49ers Linebacker Chris Borland Retiring.

[Popeyejones]

Given the generous example the Seahawks set with Scott Garrett, I think it unlikely that the 49er's would make Borland's signing bonus a refund issue.

49ers haven’t addressed Borland’s signing bonus >>>> [urltargetblank]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/17/49ers-havent-addressed-borlands-signing-bonus/[/urltargetblank]

First, his name is Garrett Scott.

Second, it's a totally different. He had a heart condition and COULDN'T play. Borland has changed his mind about if he WANTS to play.

I wouldn't be remotely surprised or perturbed if they wanted him to pay back money for work he has chosen not to do. Quite frankly I'd only be surprised if he didn't realize this too.

That reads like a school master.

With regards to Garrett Scott, you have the name in the correct order. Congratulations.

With regards to the balance of your post, the cultures of the two clubs are very different. So within the Santa Clara frame work it wouldn't entirely surprise me to see the 49ers balk. That of course doesn't dictate how building it into an issue will be received outside of the 49er empire.

Heh.

No, it's not about the culture of two clubs, it's about comparing apples to oranges.

If you want compare apples to apples, compare Scott to Marcus Lattimore. He also got to keep his bonus money.

Hell of a two different cultures you have.

 

[Popeyejones]

Edit: double.

 

[Jville]

Double posting doesn't make it so.

 

[HunnyBadger]

I guess Willis and Borland saw the 'brick wall' that Tomsula wanted them to run through and thought '**** that'.

 

[TAB420]

http://vid212.photobucket.com/albums/cc ... eahawk.mp4

 

[hawknation2015]

I don't think playing football was "fun" for him anymore. Whether that had anything to do with the mess Jed York has created is up for debate . . . only Borland himself could resolve the issue.

There is a clear balance every player must strike between risking injury and doing something they love. If Borland's heart was not in it anymore, then he made the right decision for himself. Ultimately, he made an informed decision that was personal to him.

 

[BadgerVid]

I really wanted the 'Hawks to draft Borland last year and hated it when the 9ers took him...

 

[BadgerVid]

Borland did not retire. He QUIT. There is a big difference.

You don't play only 8 NFL games in your first season and have the right to say that you're RETIRING for any reason. He had no injury or concussion history. If he is afraid of what might happen he should never had put on a helmet in the first place. There are many people who would have loved to get he chance to live that dream of playing in the NFL. Including me.

I am only 5'6" and about 140 pounds. I was even lighter than that in high school and college. I didn't have the size to play, but loved the game. So I became a photojournalist and was able to share a small part of their experience from college to the NFL for 15 years. As much as I enjoyed that part of my life, it just wasn't the same as if I could have put on a helmet and played.

So for me to hear a guy make a statement that includes the word RETIRED with so little actual playing time in the NFL just makes me sick. He has known the risks since he started playing. Coaches, family, medical professionals, ect. had to have made him aware of the risks long before he came to the NFL.

So let's at least get the term right. HE QUIT. That is his legacy. Nothing more to it.

Huh? So because he has the physical tools to play pro football but decides its not for him, and you dont have the physical stature but have a passion for the game gives you the right to call him a quiter? And I'm pretty sure your using I t in a derogatory manner too. Yea truth is, you're a fascist that wants to impose your will on others. In other words, your a nutcase

Your comment to me just makes you look like a really stupid dimwit. See I can do the same thing.

Except he's correct...

 

[kf3339]

Borland did not retire. He QUIT. There is a big difference.

You don't play only 8 NFL games in your first season and have the right to say that you're RETIRING for any reason. He had no injury or concussion history. If he is afraid of what might happen he should never had put on a helmet in the first place. There are many people who would have loved to get he chance to live that dream of playing in the NFL. Including me.

I am only 5'6" and about 140 pounds. I was even lighter than that in high school and college. I didn't have the size to play, but loved the game. So I became a photojournalist and was able to share a small part of their experience from college to the NFL for 15 years. As much as I enjoyed that part of my life, it just wasn't the same as if I could have put on a helmet and played.

So for me to hear a guy make a statement that includes the word RETIRED with so little actual playing time in the NFL just makes me sick. He has known the risks since he started playing. Coaches, family, medical professionals, ect. had to have made him aware of the risks long before he came to the NFL.

So let's at least get the term right. HE QUIT. That is his legacy. Nothing more to it.

Huh? So because he has the physical tools to play pro football but decides its not for him, and you dont have the physical stature but have a passion for the game gives you the right to call him a quiter? And I'm pretty sure your using I t in a derogatory manner too. Yea truth is, you're a fascist that wants to impose your will on others. In other words, your a nutcase

Your comment to me just makes you look like a really stupid dimwit. See I can do the same thing.

Except he's correct...

Oh look, another one. Well good for you! Feel Better?

 

[hawknation2015]

Borland did not retire. He QUIT. There is a big difference.

You don't play only 8 NFL games in your first season and have the right to say that you're RETIRING for any reason. He had no injury or concussion history. If he is afraid of what might happen he should never had put on a helmet in the first place. There are many people who would have loved to get he chance to live that dream of playing in the NFL. Including me.

I am only 5'6" and about 140 pounds. I was even lighter than that in high school and college. I didn't have the size to play, but loved the game. So I became a photojournalist and was able to share a small part of their experience from college to the NFL for 15 years. As much as I enjoyed that part of my life, it just wasn't the same as if I could have put on a helmet and played.

So for me to hear a guy make a statement that includes the word RETIRED with so little actual playing time in the NFL just makes me sick. He has known the risks since he started playing. Coaches, family, medical professionals, ect. had to have made him aware of the risks long before he came to the NFL.

So let's at least get the term right. HE QUIT. That is his legacy. Nothing more to it.

Your comment to me just makes you look like a really stupid dimwit. See I can do the same thing.

Except he's correct...

Oh look, another one. Well good for you! Feel Better?

Your logic is flawed. Just because you find the risk worth the reward does not mean he needs to . . . especially on a team in a downward spiral. He made the best decision for himself. I applaud him for that.

 

[Snowprince]

As a 49er fan Chris Borland's decision to retire is another blow that's gonna make what looks to be a dreadful season that much longer. However not only do I respect his decision, I applaud it. Football is a risky game. If you don't believe the risk is worth it 100% heart mind body and soul, take your helmet and pads off, turn in your playbook and walk away. When you come to that realization doesn't matter. This young man has other interests and career aspirations he plans to persue and I wish him all the best.

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

Incredible...and I couldn't support him any stronger. I love football, but without major changes to the game, my son will not play, and most friends of mine with kids (all sports fans, several season ticket holders) feel the same way.

Mine neither, although he's a scrawny little kid that would never make it anyways. But he won't be playing football at any level. If he really wants to, he can play flag football.

Yet you both have no problem watching the game? I can respect a parents decision, but - to me - it's an inconsistent message. "We can watch, but you can't play." (We're too important, they're not?) Maybe it's just me... but, if I'm going to tell my boys they cannot play, then I have NO business watching it and supporting it.

I have two boys playing (one High School and one in Youth football.) I think if they weren't very good, I'd probably steer them to other things because the risk might not be worth the reward at that point. But, they're passionate about the game (see Bobby Wagner's tweet) and they have enjoyed success on the field. They both have aspirations of playing college ball and I hope they make it. They're training hard year round.

(quoted for brevity)

Good points, all of them, and the thing for me is there is a balance, and each family and each parent will have a balance they're comfortable with. Sure you can see an inconsistent message, that inconsistent message will show up eventually depending on where that parent finds a comfort level.

There are a lot of things that I watch (that I expect all of us to watch) that I don't think we'd get involved with. Any extreme sports? MMA? Evil Knievel? Professional wrestling and jumping off a jumbotron? Escape artists?

So I can see for some people that balance is drawn with professional football.

On to Borland: super surprised, and at the same time when you think about it, not surprised. Now I'm just wondering who's the next show to drop. Overall, you can't fault a guy for making decisions based on health and wanting to have a quality life with friends and family.

Thanks. Yes, of course I understand there are "other things" that could be lumped into this argument. I teach martial arts and have my family involved as well. So, it's something I've given a lot of thought. I don't pretend to have the all-encompassing right answer. Just, trying to make sense of this particular moment and offer some thoughts.

I agree there are things that we might watch that we wouldn't let our kids do. But, shouldn't that make us question whether we should be watching them in the first place? There are occasional crazy things that people line up to say, "We've got to see this. Are they selling tickets? Can we get in?" But, football is King in America and for all the time us fans (probably the majority of us) spend watching it, that's where my thought about consistency is targeted. I'm not saying it's easy to be consistent, but seems like a hard stance to take that one wouldn't let their kids dare play football, yet they'll go out and buy jersey's of their favorite players. Think about that. You've got to at least see the point or you won't feel the weight of that apparent conundrum. "Do as I say, but not as I do" sort of thing.

Too, understand I don't intend an insult at the poster. I'm also looking at myself. It's a general observation and consideration... and something all parents struggle with (or should) to some degree. What constitutes inappropriate entertainment? If there's such a serious risk, are we outright sick to be watching guys do this? I don't think so, but I can see why there is concern today and agree it's worth making the game safer without ruining the integrity of the sport. My question remains, though. If we're THAT concerned about it, why should we allow ourselves to support it? I think there are contours to this discussion and that there are sufficient answers to tough questions.

When we say, "Oh good for Chris Borland" yet can't wait for the draft and the season to begin, it's sort of like saying we know it's crazy to be out there, but hopefully there are guys willing to do it for my entertainment. I just can't agree with that line of thinking. I can see the logic of Bobby Wagner. It's not complicated. Yes, he gets paid. But, I do think there are those who are passionate about the game that would likely play even if the pay wasn't so great.

Do these guys play ONLY because they get paid a lot to do so? Probably not really. Some hit the big payday, but most do not. Yeah, even the lesser paid players (a higher percentage) might make more than we all might in a lifetime (or so we think), but is that enough to make it worthwhile if it's really THAT risky to one's health? They are hoping to hit the payday, perhaps, and working toward that. But, players without passion for the game usually get weeded out. It wasn't even a quick decision for Borland.

We have no way of knowing what input he got. Was it all just about the risks? Or, was there a counter-balance to all the input he was getting? Though there is a lot of research already, there's still not enough. Many former players I've spoken with think there was (or could be) a prior condition that contributed to the more serious cases. I think this is why "baseline" tests are being pushed these days. The high school one of my sons plays at requires baseline tests prior to play. There are steps in the right direction. But, it remains a "collision" sport, not merely a "contact" sport.

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

Good post teamofthecentury.

I have two boys and I plan to let them play football when they're old enough.

From all the research I've been through, it seems that limiting impact until a child is 12 is very helpful. A child's brain is much smaller than his skull when they're younger, to allow growth. The precursor, or foundation if you will, of CTE has been linked to multiple impacts that cause the brain to slosh back and forth inside the skull. They aren't getting concussions, but they are jostling the brain quite a bit. When they do get concussions, it builds upon all that previous movement. So, having your younger children play flag football, then putting them in tackle when they're older will probably help. Plus, when a kid is older, he'll take coaching and training in proper form tackling a bit better, theoretically.

Soccer is tough on the skull because of headers. Anyone that played soccer knows, that ball is hard. You're taking it right on the head, and it sloshes the brain around the same way. The thing is, no one realized this. Coaches have their kids practice headers in practice, over and over. So, you're getting the reps that you would in football.

Thanks for reading. I know I write a lot sometimes. I don't like reading long posts either. But, some topics might have more to be said.

I generally agree with you about the age of 12-ish and from the info I've gathered, most NFL guys wont let there kids play before age 12. But, I do know former NFL players letting their kids play tackle before age 12.

I reluctantly allowed my middle son to start at age 11. After holding him out at the youngest level, we allowed our youngest to start at age 8. This was perhaps against our better judgment. But, this particular child was already playing with high schoolers in sandlots tackling and diving all over the place. Coaches were telling us he is destined to be a player. We figured we may as well put a helmet on him to protect his skull. Too, because of what we observed in the younger age groups (not a lot of contact), it looked less risky than what he was already doing.

The concussion research is saying it isn't necessarily the big blows, but the constant jarring (like you were saying.) So, hopefully we didn't make a choice we will one day regret. - Yeah, I know... I'm out of the running for "parent of the year" with my choices. - But, I don't think this is the way to live our lives. Being wise is one thing, but perhaps we can also be too extreme and over-protect? Certainly there's merit to protecting our children as much as possible. But, there may also be allowances that allow for growth on a case-by-case basis.

Might be a bit out of context, but I think it can still apply to this whole thing with Borland, youth football, etc. ... the Teddy Roosevelt speech "The Man in the Arena" -

"...who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."

 

[ivotuk]

Good for him making that decision. We really don't know if he's had other concussions and hid them, but it's likely. There could be other issues too that we don't know about. Like Sgt Largent said, these guys are as tough as nails and aren't going to acknowledge the kind of pain that most of us would be seeing a doctor for.

A lot of NFL players in an anonymous survey said that they have hidden concussions and went back out on the field. I saw Zach Miller do it once, he got nailed and was wobbly. He was moving his hands around in front of him like some kind of sign language then wobbled back to the huddle on a hurry up offense.

As far as Borland's contract, I believe it was O'Neill that said he has to pay back 1.5 million. The IRS probably got about half of that so I wonder how that refund will work.

Another concern for Borland is family history. Some people are easily concussed and have severe reactions to a hit that Kam Chancellor would barely notice. Everyone is different and if you have a brain that doesn't slop around inside of your skull, you might be able to withstand NFL type hits without any repercussions.

Football is a tough game, and it takes a strong character to walk away from something that they love and that pays so well. I applaud his actions and hope that he has set a good example for younger players to not hide injuries and to be able to walk away or sit out until they are healthy again.

That's one thing that I love about Pete Carroll, he makes sure that his players get the best possible care and doesn't push them out on the field like other coaches do.

I think football will be better off if players who struggle with health retire early. I think someone like Julian Edelman might learn from Borland's actions. Don't wait until it's too late.

 

[Jville]

“You have these guys that have been going to the same house for 25 years,” said Rice, speaking about stories from NFL legends Tony Dorsett and Herschel Walker. “And all of the sudden they get to a certain point on their way home, and they have to call their wives to get the directions home. So that is something that really hit home for me after having experienced so many concussions.”

Rice’s decision didn’t get as much attention because, due to other injuries, there was a legitimate question whether he would have made the Seahawks roster. In 2013, he played in only eight games and had 15 catches, but earned a ring as part of the Super Bowl champions.

Since Borland’s decision came at the front end of his career, it cannot be overlooked, ignored or unseen, as was Rice. But the fact that two intelligent, well-regarded players came to the same conclusion puts the matters now squarely in the front of every active NFL player’s mind.

Source >>> [urltargetblank]http://sportspressnw.com/2200123/2015/thiel-borland-opens-a-new-frontier-in-nfl[/urltargetblank]

My thoughts are that the trail blazers for a safer game will come from the ranks of coaches, players, parents and medical specialists.

 

[253hawk]

Source >>> [urltargetblank]http://sportspressnw.com/2200123/2015/thiel-borland-opens-a-new-frontier-in-nfl[/urltargetblank]

My thoughts are that the trail blazers for a safer game will come from the ranks of coaches, players, parents and medical specialists.

And that's the really sad thing. This is like you and a bunch of buddies getting together at work to form a safety committee because the company doesn't give a flying firetruck beyond doing the absolute minimum legal requirement.