2 years ago500+ Views
Over the past decade, a lot of research has come to the forefront in regards to the impact collision in football has on the body and brain. As a result, many players are retiring early in an attempt to avoid long-term injuries.
While many have accepted this research with open arms and worked towards new initiatives to protect players, some people are still in denial.
One of those people may be Colts owner Jim Irsay, who said much is not known about side effects of participating in the sport, comparing it to the varying side effects one might experience from taking aspirin.
"I believe this: that the game has always been a risk, you know, and the way certain people are. Look at it. You take an aspirin, I take an aspirin, it might give you extreme side effects of illness and your body ... may reject it, where I would be fine. So there is so much we don't know," he told the Journal.
He said the NFL is trying to make the game safer "without changing the game."
"Obviously we are not going to go to a situation where we put players in almost balloon-like equipment, where it becomes a pillow fight, so to speak," he told the Journal.

Fellow Vinglers, does this comparison make sense? Does the effects of aspirin compare to playing football?

View more comments
Yeah i guess it's dependent on the person who's actually playing the game. Everyone knows there's a certain risk to the sport and even though the NFL is doing everything it can to make football safer, you can't fully take out the risks involved in it!
In a way yes because both have a risk of negative effect but aspirins risk of negative effect is lower than the risk in the nfl
Yeah....I mean really? Why would you compare aspirin to football!
I mean, even as a Colts fan I can't let this one slide.. Lol
I think it really comes down to harsher penalties for improper tackling, but more importantly, better tackling technique taught to these kids from their earliest stages