - agrees) that playing without helmets and with softer pads would reduce the number of concussions.

To go with that you modify the blocking and tackling rules to reduce the violence of collisions (obvious one, adopt the rugby rule that you have to use your arms in a tackle otherwise it's a penalty). Enforce dangerous tackles with ejections.
This is perhaps the most hopeful point. You make the helmet hard-shelled, it becomes the weapon, where players inevitably want to strike first and be the hitter rather than the hittee as it were.

We may have been better off with the old leather helmets! or whatever the modern version is thereof.

The game I envision is different. More like an artful game of tag, still rugged. Maybe if you put a shoulder in front of an opponent and one arm behind, that counts as a stop.
 
Agree with posters 4 and 9. Why not utilize one of the three forms of rugby already in existence. Then there are the various forms of flickerball and team handball.
 
I don't think you need to change football all that much to make it safer.

I've said before (and at least one former NFL player - Hines Ward - agrees) that playing without helmets and with softer pads would reduce the number of concussions.

To go with that you modify the blocking and tackling rules to reduce the violence of collisions (obvious one, adopt the rugby rule that you have to use your arms in a tackle otherwise it's a penalty). Enforce dangerous tackles with ejections.

This might work, rugby is still considered a hard hitting sport.
 
Rugby has its own problems with concussion and unfortunately the non wrapping tackle is becoming too common. Some of the tackles now the tackler just flaps an arm round to try and tell the ref he is going to use an arm and then bang goes in with the shoulder.

We were taught to go low and wrap the player around the waist down to his knees and use his momentum to go to ground and then get on our feet to play for the ball but defence coaches now want a runner stopped dead and even knocked back because of the modern obsession with stopping at the gain line and preventing a pass out of the tackle. Nowadays with the massive size of players its probably the only way to go.

I think if Gridiron wants to cut down on concussion player size has to change make the 11 starting players stay on the field get rid of the endless timeouts and the 300+ pound behemoths will soon disappear and less damage will be caused.
 
Last edited:
Limiting substitutions to cut down on specialization might work to some degree, yeah. The argument against fewer timeouts though is that it might lead to more injuries of all descriptions due to people being more tired more often.
 
Limiting substitutions to cut down on specialization might work to some degree, yeah. The argument against fewer timeouts though is that it might lead to more injuries of all descriptions due to people being more tired more often.

If you have players concentrating on cardio rather than just bulking up they wont get tired. Association Football, Gaelic football and Aussie rules Football all have limited stops and they dont noticeably get injured more often towards the end of a game.
 
And as part of the AHC, this springs directly out of concern about concussion. That if you stop the person abruptly there's no way to avoid the brain from colliding with the inside of the skull, unless you have a helmet big enough to maybe stop the head motion over distance of two inches. And so, the rules of the game are changed.

Now, please imagine 'Ohio Rugby' as still an energetic game, maybe seven downs. Maybe a fumble is redefined merely as end of a play, so you have some really wild open laterals and running. Maybe the only turnover is an interception, and this helps to re-establish a better balance between running and throwing.

Alright, please tell me more.

You've envisioned a game that causes far, far more injuries than current football.
 
Top