My father was a successful high school football coach. He was an old school, three yards and a cloud of dust sort of coach. Nothing bothered him more than watching his offense fumble the football. Offenders of what he considered the ultimate football sin were made to carry a football around school all day, every day until the next game. Conversely, as a defensive minded coach, nothing delighted him more than when his defensive unit caused and recovered a fumble.
Why not flag football?
A Georgia high school football player who came out of a game with an injury and then lost consciousness on the sideline has died, officials said. Dylan Thomas, a 16-year-old junior linebacker for the Pike County Pirates, came out of a game in the third quarter Friday night with what his coach Brad Webber said was a leg injury. He was pronounced dead Sunday night from a head injury.
How many more times does this scenario have to play out before parents, school officials, the sports media, fans and anyone else who continues to resist the need to reconsider and re-imagine tackle football at the youth, junior high and high school levels to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask themselves a question:
Why not flag football?
We say that the game is “about the kids” and that it’s about teaching valuable life lessons, developing healthy bodies and competitive instincts, building community and providing entertainment. But if that were the case, rather than refusing to consider a switch from tackle to flag football, we’d embrace the change. To do otherwise is to enable the continuation of an activity in which our children have a reasonable chance of sustaining life long brain damage.
Why would we not embrace such an activity when a significantly safer and less expensive alternative exists?
The fact is, virtually every benefit that can be derived from tackle football can still be taught and absorbed through participation in flag football. Players will still be on teams to learn sacrifice, personal responsibility and teamwork. They’d still be actively engaged in a physical activity. They’d still compete for starting positions and against other teams. And the game would continue to be wonderfully entertaining, but in a different, less brutal (and expensive) way.
So why not flag football?
Sometimes you can repeat a phrase or articulate a theory or belief so often that it begins to become simply background noise or, if repeated enough, irrelevant. I am referring to my ongoing use of the metaphor, “another brick in the wall” as it relates to the future of tackle football in America. It seems as if no sooner do I write an essay identifying a trend or incident that, coupled with the larger trends of declining television viewership, declining numbers of participants at the youth league level, increased public and media scrutiny, contributes to the steady, drip-by-drip and brick-by-brick evolution of our society’s relationship with the sport of tackle football.
These past few weeks offered another couple of bricks to add to the building of that wall. We’re accumulating so many bricks that we’ll soon have enough left over to “build that wall” on our Southern border. In fact, I’m sure Mexico will appreciate those excess bricks as it will reduce their building costs when they pay for it.
The addition of these bricks in the wall relate to two recent events that, once again, demonstrate how the culture surrounding the sport of football continues to reveal itself to be increasingly out of touch with rapidly changing American values, attitudes and norms. It is significant that the culture surrounding the game and its coaches is receiving such increased scrutiny as it is safe to say that for far too long, the football community has gotten a relatively free pass relating to the negative impact and influences of the culture surrounding the game.
Media and academic critics have long questioned certain aspects of that culture as it relates to the brutal nature of the game, its’ anti-intellectualism, the corrupting influence of the win at any cost culture and the sense of entitlement that athletes and star coaches often exhibit. But for the most part, the scandals that have lead to increased scrutiny in these areas and the attention paid to them, generally fizzles out over time and we find ourselves resorting to our traditional treatment of coaches and programs as being too important and too big to seriously challenge.
But like a wall that becomes stronger as more bricks are added, increased scrutiny begets increased scrutiny. As the light of sunshine begins to spread wider and penetrate deeper into the culture of football, additional areas of concern begin to reveal themselves.
The first is the case of Ohio State University where the university suspended its football coach, Urban Meyer, for three games – a mere slap on the wrist – after he apparently lied about and deleted emails relating to his mishandling of domestic violence allegations against one of his assistant coaches. There was a day when there would be little initial scrutiny, much less dogged follow-up and investigation, into issues at the intersection of the culture of football and domestic violence. For far too long, in such cases, it has been the woman who has been shamed or pressured to quietly bear the scars and pain in the name of “protecting the coach and program”. Often such accusations and claims never saw the light of day. But in the #MeToo and social media age, those days are gone. And as increased light is being shed on the “boys will be boys” culture of football, what the public is beginning to see more plainly, is a culture that is increasingly out of line with America’s rapidly changing social norms and mores regarding treatment of women and domestic abuse.
The second incident is the tragic death of the University of Maryland freshman football player, Jordan McNair, a freshman lineman who died of heat stroke after running a set of 110-yard wind sprints. The first question is why lineman, who hardly ever run more than 20 yards on a play during games are running 110 yard sprints. Beyond that, apparently Maryland either did not have in place or did not follow commonly accepted treatment procedures for preventing and treating heat stroke.
But in the “increased scrutiny begets increased scrutiny” category, in the investigative process of McNair’s death, according to an ESPN report, several current football players and people close to the program described a toxic coaching culture under head coach D.J. Durkin based on fear and intimidation. Belittlement, humiliation, extreme verbal abuse and embarrassment of players was common. According to ESPN, one player was belittled verbally after passing out during a drill. Coaches also used food punitively as it was reported that a player said he was forced to overeat to the point of vomiting.
As a former all-American and professional basketball player and son of a high school football coach, I have both witnessed and been on the receiving end of intense, profanity laced tirades. Highly competitive sports are intense and emotionally charged. As a player, you understand that a certain amount of that comes with the territory. But there are limits. Coaches don’t get carte blanche to humiliate, belittle and berate young people. No one does. And in particular, anyone associated with an educational institution. Athletes deserve the same opportunity as all students to learn and experience college life in an environment that is safe and one that treats them with dignity and respect.
There are two salient issues as it relates to this particular situation and the culture of football in general. The sad reality is that far too many coaches and athletic administrators don’t think of football “student-athletes” as students at all, but rather as hired guns and dumb jocks. As a result, they are denied the same rights as other college students, that being the right to have a quality educational experience and earn a meaningful degree. In short, it is clear to everyone, and in particular to the players themselves, that they are on campus, first and foremost, to play ball.
The second relates to the most fundamental justification used by the athletic establishment for athletic programs and their coaches to a part of the educational institution in the first place. Specifically, that athletic programs supplement the academic mission of the institution and that coaches are in fact “teachers”. If coaches justify their place on campus in that they are educators and teachers, why aren’t they held to the same standards of decorum and behavior as all other faculty members? You can’t have it both ways. You can’t justify your place and role in an academic community by claiming to be an educator while engaging in abusive practices that create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. An atmosphere where students are verbally abused, belittled, berated and humiliated is hardly a nurturing educational environment.
The fact is, while there may have been a time when it was widely accepted that screaming, berating and intimidating players was simply a part of how coaches “made boys into men”, those days are over. While such behavior and methods might be acceptable for training Marines for war, intercollegiate and interscholastic football is not war. Such behavior has no place within an educational institution.
Granted, these two incidents, in and of themselves, will not bring the American football industrial complex to its knees. But make no mistake, slowly and surely, things are changing as it relates to the role, influence and impact of football in our society. Consider these as another couple of bricks in the wall in America’s reassessment of the role of football in our society.
An old friend called recently. We were catching up on news of kids, recent travel and various body aches and pains when he announced he had something to tell to me.
“I’m quitting football.”
I found this a bit confusing because at age 60, his playing days are long over. Besides, he played basketball in college and professionally overseas.
We’d always bonded over sports, discussing and pontificating regarding matters both on the fields of play and off. For a period of time, we both worked in college athletics. We consider ourselves pretty knowledgeable, having played at an elite level, studied sports as scholars and worked in the field.
He also loves watching sports. In particular his, beloved Boston Celtics and New England Patriots. He hadn’t missed a televised Patriots game in years .
“I’m quitting football,” he repeated. “I can no longer watch with a clear conscience.”
He went on to cite several reasons, from the brutality of the game and the brain trauma it inflicts on players, to the NFL’s treatment of its cheerleaders, to the leagues handling of their players’ acts of “taking a knee” as a form of civil disobedience to highlight their concerns about police brutality.
“I can’t justify it anymore.”
I’ve long been where he is now arriving. I do, however, periodically check in to watch a few plays to gauge whether the game is changing as it relates to player safety. As has been well-documented, the “football industrial complex”, lead by the NFL and its “Heads Up Football” campaign, has engaged in a widespread public relations campaign aimed to convince the public, and in particular, mothers, that the various changes in rules and teaching techniques have made the game suitably safe for children. It is important to note, however, that they have waged this campaign with little empirical data to back their claims. Yes, there are many well-meaning people who are attempting to make the game safer. But I am sorry. From what I see, the game is not being played in a significantly different manner. It simply doesn’t pass the eye test. It remains a gladiatorial sport – brutal and barbaric. Players continue to lead with their heads, using their helmets as spears. Meanwhile, research regarding tackle football’s devastating impact on brain health and function continues to mount.
The following day, I read an article about the growing movement to bring 'esports' into the high school sports arena to meet what is a significant and growing demand. Esport leagues are being created to meet that demand. One league, the High School esports League (HSEL) has partnered with 850 schools and has more than 16,000 users. Another company (Play VS) has partnered with the National Federation of High School Associations (NFHS) to begin varsity level esports leagues in at least 18 states. And this year, Indiana’s Munster High became the country’s first high school to allow students to letter in varsity eSports.
And there’s money in it.
Colleges are beginning to offer esports scholarships. Once substantive scholarship money is dangled in front of participants, high school eSports are going to explode. While the demographics of those attracted to esports versus football may not overlap completely, it will have an impact around the fringes. Kids who may not be the best athletes but who participated in football to feel a part of a team or to participate in an activity with their friends or simply to please a parent, will have another, far less violent alternative.
Esports, offers many of the same benefits and attractions as football. It is a team sport and in many schools will soon be a varsity sport. It is a fun activity that can be played with friends as teammates and even provides the possibility of earning a scholarship. That will be an attractive package for a growing number of kids.
Further, an increasing number of parents will likely ask, “Why sacrifice my child’s brain and body on the football field for the non-existent chance at a college scholarship?” Inasmuch as football is a game of numbers, losing a handful of players here and there, will make a difference.
And for colleges, recruiting kids who are strengthening their minds through eSports as opposed to scrambling them with football will be increasingly attractive.
And if you think esports is simply a passing phase for geeks and freaks, live eSports events are beginning to sell out professional arenas.
The most striking story told in a June 14, 2018 article in Bleacherreport titled “Forget Friday Night Lights, Esports is Becoming the Next Varsity Obsession”, was about Chris Chapman and his two sons. Chris grew up attending football games with his father. Apparently when Chris offered to take his two sons to a New York Jets game, they asked whether they could go to the CS:GO tournament instead. GS:CO stands for Counter-Strike:Global Offensive, which is the esport world championship that was held in the Barclays Center in Brooklyn.
Clearly, the loss of my friend as a devoted television viewer or the fact that a father who offered to take his kids to an NFL game wanted to be taken to an esport event instead will not bring the NFL to its knees. Football remains a powerful cultural force. But small stories and actions such as these, coupled with the larger trends of declining television viewership, declining numbers of participants at the youth league level, increased public and media scrutiny, begin to add up.
Make no mistake, slowly but surely, drip-by-drip and brick-by-brick, our society’s relationship with the sport of tackle football is changing. Football is a numbers game. And the fact is, those numbers are steadily decreasing.
America’s Game Slipping Out of Touch with American Values?
One of the most defining influences on my athletic career was when the New York Jets defeated the Baltimore Colts in the 1969 Super Bowl. The Jets, from the upstart American Football League, were lead by the brash, shaggy-haired, nightlife-loving Broadway Joe Namath. The Colts represented the “old line” National Football League and were lead by the crew cut straight-laced quarterbacks Johnny Unitas and Earl Morrill. I was a Jets fan and loved Namath. What he represented to me was that you could still be a great athlete without having to force yourself to fit the conservative mold of the old-line sports establishment. Namath taught me that you can be an athlete and still be yourself and do it your way.
Like me, many people, young and old, take their cues and mirror behaviors from what athletes or team owners say or do. For well over 60 years, the National Football League’s impact on American society and cultural norms has been significant. The NFL has aligned its’ brand with American institutions such as the military, law enforcement with a full embrace of the flag and patriotism. At the core of the league’s narrative and brand is positioning football as uniquely “American”. As a result, the NFL has served as a leading indicator and shaper of American cultural norms. But a closer look reveals a league that is handling a wide array of issues in a way that suggests that it is falling out of line with various, rapidly changing American values.
To date, linking its’ brand to all things American has served the NFL well. The problem, however, is that the cultural values and norms the NFL continues to embrace, remain locked in an American society of the 1950’s or 1960’s rather than American society and culture of today. While our society has been changing dramatically over the past several decades, largely for the good, the NFL has been mired in the quicksand of the past.
It is not surprising that the NFL has become breathtakingly out of line with several fundamental societal changes in norms and beliefs. The league is run by old, white, billionaire men who seem to be out of touch with today’s shifting cultural trends. Clearly, more than a handful of them think that America remains as it was is in the days of Henry Winkler’s Fonzie character in the TV sitcom “Happy Days”.
Clearly, there is something going on as it relates to football’s place in our culture. Television ratings are dropping. Participation numbers at the youth level for tackle football are declining. And media coverage, once unfailingly fawning, has become more critical and introspective. How much of these trends are a result of the NFL being behind the cultural times is hard to determine, but make no mistake, our society is changing rapidly and if the NFL does not acknowledge and address those changes accordingly, its’ cultural sway will likely diminish significantly.
In short, the world is passing the NFL “old boy’s club” by. Without significant change, the league and its values will become cultural dinosaurs. This is not to say that the league won’t remain popular and won’t attract a significant number of fans who will continue to watch football. Rather, it is to suggest that the values and policies it represents and embraces are becoming out of line with the beliefs of an increasing number of Americans. A case can be made that in the age of rapidly changing America values and demographics, as evidenced in the #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter movements, the corresponding evolution of cultural norms and beliefs no longer line up with those of the league.
Gladiator Games: A Healthy American Value?
The ongoing revelations regarding the violent nature of the game and its impact on the players, particularly as it relates to brain trauma, is a good place to start. These revelations have resulted in increased scrutiny and skepticism regarding the gladiatorial nature of the game. While this might sound hyperbolic, but short of feeding the participants to lions, at a core level, there’s not much difference between Roman gladiator games and the modern day NFL. Both sacrifice the bodies and brains of participants in violent “combat” for the entertainment of the masses. And the league has only exacerbated that skepticism in its’ long-standing efforts to hide or downplay research on head trauma and it’s continued practice of stonewalling attempts of former players who are suffering from the effects of brain trauma from receiving compensation and health benefits. It all makes you wonder whether our obsession with brutal “Gladiator Games” is a healthy American value.
A Culture of Misogyny?
Another example is the way the league has handled the issue of domestic violence by its players. Typically, the NFL’s stance has been to brush over such incidents or to bend over backward to make excuses for them and by imposing a suspension of a few games on a player without really addressing the issue in a meaningful way.
Further evidence of the NFL’s misogynistic culture relates to how the teams treat their cheerleaders. The New York Times recently reported on a Washington Redskins 2013 cheerleader calendar photo shoot in Costa Rica. The women were required to pose topless or in body paint for the shoot, all while team sponsors and luxury suite holders were allowed to observe. And after the photo shoot, several of the cheerleaders were expected to accompany sponsors as escorts. But that is simply one example from one team. Throughout the league, cheerleaders are required to adhere to standards of behavior more suited to the stern morality of the Victorian Age than the 21st century, with restrictive rules on dating or even being seen in public with players, strict dress codes and excessively restrictive codes of conduct.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is not only the NBA’s all-time leading scorer but is also one of the most knowledgeable and thoughtful observers of the intersection of sport, race, civil rights and American culture. In an April 6, 2018 column in The Guardian titled, “The NFL’s plan to protect America from witches”, he writes, “a cheerleader in modest lingerie is fired; a player knocks out his wife on video and is suspended for two games. Boys will be boys, but girls must be what the NFL tells them to be.”
Talk about a slam dunk in summing up a troubling culture!
Remnants of a Plantation Culture?
And then there is the way in which the league has handled player protests relating to police brutality against black Americans lead by Colin Kaepernick. As a way to draw attention to the issue, players “took a knee” during the playing of the National Anthem. These actions have generated attention in a way that suggests that there may be a shift or an awakening taking place among athletes relating to how to leverage their visibility and standing in our society. There have been a sizable number of athletes throughout the country from the NFL, NBA and WNBA to colleges, high schools and even youth leagues who have knelt, sat, raised a fist or locked arms as a sign of unity with Kaepernick. That’s noteworthy.
What’s also noteworthy is that while several owners supported the players at first, their stance quickly changed when they began to get negative feedback from fans and television executives. Since then, the NFL has clearly blackballed Kaepernick and, as of this writing, they are apparently doing the same to his former teammate Eric Reid, who has been vocal in his support of this activist action.
Another example is the case of Chad Thomas, a recent third round pick of the Cleveland Browns who played college ball at the University of Miami. Thomas has already made a name for himself in the music business as a talented producer who has produced tracks for artists like Rick Ross, Kodak Black and City Girls and has been sampled by DJ Khaled and Drake. He can read and write music and plays nine different instruments. It’s an interesting reflection of the values of the NFL and football culture that he was repeatedly asked by teams during the draft evaluation process about his music career. As Master Tesfatsion wrote in BleacherReport.com (April 23, 2018), “NFL teams are uncomfortable when a football player pursues off-the-field interests, none more so than rap…It causes decision makers to question whether a player wants to be a rapper or a football player.”
As if you can’t do both?
The NFL seems to be saying that athletes are not worthy, smart, educated or well informed enough to speak out on societal matters that deeply impact them and their families or to have interests outside of football. It is ironic that often the same people who hold up those very same athletes as “role models” when they are scoring touchdowns and selling tickets, are the first to attempt to silence them for speaking out. Apparently, when athletes use their brains and intelligence to make a public stand or pursue other interests, they suddenly become radicals and ungrateful for the “privilege” of playing football.
Anti-Intellectualism in the Global, Creative Economy of the 21st Century?
There is another angle to the Chad Thomas example that is worth mentioning. While this applies to many sport cultures, it seems particularly prevalent in the football culture. Specifically, it is the thread of anti-intellectualism and the “dumb jock” stereotype that permeates the football culture. This attitude flows from the absolute obedience, discipline, and conformity that is demanded by coaches. In other words, as was made clear to Thomas, all that matters is football.
Without question, over the past century, football has played an important role in the development of our country. Football helped to strengthen our bodies and mold our character in a way that met the needs of a country emerging into a world military and industrial power. But we are now in a new age, an age where intellect, education and the ability to creatively manage and communicate large amounts of highly technical information will power our growth and continued development as a nation. Intellectual creativity, not single-minded conformity and gladiatorial feats, will be the currency of the future. Against this backdrop, we must consider whether the values and attitudes that permeate throughout not only the NFL but the entire football community, remain in line with the educational values and personal skills and characteristics that are necessary to succeed in the global, creative economy and the world community of the future.
NFL Profits vs Public Health?
In a March 28, 2018 piece that appeared in Vox, Julia Belluz writes about how major advertising sponsors of sports leagues and in particular, the NFL, are often food and beverage companies that peddle junk food to children. The association of these unhealthy foods (sodas, snack foods, etc) with sports, she writes, is “especially problematic – it fuses this healthy activity with this really unhealthy message.” Clearly, the NFL has a tremendous influence over and impact upon children. Given the childhood obesity problem in our country, could it be that, in its’ quest for profits in partnering with these industries, the NFL is actually having a negative impact on public health and the childhood obesity epidemic? While the league has made an attempt to promote physical activity in youth through its Play 60 campaign, the question is whether that is enough.
Granted, a few articles and some increased attention and critical analysis of its’ handling of these issues will not bring the NFL to its knees. But make no mistake, slowly and surely, things are changing as it relates to the role, influence and impact of football in our society. Football is facing growing public scrutiny that will continue to increase. And it should as a case can be made that certain values and societal norms, long promoted by the NFL, are not necessarily a reflection of today’s culture.
In short, American culture has changed significantly from when I watched Joe Namath and the Jets defeat the Baltimore Colts in the 1969 Super Bowl. While the NFL’s cultural influence remains powerful, the fact is, if those old, white, male, billionaire owners don’t get their heads out of the sand and recognize that we are long past the “Happy Days” of Fonzie, Ritchie, Joanie, and Mr. and Mrs. Cunningham, the NFL’s cultural relevance and influence will, like the skills of an aging superstar quarterback, slowly but surely wither away.
USA Football, the NFL funded national governing body for the sport recently held its annual meeting in Orlando. According to a January 30, 2018 account in the New York Times, they would have been better off holding it at a beach resort as it would have made it much easier for participants to dig holes to bury their heads in the sand.
According to Ken Belson, the conference amounted to a series of coaches, former players and various administrators coming to the lectern to deliver the same stern warning: “Football is under attack and your job is to change the narrative.” Apparently, many of the speakers insisted that the sport is “vital to the American experience, essential for its survival, and it doesn’t have a health and safety problem as much as it has a messaging problem.” David Baker, the president of the Pro Football Hall of Fame said that if we lose football, “I don’t know if America can survive.”
I must have missed the American history lesson that explained how George Washington, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton felt a need to carve into the U.S. Constitution a clause specific to football being essential to the survival of our nation. Trust me, America will survive and thrive with or without football. Yes, it is extremely entertaining. Yes, we love being fans and being a part of a “tribe”. And granted, playing youth tackle football can have a positive impact on participants. But the fact is, so can involvement with any number of other sports. At the end of the day, it is simply game. To think it is essential for very survival of America is delusional. That said, the focus of this essay is not football in general, but rather youth tackle football specifically.
If Baker and his colleagues would lift their collective heads out of the sand and take an honest look at the current state of the game, they’d see that virtually all of the research emerging regarding football and brain trauma is making the connection between the two irrefutable. As a result, more parents, including many former NFL stars, are expressing concerns about letting their children play or prohibiting it outright. Meanwhile, for the second straight year, television ratings for the NFL fell both for the regular season and playoffs. And in the last two months, legislation to ban tackle football before the age of 14 was introduced in four states (Illinois, California, Maryland and New York).
Clearly, something is happening here. And it’s not simply a product of poor messaging.
If these developments on their own are not enough to paint a very cloudy picture of football’s future, something even more fundamental is at work, particularly as it applies to the future of tackle football sponsored by our junior high and high schools. Specifically, it relates to the fundamental justification for football being incorporated into our educational system in the first place.
Until the mid 1800s, America was primarily an agrarian economy and society. And, true to its purpose, our educational system reflected and served the needs of that society. Schools existed to provide the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic. There wasn’t much time for anything else. Sports, games, music and the arts were considered frivolous and, for the most part, didn’t have much of a formal role in schools.
It was not until the Industrial Age that sports and football in particular, began to gain a foothold within our school curriculums. America’s emerging middle class began to experience a rising standard of living, with shorter workdays and more disposable income. As a result, it became more accepted to engage in a little “frivolity.”
But in the case of football, there was another influence at work. The primary reason football was incorporated into high schools had little to do with education in the traditional sense. The driving force behind the implementation of such programs were the great industrialists of the late 1800’s and early 1900s. Rather than having an interest in educating through sport, these business leaders looked upon organized athletics and in particular football, as a means to train, socialize and control a workforce. In short, Industrial America required workers to be dependable, in good physical shape, able to work as part of a team and, above all, obedient. It was widely believed that football instilled these characteristics. In the minds of factory owners, there was little room for lofty thinking on the assembly line. Industrialists of that time did not want their line workers to be great thinkers, preferring that they passively conform. “The leaders of American industry felt that their workers needed to be loyal and punctual, but not necessarily good academically.” (Miracle and Rees, Lessons of the Locker Room: The Myth of School Sports, 1994, p. 178.)
At its origin, football was considered an extracurricular activity that was an entertaining addition to a school’s broad offerings, but certainly not central to the educational mission of the institution. But as our society’s love affair with football, grew, so too did football’s place of importance in our schools. As a result, football has, if not structurally, then culturally and philosophically, moved closer to being considered a “basic”, or at least a more important part of the curriculum, than other extracurricular activities such as music, theatre or visual arts.
Because this notion has become so engrained in our public psyche over the past century, we continue to accept it without question. If this were not the case, why has it been far more likely that arts programs, rather than football programs, are reduced or eliminated in times of budget shortfalls?
It is precisely this long held belief of the educational utility of football as it applies to instilling in youth the necessary skills to successfully compete in the workforce and economy of the day that foretells its future in America’s educational system.
In short, the fundamental educational rationalization for incorporating football into the fabric of our educational system has gone the way of the leather football helmet. It simply does not apply in today’s world.
The fact is, our economy and our society have changed dramatically since these programs were initially incorporated into the educational system. We no longer live in an industrial economy that requires workers to be physically fit, unquestionably obedient and able to methodically perform the manual tasks required for an assembly line. While football may have been a wise educational and economic investment in the early 1900s, continuing to invest in an activity best suited to prepare workers for a world and economy that no longer exists, is misguided. Music, for example, is a far better educational investment than football in providing the creative skills necessary to succeed in the interrelated, global, information-based, creative economy and world community of the future.
Change is difficult. It is often much easier to cling to the comfortable models from the past. But how silly would it be for a politician, school administrator or community leader to propose reforming our schools to place the primary emphasis on preparing students to become farmers and steel workers? That may have been quite reasonable in 1850 or 1900, but to propose that today would be considered crazy. While we still need a certain number of farmers and steel workers, to systematically structure our educational system to concentrate on preparing future generations for an agricultural or industrial economy is ludicrous.
This is why it is important to have a serious discussion about extracurricular activities in our educational system. This discussion must take place against a background that recognizes the fact that America’s economy has changed from one based on industrial might to one based on creativity and innovation. Clearly, the skills necessary to succeed in the workplace of the future have far more to do with brains than brawn, requiring intellectual and creative skills nurtured in the classrooms and concert halls rather than muscles built in the weight room and on the playing field.
It comes down to whether we, as educational and community leaders, continue to fund an activity that scrambles brains and is better suited to prepare our children for an industrial economy that is long gone or invest in an activity that strengthens and builds brain capacity and brain function that is perfectly suited to prepare our children to more effectively meet the challenges of the twenty-first century. We should welcome this discussion and analysis, because if we approach it honestly, the end result will be better schools serving our children and communities more effectively.
In the end, isn’t that what we all want?