Should the NFL accept 18-year olds?

[Woolen Horde]

Reports coming in that Maurice Clarett is going to challenge the NFL's requirement that you've got to be at least 3 years out of high school to play.

Frankly, I hope Clarett loses, and loses big. And if he does win, does he realize he's probably not going to be anywhere as big a draft pick as he thinks he'll be? For one, he's injury-prone, and that's the least of his problems. NFL teams want players who can take a hit and keep on tickin'. But his biggest liability is his attitude, which is making Randy Moss look like Moses. He bitches and whines and sulks that Ohio State wouldn't let him have time off for a friend's funeral, nevermind the fact that he never filled out the paperwork that the athletic department told him he had to fill out so they could gladly let him have his time off. Then there's the "borrowed" car issue, along with all the "borrowed items" in them.

When Ohio State beat Miami, Clarett was off in the corner of the celebration podium, sulking by himself.

But aside from Clarett, I think this is one of the great rules of the NFL. For one, 18-year olds are nowhere close to phsyically developed as a junior or senior college player. Then there's the competition issue. I don't care how good a player is in high school, he needs to go to college to experience competition on a whole new level.

I think the straight-out-of-high-school attitude the NBA has adopted is one of the big reasons why I've dropped watching basketball. (The bigger reasons are the thugs who play the game with their me-only attitude.)

[Jason McCullough]

I'd fear for the life of a high school-to-NFL pick. He'll be lucky to come out of camp able to walk; the difference between high schoola and the NFL is unbelievable.

[Brian Koontz]

I hope he wins. If someone was good enough he should be able to play at age 15 (maybe a phenom kicker or something). The whole point in going to college for elite athletes in major sports is to play their sport and prepare for the pros. If they are ready for the pros prior to 3 years out of high school they should be in the pros then.

You won't see a glut of high schoolers joining the NFL even if the rule is destroyed. Unlike basketball, football is a very contact physical and bulk-oriented sport. It takes time and age to develop that physique and bulk. However, if this rule is destroyed great high school players would ratchet up their weight training.

The positions best suited to young players would be cornerback, safety, wide receiver, and kicker, I would imagine.

This rule would be like a rule in MLB that states a player has to be three years out of high school to play. There is no such rule because such a rule is nonsense. You could be 12 years old and play in MLB if you were good enough.

Imagine such a rule in Tennis. LOL. It would kill the sport, especially on the women's side.

[bmulligan]

The NFL is full of whiney elitist showboats, what makes Clarett any different? He's of legal age so why shouldn't an NFL team get to sign him if they choose to? It's their money. High draft pick don't mean shit as far as future performance is concerned, or how big a contract you can land.

[Midnight Son]

The NFL is full of whiney elitist showboats, what makes Clarett any different? He's of legal age so why shouldn't an NFL team get to sign him if they choose to? It's their money. High draft pick don't mean shit as far as future performance is concerned, or how big a contract you can land.

The reason NFL teams can't sign him is that they are part of an organization that has RULES that the majority agreed too. They promised not to break the rules..... I was almost gonna take a cheap shot at you but this isn't the P&R forum. :)

[bmulligan]

Ha! Rules were meant to be broken, especially in the realm of competitive sports. (not field rules, though) I don't see why this majority couldn't reverse itself by voting to throw out the rule.

[Midnight Son]

Ha! Rules were meant to be broken, especially in the realm of competitive sports. (not field rules, though) I don't see why this majority couldn't reverse itself by voting to throw out the rule.

Of course they could, but have said they wouldn't for "the protection" of the young athletes.

[bmulligan]

'Protection' of young athletes. What a crock of shit. Like they care about anything else except revenue.

[Brad Grenz]

Well, they'd feel pretty stupid if they entered the draft at 18, destroyed their hip, or something, in camp and were never able to play football again. Then they'd have no prospects, no education and no prospects of getting a free education. Football's such a dangerous sport I think it's monumentally stupid to not at least get a degree before going pro.

[Lloyd Heilbrunn]

IIRC, this has already been decided in his favor in the Spencer Haywood v NBA case years ago, only question would be is if the Union contract can get around this precedent, if it really does cover this situation, and if a union contract is binding over a non-union member so that it may limit his right to make a living.

I believe, the NFL has worried for years about that last issue being challenged, as it is what gives them the right to set up the Draft as they do and if overturned could effect their whole business plan. It is posssible this has already been decided in their favor but have not seen this reported.....

[bmulligan]

Well, they'd feel pretty stupid if they entered the draft at 18, destroyed their hip, or something, in camp and were never able to play football again.
y'know they make this new thing called insurance. It's really cool cause you can even insure parts of your body against disability and loss. And he'd be able to pay for an education from the money he would get regardless if he plays or not. Gotta have a clause in your contract that guarantees you something in case of injury.

[Brad Grenz]

If you're just in camp trying not to get cut, I'm not sure you'd be to the insurance stage of your NFL career.

[Jason Levine]

Although I think Clarett's legal case is fairly strong, I don't think this a good move for him personally. Even if he wins the case, by the time all the appeals are exhausted another year of college eligibility will have gone by. By all accounts, NFL scouts do not consider him a first round draft choice at this time. He's got the legs, but the scouts think his upper body strength needs to be developed and that his shoulder injuries last years were evidence of that.

He'd put himself in much better draft position by sitting out his suspension and playing another year in college. The bridges are burned at Ohio State, but he could do his draft postion and his $$ a lot of good by playing next year at a 1-AA school like Grambling, which would love to have him.

[XPav]

If you're goign to accept 18 year old into the NFL, I don't want to hear any bitching and moaning about how much they get paid.

[Midnight Son]

If you're goign to accept 18 year old into the NFL, I don't want to hear any bitching and moaning about how much they get paid.

It probably ain't all that smart to want to got there if you are also good at Basketball or Baseball. The NFL doesn't guarantee its' contracts! Blow out a knee, too bad, punkass!

[awdougherty]

Although I think Clarett's legal case is fairly strong, I don't think this a good move for him personally. Even if he wins the case, by the time all the appeals are exhausted another year of college eligibility will have gone by. By all accounts, NFL scouts do not consider him a first round draft choice at this time. He's got the legs, but the scouts think his upper body strength needs to be developed and that his shoulder injuries last years were evidence of that.

He'd put himself in much better draft position by sitting out his suspension and playing another year in college. The bridges are burned at Ohio State, but he could do his draft postion and his $$ a lot of good by playing next year at a 1-AA school like Grambling, which would love to have him.

I agree with this completely. I think Clarett needs to have another great season at the college level where he doesn't go down midway with an injury. He needs to build up the durability and he needs more time to mature. While I don't feel the NFL is necessarily responsible to protect young talents from themselves, I'm glad they have their rule in place.

Clarett is a diamond in the rough and a bit of a whiny bitch. It's in his best interest to work those things out before going pro. He's going to work himself right out of all the things he's chasing after with his current course of action.

[Anders Hallin]

While I don't feel the NFL is necessarily responsible to protect young talents from themselves
No, but it's smart for them to try upholding a high talent-level for the league, which means making sure future stars get crippling injuries because they started too early.

[graller]

I have to side with some of the others here. I think the drafting of kids out of high school and early in college has ruined the NBA game and has started to negatively effect the college level game in basketball. Its all the prrof I need that I don't want to see the same in Football. I also agree the physical demands and danger of NFL football is an important concern.

[awdougherty]

While I don't feel the NFL is necessarily responsible to protect young talents from themselves
No, but it's smart for them to try upholding a high talent-level for the league, which means making sure future stars get crippling injuries because they started too early.

By quoting that one half sentence, you make it sound like we disagree. As the sentence continues on to say, "I'm glad they have that rule in place." Clarett is a prime example of why I feel like that rule is a good one. Here is a guy with the potential to dominate in the NFL. If some pro team caves and lets him in (assuming the rule also caves), I feel like his potential will go down the toilet.

As I said in my post (and others have said it as well), Clarett's a little too fragile. He could use a few more years to finish growing, both physically and mentally.

[MarchHare]

At 18 he's considered an adult; he can vote, buy a gun, join the Army...he has all the rights afforded to other adults (except the right to drink alcohol...crazy puritan American drinking laws), so why should he arbitrarily be kept out of the NFL just because of his age.

Do I think it's a good idea for a kid that young to be playing in the NFL? Not really, but if he can hack it, all the power to him. 19 and 20 year olds routinely play in the NHL, and they're hit just as hard as football players.

[awdougherty]

For the same reasons why he can't rent a car without special, added costs. Say the NFL lets Clarett in and he gets paralyzed because of some weird thing that happens because his muscles and bones weren't fully developed (hey, I broke my hip as a teenager because of freak "I'm not done growing yet" type stuff, so weird things can happen). Can Clarett sue?

But more importantly, just because Clarett is legally an adult, that doesn't mean the NFL has to shape their rules any differently. It's the NFL, not a legal government body. The NFL doesn't have to make rules that are fair.

This post is pretty scattered, I apologize for that. The bottom line is while Clarett is free to try to get into the NFL, I don't think the NFL is obligated to make rules that are legally fair. They don't have to allow someone in a wheelchair to enter the draft.

[Bub, Andrew]

19 and 20 year olds routinely play in the NHL, and they're hit just as hard as football players.

Wow. Do you really believe this? Hockey can be terribly violent but there's a reason why football has a LOT more padding. 350lbs of reason in many cases.

[graller]

Andrew I just had a vision of a 350 lb defenseman on skates tearing ahead at full steam into a nice little 180 lb left winger...boy that would not be pretty. I think hockey is faster moving which increases the damage factor from a good hit. Btw I played both Hockey and Football and trust me hockey players wear more pads.

[awdougherty]

Hey, some force=mass X acceleration going on there. I imagine the higher speeds in hockey could lead to the need for more padding. There's more hitting in football I guess, but it seems like the potential for a truly devastating hit exists more in hockey.

[Bub, Andrew]

There's more hitting in football I guess, but it seems like the potential for a truly devastating hit exists more in hockey.

That's not the reality though. Doesn't the NFL have the NHL beat in terms of career threatening injuries? (I don't have stats to back this.) Even if not, the NFL ranks really high given the short-by-comparison 16 game season.

I'm a fan of both sports but the idea of an 18 year old in the NFL sounds a lot more ludicrous and dangerous to me than an 18 year old in the NHL.

[Toddy]

I don't know what the numbers are, but there are a lot of high-profile career-threatening/ending injuries in the NHL. I haven't seen nearly as many big injuries in the NFL amongst the top players. For instance, I can name something like two dozen *top* NHLers who have lost significant time to injury or been forced to retire the past couple of years. The same rate of injury isn't present in the NFL today, though it is pretty high.

It didn't used to be this way. In the last decade or so, hockey equipment's gone to ridiculous levels. Shoulder and elbow pads have gone from, um, pads, to these massive kevlar-like things that can dish out concussions with ease. Hockey players wear a lot more equipment than football players, too. Shoulder pads are football-like, then there are the huge elbow pads, gloves, helmets, pants that are reinforced and padded all over, and big shin pads, not to mention skates. I get the feeling that a lot of sports injuries today are caused by this supposedly safer equipment, along with other modern "niceties" like artificial turf and that insane seamless glass in NHL rinks that turns boards into concrete walls.

But back to the main argument -- why exactly is it so hard to fathom an 18-year-old playing in the NFL? The kid's gotta be huge and talented, so why shouldn't he get the chance? I don't agree with this, and think one of the NHL's biggest mistakes was opening the draft up to 18-year-olds, but arguing that the kid's going to be killed by because he's three or four years younger than most rookies seems preposterous.

[Ben]

I don't understand the "a young guy isn't capable of being good enough" argument against Clarett(or some hypothetical 18 year old) joining the NFL. Isn't that for the team to decide? That's an argument against a specific team drafting him, not against not allowing him to be drafted. The NFL absolutely should allow some guy in a wheelchair to be drafted, that's between the team and the guy.

Anyway, there's really no reasonable argument against letting people follow their chosen profession whenever their employers are willing to employ them, so this is kind of a dull thread. People go to college because they can't get the job they want without a degree. It just so happens that not every profession requires a degree for entry.

If it's a bad idea for Clarett, how about we let Clarett make his own decisions? He's going to be 20 his rookie year if he wins, anyway. And specifically, though he's been injury prone, it isn't because he's scrawny. He doesn't need to add any more bulk. If he needs to work on his physique, he'll do better with NFL trainers and full-time work instead of having to go to class and eat shitty OSU cafeteria food in between workouts.

Re: The NBA
Yeah, it's a real shame that the NBA let people like McGrady, Bryant, and Garnett into the league early. It's difficult to construct a top 5 in the NBA that includes more than 2 players who attended college, even though the vast majority of NBA players have 1+ years of college under their belts.

A tremendous amount of the vitriol we see about guys going into the pros early is because jealous sportswriters are angry that some 18 year old nigger is getting millions while they spent 4 years in college and all they got was 45 grand a year. I didn't see very many "Darko Milic should go to college" stories around draft time. If it was some Peyton Manning-lookalike trying to challenge this rule and there was no ineligibility scandal I suspect we'd see quite a different response.

[Jason McCullough]

There's probably no legal way to stop him from going pro, but what's the weight difference between HS and the NFL?

[Bub, Andrew]

Is there an NFL team that's expressing any interest in the guy?
It's amazing how many College stars actually fail to make the NFL cut at 24 or 25, much less 18.

Remember, the rule came from the teams, not the NFL itself. A lot of what football coaches want isn't raw talent. Football is far more of a mental/experience driven game than most people think. College is generally seen as "paying your dues" by learning playbooks, running plays, and learning how to handle game situations. I bet you part of the thinking behind the rule is to discourage 18 year olds from attending camp and wasting time.

Besides, he's welcome to play in Canada or Europe (if they want him) right now, I don't believe they have an age requirement there.

[Smaugbelly]

I get the feeling that a lot of sports injuries today are caused by this supposedly safer equipment,

This is the argument used in Rugby against having protective gear. Basically the argument goes that all the gear decreases the fear of injury in players, and increases the chance of injury in tackling. Also any tackles involving any danger to the head or spine are severely punished - ie no tackling above the shoulders, and no spear tackles (where the tacklee is driven into the ground headfirst). Oh and I believe football players are taught to tackle using their (helmeted) head as a weapon. This sounds pretty risky to me.

I'm fairly confident there are detailed stats on this.

Elliott

[Bub, Andrew]

Oh and I believe football players are taught to tackle using their (helmeted) head as a weapon. This sounds pretty risky to me.

Yeah but this is a flagrant violation in Football. Big penalty, big fine, etc., It still happens of course, most of the time accidentally (there are some bastards out there). Same with spear tackles, like opening week when Driver got nailed mid-air, flipped, and landed on his neck. Sans padding he'd have been paralyzed or dead, instead of just sprained.

The NFL has really improved. Probably because of replay tapes, etc., it's much harder to get away with deliberately trying to hurt an opponent today than it was in the past. I have a book about the Packer rivalry. Not only did they not have any meaningful padding, they'd TRY and punch people in the neck, temple or nose to knock them out of the game. Of course players would refuse to come out, even if they were bleeding all over the damn place back then. Yeesh!

Of course in Rugby they deliberately grab and twist each other's nuts. I'd wear a few cups if I played Rugby. And Aussie Rules Football is just insanity on mud.

[MarchHare]

Wow. Do you really believe this? Hockey can be terribly violent but there's a reason why football has a LOT more padding. 350lbs of reason in many cases.


1. Hockey players wear way more padding than football players.

2. I'd rather be tackled by the likes of Warren Sapp any day than be on the receiving end of a Scott Stevens body check...especially an open-ice hit when I'm looking the other way. I don't have stats to back this up, but I'm almost positive concussions (and other injuries) are FAR more common in the NHL.

[Ben]

Goalies wear way more padding than football players. But the average hockey player looks to be around or a little under skill position padding. Front 7/5 level padding? No way.

Hockey may have more minor injuries, but football definitely has more major ones. Hockey has visible blood, which makes it everything look bad, but it doesn't have knees bending the wrong way and spines compressing. Football can hide it's minor injuries better, too. A hockey player gets hurt, he needs to come off the ice and that's an event. His team will have to briefly change their strategy. Football teams rotate players all the time between players, you don't even notice that one of them is limping off unless it's a star player.

It's not getting tackled by Sapp that causes the serious injuries, it's getting blindsided by Arrington or getting creamed by Lynch on a crossing route.

[MarchHare]

but it doesn't have knees bending the wrong way and spines compressing.


Are you sure about that chief? Maybe you should read about how Mike Bossy's career was ended after suffering a spinal cord injury...or maybe just do a google search for "hockey spinal injury" and see how many hits you get. Like this one:


Since 1981, ice hockey has been identified as a major cause of permanent serious spine injuries, especially among those players 11 to 20 years old. Studies indicate that on a per capita basis, there is a three times greater risk of catastrophic neck injuries in amateur hockey than in American football.


Emphasis mine, from http://www.chiroweb.com/archives/14/04/11.html


A hockey player gets hurt, he needs to come off the ice and that's an event. His team will have to briefly change their strategy. Football teams rotate players all the time between players, you don't even notice that one of them is limping off unless it's a star player.


Please. It's not an event when a hockey player comes off the ice...hell, they change shifts every 30 seconds or so. Even when they're injured, they usually just get stiched up right there on the bench and don't even miss a shift. It's only an event when a someone goes down on the ice and doesn't get up, prompting the trainer to come running out to check on the player...and last I checked that happens pretty frequently in football too.


it's getting blindsided by Arrington or getting creamed by Lynch on a crossing route.


Which is no different than the example I posted of being on the receiving end of a Scott Stevens check in the open ice when looking the wrong way...except hockey players tend to be moving much faster than football players...

[Xaroc]

it's getting blindsided by Arrington or getting creamed by Lynch on a crossing route.


Which is no different than the example I posted of being on the receiving end of a Scott Stevens check in the open ice when looking the wrong way...except hockey players tend to be moving much faster than football players...

I would say on a whole big hits in hockey are worse than big hits in football due to the speed of skating but big hits happen more often in football. Stevens might lay out one guy a game with a hit like that but in the NFL it seems you have multiple hits like that per game.

-- Xaroc

[Anders Hallin]

Seems like a good thread to express my complete and utter disgust of the "hard, clean, open ice check" that causes concussions, and every other thing that causes injury, but that most of all, due to a lot of people seeming to like it. It sickens me that a sport I love so much is the cause of so many crippling injuries and that it leaves such deep wounds in so great a number of people. And that there is a culture that bloody cherishes it makes me sometimes want to leave it all behind. It's a fucking sport, the idea that people can accept life-long pain to attain glory in that field should be a completely foreign idea. God damnit, some perspective, please!

[Tom Ohle]

But if someone's willing to risk that kind of punishment... why feel bad for them? I mean, granted, it's a horrible thing if someone is seriously hurt in a sporting event... but that's the risk they take. A stunt man makes far less money than a professional athlete and puts himself in far more danger.

As for the initial question... I think they should let him play... if he can get through camp and actually make a team... which I highly doubt he would. High school kids (no matter how good they are) just can't stand up physically to guys that currently make it into the NFL.

[Anders Hallin]

But if someone's willing to risk that kind of punishment... why feel bad for them? I mean, granted, it's a horrible thing if someone is seriously hurt in a sporting event... but that's the risk they take. A stunt man makes far less money than a professional athlete and puts himself in far more danger.
Why create a system where such behaviour is encouraged? That's just stupid and harmful, not just physically.

[Bub, Andrew]

As for the initial question... I think they should let him play... if he can get through camp and actually make a team... which I highly doubt he would. High school kids (no matter how good they are) just can't stand up physically to guys that currently make it into the NFL.

Again, I think the rule is because NFL teams don't want camp crowded with 18-year old kids who either won't make it or might get hurt not making it. Camp is crowded with washouts every year anyway. 24-30 year old washouts. Why encourage 18 year-olds?

[Lloyd Heilbrunn]

As for the initial question... I think they should let him play... if he can get through camp and actually make a team... which I highly doubt he would. High school kids (no matter how good they are) just can't stand up physically to guys that currently make it into the NFL.

Again, I think the rule is because NFL teams don't want camp crowded with 18-year old kids who either won't make it or might get hurt not making it. Camp is crowded with washouts every year anyway. 24-30 year old washouts. Why encourage 18 year-olds?

Most reports I've seen indicate the reason for the rule is to keep the status quo in effect as much as possible for the NCAA, a free development/minor league for the NFL.