Letter to the Editor: The long-term effects of football

Even with one of the largest per-student endowments of any university in the country, the question remains: how can Grinnell College save money and plan for a long term sustainable budget?

Recent college developments indicate the Humanities are under increasing scrutiny, and at least part of the reason is because the college must maintain a tight budget for the future. We suggest a conversation about the future of Grinnell should begin with the issues on the periphery of the school’s education.

The story of David Duerson has shocked us into writing a letter. Duerson, an NFL lineman, committed suicide by shooting himself in the chest, and implied in text messages to his family that his brain should be studied by science. As the New York Times reports, “ After years of denying or discrediting evidence of football’s impact on the brain—from C.T.E. in deceased players to an increasing number of retirees found to have dementia or other memory-related disease—the N.F.L. has spent the last year addressing the issue, mostly through changes in concussion management and playing rules.” Dozens of players are now submitting their brains to science. The evidence of the harmful long-term effects is mounting.

In 2009, Purdue University conducted a Neuroscience study with a high school football team. The researchers concluded that even the sort of minor head-to-head contact that occurs on every play has traumatic effects on players’ brains. The two players focused in the study weighed roughly the same as many Grinnell players at 260 and 190 pounds, respectively. Two Purdue engineering professors and their staff, Sports Illustrated reported in 2010, “fitted 23 helmets with accelerometers and gave both the players IMPACT test—a computerized neurocognitive exam that tests memory and concentration—and tests of working memory while their brains were monitored with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).”

The engineers combined accelerometer figures with IMPACT scores to get a sense of how players were affected by football. Researchers considered anytime an accelerometer exceeded 80 Gs was enough force to cause a concussion. Multiple hits in the first contact practice they attended exceed 100 G’s. One offensive lineman suffered an impact of 289 Gs (289 times the force of gravity) while holding an extra-point, an event that occurs multiple times in most games. The scores of one lineman before and after the preseason were examined, and he scored 20% lower on the visual memory section of the IMPACT test, which requires rapid identification of recurring patterns. Other players also fared particularly poorly on the test. And the scariest find of the entire study? Four players were categorized as “functionally impaired” with apparent symptoms of which none the four were cognizant.
Schools have responded to this and other studies. The New York Times reported: “‘Because of the seriousness of the potential consequences, the presidents determined the league needed to take proactive steps in protecting the welfare of our student-athletes,’” said Robin Harris, the executive director of the Ivy League.

According to new rules, teams will be able to hold only two full-contact practices per week during the season, compared with a maximum of five under N.C.A.A. guidelines. On the other days of the week, practices cannot include contact or live tackles, and no player may be ‘taken to the ground.’” Grinnell has adopted similar measures, but this avoids the inconvenient fact that even during these two practices and particularly during games, significant, concussive-inducing hits occur.

The other disturbing consequence of playing football is the constant pressure to gain weight and eat an unhealthily large number of calories. An American Medical Journal article published in January 2007 classified an astonishing 45% of the high school linemen it studied as overweight, and 9% with adult severe obesity. The article concludes, “Severe obesity in adolescence can have an important impact on quality of life and accompanies several comorbid conditions.” On a nationally read blog, one Grinnell football players details his strategy for gaining weight rapidly in order to play college football. He writes that he gained 100 pounds between his sophomore year in high school and his first year in college. One of the central thrusts of Grinnell athletics is to encourage wellness. How does encouraging rapid weight gains fit into this purported institutional philosophy?
Another less considered argument was advanced by Swarthmore College when they ended their football program in 2000. College spokesman Tom Krattenmaker said at the time, “it’s basic math. If you eliminate football, you suddenly have a lot more spaces for everything else.” As a small liberal arts college, Grinnell’s recruited football players represents a chunk of each incoming class. The College Sports Project has cogently summarized the data at 84 selective Division III schools. They concluded that male recruited athletes at the 24 most selective of these schools in certain target sports significantly underperformed academically compared to their peers. As an institution we must always ask ourselves if we have best utilized our coveted admission spots. At a minimum, Grinnell would do itself a great favor by participating in such useful data collection to show the impact of this recruitment. Clarity and transparency are reasonable expectations at such a tightly-knit institution as our own.

We write this article on behalf of a number of concerned students who respect the vast majority of the football team and believe they belong here as well, as students. We ask that these recommendations be considered by adding it to the list of topics for the Strategic Planning Committee. Maybe the proposed solution appears to be brash, but it must be. No half measure could protect these students’ minds. We can make Grinnell a leader and save money. President Kington, you know the effects of binge drinking on the brain and passionately object to the practice for that reason, so take a step to address the practice of binge head-bashing due to its effects on students’ minds. We suggest that Grinnell College, in concurrence with peer institutions like Colorado and Swarthmore College, should suspend its football program indefinitely until these critical issues can be addressed.

Marcus Eagan ’12 and Thomas Neil ’14


Editor’s note: The S&B received a complaint that comments supporting football players or the football program are being edited out because of their content. This is not true. All comments are approved except those deemed inflammatory without cause or argument, off-point personal attacks, and comments published under someone else’s name.

'Letter to the Editor: The long-term effects of football' have 98 comments

  1. December 12, 2011 @ 3:01 am Young Cocoa Butter

    Blastoise, let’s break down your argument:
    “I’m still trying to understand how it’s even relevant to this conversation that a few members of the football team have made poor decisions in the past?”
    -So it’s not important, then there’s no need to talk about it…
    “Not only is it statistically significant, its logically fallacious to associate those actions with the football team at-large. The football team did not make said mistakes, per se (non-football player here), individuals did.”
    -Right, individuals on the football team.
    “The fact that they were football players is as relevant as the fact that they belonged to any other group.”
    -Just one group, the football team.
    “Such mistakes are not isolated to football players, nor have they ever been systemic among football players–and even if they were, correlation is not causation, obviously.”
    -Obviously. You don’t understand what “correlation is not causation” means. The football team had a party, a team party, where they objectified and demeaned female members of our community. No other group or individuals created and participated in that event or any other like it. To say “even if they were” implies that “such mistakes” are in fact “systemic among football players”, yet that can’t be true because “correlation is not causation, obviously.” By your own words, that’s “logically fallacious”.
    “On the whole, I believe football players are far better behaved the mean of Grinnell College students. Their cost of misbehaving is so much higher than the average student’s.”
    -the mean? Nice pun, but I think you got a few members bringing down your average as evidenced by last night, Also, proof of this cost of misbehaving? Have you ever had all your funding cut like GCCF?
    “And could someone please justify the budgetary argument with actual numbers? How can one claim football receives too large a portion of the budget (whatever that means) without quantifying the budget and defining that proportion?”

    -I agree, this discussion really needs a factual grounding.


  2. December 12, 2011 @ 3:41 am Marcus, One of the Authors

    Hello everyone. I will address a number of comments that have used false information. I will provide links where links and I will ask all these so-called “alums,” especially the one that wrote “alumn” to use their real names from here on out. Otherwise, I won’t take you too seriously and no one else should either. Accountability leads to constructive discourse in forum like this one.

    Unfortunately, too many people on both sides have resorted to subjective claims and have ignored the actual content of the article.

    Stand behind your words or please expect the decision-makers reading this conversation to ignore you or read for your the Fox effect-baseless, subjective claims speaking to little approaching nothing. Any critical thinker would notice that the only people who have put their names with their comments to this article have been supporters of its conclusion. Please represent your thoughts, if you really think they are worth much.

    Now for clarifications based on facts:

    To the person that said being slimmer is a bad thing: it’s not terrible.

    To the few critics who praised overweight, very muscular statures: wait a few years.

    To the person who said the authors are not athletes:

    In fact, both are athletes in various respects. In fact, both have been athletes in college at some point in their lives. In fact, one of the authors is a current member of the Men’s Grinnell Varsity Soccer Team. The other practices capoeira. It’s a fairly athletic endeavor.

    (One takes it easy nowadays to focus on researching for his self and assisting other people’s research of TBI’s, an extracurricular he did not choose but has inherited from the ongoing studies that make critical use of his experiences).

    To those that have labeled our argument a thinly-veiled attack on the football team:

    A person that once spoke no words, took no breaths of his own will, and exhibited limited brain activity for days wrote this article. This resulted from a Traumatic Brain Injury. He had already sustained such injuries playing football as a youth. He does not want that to happen to anyone else if he can help it. This article is a step towards that unreachable goal.

    The people responding to the “end football” thesis that did not understand it as a rhetorical device in an Opinion piece:

    In positing our thesis, we knew next year’s budget had already been allocated, a portion of resources had already been used for the recruitment of next year’s players and that the idea of actually ending the football was, therefore, not plausible. We sought to spark discourse. That has certainly happened. Again, look at all the comments, despite their content.

    We only want an discussion. Not a fight. Not a divided campus.

    I have received fairly insensitive remarks in e-mail from non-football players about personal attacks I have made, but I would like for those personal attacks in the article to be be shown. I can’t find them and I co-authored the article.

    To the person who claimed that recent neurological data suggests that football does not detrimentally affect the brain and that studies that come to that conclusion are outdated:

    That claim is blatantly false. I have done the best to summarize the articles briefly, during finals week.. Therefore, I may err in some of my summaries. I am also sleepy and trying to study for finals without facing threats and receiving hateful e-mails (supporters not a worry, I have not received that many).

    This dated book (1989) chapter did not support the conclusion of this article and suggested:


    But more importantly, check these links out. They partially influenced me to co-craft this article. They are not all directly relate necessarily, they just make up about a third or a fourth of all the articles I could remember reading leading up to the writing of this article. The article went to press before I could mention the recent 3-part story on the “Boogeyman”. The technology in Neuroscience, like everything else has improved every year, so I am not sure I understand how the old science was better. I’m sure the commenter could explain to us all why he said the old studies are more informative:

    Anyways, so we learn together as a campus (Feel free to send me any articles on the topic, as I would learn to more. Right now I am studying the compromising (for this article) alternative of “speed helmets,” for those interested in preserving football).

    News Articles:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303661904576452243498496516.html (This right-leaning publication shows how recent studies have linked head injuries sustained during football can lead to cognitive function issues later).

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/343345-nfl-brain-drain-more-and-more-players-donating-to-concussion-research (“In NFL Brain Drain…an author discusses how more and more players current and retired are submitting their brains to further study on the effects football has on the brain).

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/sports/ncaafootball/college-players-move-concussions-issue-into-the-courtroom.html?pagewanted=all (Former Eastern Illinois college player and others initiate a class-action lawsuit on the NCAA for reasons relatedy).

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/10/06/football-causing-more-reported-child-brain-injuries/ (The incidence of TBI’s has increased even amongst high school players. While it also has in college, shown in a few of the scholarly publications listed below, this article does not discuss college.)

    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_hidden_brain/2011/01/the_national_braindamage_league.html (an alum from this publication recently visited the campus-non seq-read the article)

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sports/football-high/football-head-injuries-from-high-school-to-the-pros/ (discusses brain injuries at many levels)


    (well, brain injuries haunt football players years later)

    http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/science-scope/head-trauma-could-make-football-players-end-up-with-an-als-like-disease-later-in-life/3688 (Lou Gherig might not have had Lou Gherig’s disease if it was not for head trauma)

    Scholarly Publications:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC155424/ (NIH SUPPORTED RESEARCH-HELLO REYNARD)

    http://www.xenith.com/mission_control/assets/Uploads/Guskiewicz2003JAMACumulativeEffectsAssociatedwithRecurrentConcussion.pdf (“The NCAA Concussion Study” specifically analyzes collegiate football’s effects on the brain)

    http://journals.lww.com/neurosurgery/abstract/2003/04000/brain_injury_related_fatalities_in_american.16.aspx (most Grinnell-related incidents would be subtle and more long-term, I expect.)

    http://msscentershop.info/content/41/suppl_1/i20.abstract (Grinnell has a turf football field)

    http://ajs.sagepub.com/content/34/7/1147.full.pdf+html ( “Among all high school sports, football has the most injuries.” It’s the same for college sports. Concussions make up 10% of the injuries in the article physical injuries section).

    http://thejns.org/doi/pdf/10.3171/jns.1987.66.2.0234@sup.2010.112.issue-2 (neuro-behavioral outcomes following minor head trauma. Protect your heads)

    http://ajs.sagepub.com/content/34/8/1223. (“Catastrophic Cervical Spine Injuries in High School and College Football Players”)

    http://www.aea1.k12.ia.us/birt/McCrea%20.pdf (Unreported Concussions on High school football players)

    /measurement_of_head_impacts_in_collegiate_football.22.aspx (About diagnosing head trauma resulting form football. Science has moved in a direction since the publication of this article, see our article and the discussion about the sports illustrated article).

    Here is a comedy central video of the same name, “Football: Brain Drain” :


    I hoped not offend, but I knew I would. I also hoped discussion of this article would not fall to speculative arguments about our intentions. We both love football, attend the games, and summarily agree that it’s time to retire the game at Grinnell College until changes are made.

    If you disagree, that does not make us haters or personal assailants. We are thinkers with whom you disagree. So be it. But please limit the discussion to Neuroscience and budget– not cunning linguists, or statements that equate an Opinion article about an athletic team that played its first game in 1889 to the social descriptor that compelled some of the college’s founders to aid the Underground Railroad and John Brown. Football and race (or sexual-orientation) are disanalagous, particularly as it pertains to our discussion. If that relationship interests you, maybe you are interested in some of the racial disparities in college football’s operation. Read this article not ours: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Issues/Diversity+and+Inclusion/Minority+Head+Football+Coaches

    It’s sad that our argument has been misinterpreted and charged with veiled hate-mongering. Anyone with anything constructive to say should, again, put your names with your comments, as well your e-mails. That is a charge that may influence readers when they read your comments. I’m sure plenty of people will have things to say about me and would love to break this article apart for all it’s imperfections.

    Final note, this campus has recently been hurt by a serious accident involving brain trauma, so trust me when I say that we take the matter of brain injuries very serious. Both authors also recently suffered Traumatic Brain Injuries, but by grace we survived to write this article to propose a theoretical limit to concussions, highlighting the largest group of students that routinely engage in a school sanctioned activity that increases, in the greatest ratio, the probability of causing a long-term cognitive hindrances.

    This, honestly, is the culmination of a quite extensive study. Please take this seriously.

    Apart from all the harm this has caused member’s of the community, I hope readers think about this article for a moment.

    Thank you

  3. December 12, 2011 @ 4:20 am Not Convinced

    Football players are victims of discrimination at Grinnell. The blanket term, football players, is accusing a large number of innocent individuals. It has been inculcated throughout this discussion that they are misogynistic, violent, fat, and dumb. When a homosexual student was a victim of discrimination, many students were let out of class to join in protest. We all acknowledge that homosexuals are mistreated, but I don’t think the same acknowledgement exists concerning the football team. I believe that any minority on campus would confront another student for publicly calling them fat and stupid. As far as I can tell, the confrontation was non-violent. All I see is a bunch of hypocritical finger-waggers.

    Everybody seems to blame the entire football for participating in the Cunnilingus party, but the horrible notes that were written were unprecedented and only written by a couple of students. I know that many football players did not attend the party, but they will still be labeled just the same as the guilty individuals. The perpetrators were rightly punished and are no longer at this college. The tradition was to write only a name at the bottom of the cup, but the individuals in charge of writing them got horribly carried away. The tradition is far from admirable, but blaming the entire team is also a logical fallacy.

    Respect begets respect.

  4. December 12, 2011 @ 9:25 am Stop Funding the History Program

    Get rid of the history major. The graduates of the program make very little money, an therefore don’t donate as much. The money should be spent elsewhere.

  5. December 12, 2011 @ 9:40 am Frustrated

    Can everyone just remember that Cunnilingus was not this year, was not even last year, it was three years ago. Those who were in charge have already been punished. Jeez Louise, how long are we going to associate a team with the past actions of a few. Let it go, and let the football team move on.

  6. December 12, 2011 @ 9:47 am Alumn

    You would think that someone who “attends the games” would know that we have a grass field

  7. December 12, 2011 @ 10:19 am Concerned Parent

    These comments are so disheartening. I didn’t realize how intolerant so many Grinnell students are toward athletics.

  8. December 12, 2011 @ 11:00 am Kevin McConnaughay '10

    “Any critical thinker would notice that the only people who have put their names with their comments to this article have been supporters of its conclusion.”

    Mmm… nope. Nope, not at all.

  9. December 12, 2011 @ 11:19 am Alum

    This entire article was summed up best in a previous post, and it bears repeating: “Such hypocrisy is infectious at Grinnell. The article is hardly intellectual; it’s disguised bigotry of the sort routinely accepted by the student population at Grinnell.”

    The football team is comprised of the most diverse group of students–geographically, racially, and socioeconomically–at the college. It’s no surprise that the monolith of privileged, liberal, sheltered children at Grinnell have problems dealing with such diversity. When confronted with other people from different backgrounds who act and think differently, the reaction is immediately to exclude the “other” entirely.

    These aren’t people who are criminals; to the extent that anyone on campus is, they should be punished. But it’s not about that. This is a group of people who act different–who ARE different, and it’s that difference that you loathe. It makes you uncomfortable.

    Not everybody will live your lifestyle. Not everyone will deal with conflict the same way you do. Not everyone will share your political sensibilities. College is a great time to learn that. You may not have to accept it, but it will serve you well in life to learn some tolerance.

  10. December 12, 2011 @ 12:55 pm Joe Buckhalter

    One thing that makes this article particularly hard to view as not an attack on the football team deals with the authors. I find it hard to take seriously one of the authors who, correct me if I’m wrong, interrupted a comedian that came to campus and attempted to do a head stand. This article isn’t about doing the right thing. This article is about the authors trying make a name for themselves because they are starved for attention*cough Kim Kardashian *cough. This is my first and last comment because I refuse to give the authors any more attention than they have already undeservedly received.

  11. December 12, 2011 @ 1:53 pm Random Student


    Can’t we all just get along?



  12. December 12, 2011 @ 2:02 pm Just Saying! 2.0

    “Just reminding all readers that this is a letter to the editor, not an article by S&B writers.”

    Marcus Eagan’s Experience

    Business Manager
    Grinnell College’s Scarlet and Black (newspaper)
    August 2010 – Present (1 year 5 months)

    I am responsible for contracting ads for the newspaper and putting those ads into the upcoming issue.

    The Scarlet and Black
    August 2010 – Present (1 year 5 months)

    I write a bi-weekly column on redirecting consciousness in my community.

  13. December 12, 2011 @ 2:13 pm Young Cocoa Butter


    Cunnilingus was in late Spring 2010, not 3 years ago, not even 2 years ago.

    Not convinced:

    “The tradition was to write only a name at the bottom of the cup, but the individuals in charge of writing them got horribly carried away.”

    Even this “tradition” fits the definition of objectifying women, to call it “far from admirable,” is entirely disrespectful to the individuals of our community victimized by that specific event and past iterations of it. And to this day there has not been a clear identification of who was and was not at the party, so until that happens I think it is entirely fair to associate a team party as representing the entire team, especially if all members present are going to defer blame
    to “The perpetrators [who] were rightly punished and are no longer at this college.”

    So every single person who attended and participated in that party no longer attends this college? Not true. There were an estimated 150 jello bowls, of which only 75 were recovered. We still have no idea of exactly how many team members were at the party, but it is obviously more than the few members “no longer at this college” you refer to.

    As for your idea that any “minority” (you need to review the definition of this term) “would confront another student for publicly calling them fat and stupid” has no factual basis because you are both twisting the authors’ words and not taking into account the context of the confrontation. What is to gain by confronting them late at night and outnumbering them? That doesn’t sound very respectful of free speech. Perhaps writing a letter refuting the claims of this letter would be more professional?

  14. December 12, 2011 @ 2:29 pm Max Calenberg, Sports Editor

    Comments directly attacking either of the authors with no direct relevance to the argument presented will not be allowed. Also, the key difference originally pointed out by Just Saying was that this is entirely an opinion piece and not an article, meaning the views purposed by it are that of the authors’ and the only them. It in no way represents the views of the S&B as a whole. Marcus’ history with the S&B has no relevance to this Letter to the Editor because we would have published it regardless of the author.

  15. December 12, 2011 @ 2:51 pm invalid facts

    We should just point out that the average GPA of football players is above that of the average Grinnell Student, and I would not call the 10-12 incoming freshman a significant chunk of an incoming class. If we want to promote health on campus, why not instate more strict drug policies, a common practice of the South Campus community. None of the hospitalizations from binge drinking were football players. If anything football promotes health as the amount of time they put exercise exceeds that of any other student and as a result do not put drugs in their body. If students would put their extra time into their studies instead of bashing minority groups then maybe we would see an improvement in the campus community. It is sad that at one of the most intellectual colleges we still have students who are ignorant to facts and judge people without knowing them.

  16. December 12, 2011 @ 3:03 pm oy vey

    Whatever transpired this past weekend is being dealt with from within the football team. Anyone who may or may not have confronted the authors of the article do NOT speak for the football team. In fact, a vast majority of the football team is upset with whatever it is that happened.

  17. December 12, 2011 @ 4:01 pm Marcus, One of the Authors

    I assumed we had a turf field because it always looks so neat. Being reasonable, I stand corrected. But a number of people spoke with me at the two games I attended this season and can attest to my presence.

    Please engage the argument. Personal attacks on me are not warranted. I have spoken with a number of people on the team constructively and they would appreciate more constructive support.

    Will Frampon ’08, this is not a joke and it is not about me. I was in a coma for a little while after my numerous “most likely mild concussions” put me there and I had to relearn most things, including walking.

    I could say a number of things about your illustrious career, but they are not relevant to the article. Your baseless assumptions about me detract from the discussion and highlight what sort of human being you are. When I wrote this article, I prepared myself mentally for this sort of backlash, this hateful speech. But I wrote this with compassion and concern, to the best of my ability while in 4 courses.

    Yet I appreciate your baseless accusations.

    Critics, where are your names? Cowards.

    This is not an attack on any one member of the football team, so I think you should engage the arguments rather than me individually.

  18. December 12, 2011 @ 7:10 pm Not Convinced

    Young Cocoa Butter –
    The author claimed that football causes players to become obese and can cause player’s brains to be “functionally impaired.” Then the author asks if the admissions office “have best utilized our coveted admission spots.” I think many players interpret this as saying they are fat and intellectually inferior (dumb). Despite the fact that the football players spend an extremely large amount of time working out and have a higher gpa than the average Grinnell student. It is fully within the rights of free speech to argue against an author’s claims. I’m simply stating that many other groups of students become very vocal whenever they are victims of an attack. Yet other students (whose posts have since been hidden) seemed furious that a few football players peacefully approached the author to argue these statements. I do not know the context and did not witness the confrontation. Yet, I don’t think that the football team should be blamed for being offended.

    The argument about their obesity is uncalled for and malicious, i.e. “To the few critics who praised overweight, very muscular statures: wait a few years.” Many of the football players are in fantastic shape and many others have obese body types regardless of playing football. Calling them overweight is completely unprofessional. I’m sure that a professional response addressing these issues will be submitted for a future publication of the S&B.

    I find the fact that you stereotype and blame the entire football team to be contrary to the Grinnell core value of egalitarianism. I do not want to defend the cunnilingous party, because it was undoubtedly wrong, but I think that we need to move on. There are a small number of students remaining that attended the party, but the individuals responsible for hosting the party and writing the bowls are no longer at this school. I agree that writing only names is still objectification and wrong, but most students assume that the football team had a tradition of writing horribly demeaning statements. I am merely trying to clear up a misunderstanding. The writings were the act of a couple of students. The students who attended the party have been punished (disallowing football parties and required counseling). I know of multiple football players that did not attend the party because it conflicted with their moral values and they also suffer from the punishment of the guilty parties. Blaming the entire football team does not cohere with Grinnell’s values and additional punishment should not be given to the innocent individuals.

    I think that the only factually based argument in this essay is regarding the effects of head trauma on the human brain. This is currently being considered by the NCAA, researchers at respectable institutions, and many other news sources around America. However, most of the research is inconclusive and a lot is still not understood. Regardless, there have been many recent improvements in the design of helmets and the rules of the game. I agree that brain damage is an important issue to consider, but why don’t we wait and see how the lawsuits turn out first? Making a brash argument to cut the football team is not helpful. The arguments on the budget, obesity, and academic performance are flawed and not supported by data or research. All contact sports have risks involved and singling out the football team is unjustified.

    Cigarettes have killed millions more people than football. Soccer is more likely to cause head trauma than football. Maybe the authors should consider their own life choices before pointing their fingers at others.

  19. December 12, 2011 @ 7:27 pm Stop Funding the History Program

    Question for the authors: Let’s suppose the College stops giving money to the football program, i.e., defunds it. If there are alumni donors who earmark their donations to the football team, and they donate enough to completely fund the program, would you still oppose the existence of the football program? Under what arguments?

  20. December 12, 2011 @ 11:24 pm Marcus, One of the Authors

    For “Stop..” and others.

    Let’s suppose that isn’t the case because it is not. I am not going to debate hypotheticals with a group of cronies who probably still have not read the article, save the title, the last sentence and the names of the authors. In cowardice, you all have named yourselves, “Stop Funding the History Program,” “Concerned Parent,” “Alumn,” etc…

    Not only do you all delegitimize this forum with nonsense and immaturity in the same way that some people who claim to support this article have done, you all terribly misrepresent the Grinnell Football program.

    Your cowardice, too, is despicable because I am sure you are the ones who surrounded me in the loggia (6 on 1) to yell about the article and threaten me. I am not of afraid of your threats or the truth.

    Fortunately, for Thomas and me, the members of the football program and the college at-large, a constructive discussion has begun with football and brain injuries at its heart.

    Unfortunately, particularly for you few, this article has exposed the worst in the football team (albeit outliers), players who claim our article is a personal attack about recent thefts on campus, and violently threaten the authors and their uninvolved friends until the ratio drops below 6 to 1.

    Thank goodness the community will be able to move forward in discourse without your barnyard interruptions.

  21. December 13, 2011 @ 1:27 am Dugan Knoll '12

    I think that the credible argument in this essay is regarding the effects of head trauma on the human brain. This is currently being considered by the courts with a couple of lawsuits against the NCAA. Brain damage is an important issue to consider, but why don’t we wait and see how the lawsuits turn out first? Perhaps there will be changes to the rules of the game to make it even safer. Many researchers are also studying these effects, but with current knowledge and technology, they have trouble detecting whether or not a concussion has even happened. Despite the little that we know, there have been many recent improvements in the design of helmets and the rules of the game. If it is as much of a problem as some suggest, then the problem will be amended by improved equipment, rule changes, and proper training. Is brain damage something to consider? Yes. But at this point in time, it would be a brash decision to cut the team.

    Also, the arguments on the budget, obesity, and clearing space for better students are not backed by data or reliable sources. Obviously the budget argument doesn’t have any data yet. Concerning obesity and poor health, the obesity measurement used in the American Medical Journal arguments is the BMI, which is simply weight over height. It does not consider muscle mass which weighs 10 times as much as fat. Also the football team spends a ton of time in the weight room, and they must be in prime cardiovascular shape to play an entire game. Finally the football players have a better gpa than the average student. Remove these arguments from the article and the only remaining argument is the one that questions player safety. Yet, many other sports have comparable risks of head trauma and singling out the football team seems unfair. There are also some complications from removing the football team. For example, Title IX would require removing a large women’s sport from campus. Also many alumni and current students would be upset by removing a team that has been a part of Grinnell culture since 1889. Removing the football team will require much more evidence and work than what has been done already.

    Cocoa Butter –
    I think I see a few lines that Not Convinced finds offensive. The authors did not say that the players are fat and dumb, but a few statements could be read that way. We should avoid talking about the player’s brains being “functionally impaired,” their obesity (or muscular builds as I see it), and saying that there are other students who could “have best utilized our coveted admission spots.” These are not constructive criticisms and can easily cause tension. Many other groups of students become very vocal whenever they are victims of an attack. If the football team thought it was offensive, then because of free speech, they have the right to defend themselves. A couple of them peacefully spoke their mind while drunk one night. Is that something that they can be blamed for? I would expect the same from any group that feels unjustly treated. It may not the best way to handle the situation, but I don’t see why everybody has to make them sound like horrible human beings for it.

    Also I agree with Blastoise that some big mistakes by individuals have ruined the reputations of everybody on the team. Hating the entire team goes against the school’s egalitarian values. Many football players did not attend the cunnilingus party because it conflicted with their moral values, but were banned from hosting parties and were forced through counseling sessions anyway. Athletes are held to higher standards since their actions reflect on the entire team. Yet stereotyping specific teams should not happen on this campus. Assuming things about people before we get to know them will only enforce the separation of a team from the rest of the students on campus. Lets take care not to speak in generalities about the teams and to treat everybody as individuals.

    We should be trying to unite the campus, rather than raise issues that polarize. Wouldn’t that be more congruent with the Grinnell mission?

  22. December 13, 2011 @ 2:10 am A student

    I definitely agree that some football players negatively affect the community, and I might argue that the football team is responsible for a disproportionate amount of the overly aggressive/unGrinnellian behavior going on at this school, as well as for some average GPA dragging. I also think the administration should do a better job of telling football recruits just what they’re getting into- I have a feeling that many football players feel marginalized and uncomfortable with the Grinnell campus climate, and I don’t think they’re wrong. I think many of them get here and feel unappreciated, or like they are out of their element. They have not come for the students, or the academics, or the social justice aspect: they have come primarily because someone told them they could play football in this random town in Iowa. The problem is, there are a lot of great guys who also happen to play football. There are people who could have gotten into Grinnell on their own merit, but also happen to play football. I think that Grinnell should certainly limit pushes, if not do away with them altogether. But getting rid of the team, as some people have suggested, is drastic and unfair.

    However: our school is not known for football, and what’s more, I doubt that we receive many alumni and/or fan dollars because of our football team, as I know is the case with some Ivy League schools whose football teams are not great but pull alumni back in huge numbers for games, or with big state schools known for their college football teams. I don’t see what there is to gain by making our football team marginally better at the cost of a better community and academic climate, two trait we ARE known for. Again, I am by no means saying all, or even most football players are aggressive idiots who don’t belong here. What I am saying is that our priorities need to be readjusted. We need to stop pretending that we’re a football school, and start treating football as it is treated by most other students and alumni: an extracurricular activity. Not an institution. Hate to break it to everybody, but we’re not LSU.

  23. December 13, 2011 @ 9:05 am The Culture of Football

    After the Last Practice
    (Grinnell, Iowa, November, 1971)
    A poem by Edward Hirsch ‘72, President of the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation

    Someone said, I remember the first hard crack
    Of shoulderpads on the sidelines before a game,
    And the bruises that blossom on your arms afterward.

    Someone else remembered the faint, medicinal smell
    Seeping through the locker-room on Saturday
    Getting your ankles taped while a halfback

    Frets in the whirlpool about his hamstrings:
    Steam on three mirrors, the nervous hiss
    Of the first hot shower of the morning.

    We talked about the tension mounting all day
    Until it became the sound of spikes clattering
    Across the locker-room floor, the low banter

    Of the last players pulling on their jerseys,
    Our middle-linebacker humming to himself
    And hammering a forearm against the lockers

    While an assistant coach diagrammed a punt
    Return for the umpteenth time on his clipboard
    For two cornerbacks looking on in boredom…

    Eventually, it always came down to a few words
    From the head coach—quiet, focused, intense—
    While a huge pit opened up in your stomach

    And the steady buzz of a crowd in the distance
    Turned into a minor roaring in your skull
    As the team exploded onto the field.

    The jitters never disappeared until the opening
    Kickoff, the first contact, until a body
    Hurtled down the field in a fury

    And threw itself against your body
    While everything else in the world faded
    Before the crunching action of a play, unfolding…

    I remember how, as we talked, the flat Midwestern
    Fields stretched away into nowhere and nothing,
    How the dark sky clouded over like a dome

    Covering a chilly afternoon in late November
    On the prairie, the scent of pinecones
    And crisp leaves burning in the air,

    The smoky glow of faces around a small fire.
    Someone spoke of road trips and bridge games
    In the back of a bus rolling across the plains,

    The wooden fenceposts ticking off miles
    And miles of empty cornfields and shortgrasses,
    Windmills treading their arms, as if underwater,

    The first orange lights rising on the horizon—
    Jesus, someone said, I never thought it would end
    Like this, without pads, without hitting anybody.

    But then someone mentioned stepping out of bounds
    And getting blindsided by a bone-wrenching tackle;
    Someone else remembered writhing in a pile

    Of players coming down on his twisted body.
    Torn ligaments. Sprained wrist. A black coin
    Blooming under your left eye on Sunday morning.

    After all those years of drills and double practices,
    Seasons of calisthenics, weightrooms, coaches
    Barking orders—missed blocks, squirming

    After all those summers of trying to perfect
    A sideline pass and a buttonhook, a fly, a flag,
    A deep post, a quick pass over the middle;

    After the broken patterns and failed double-teams,
    The July nights sprinting up the stadium stairs
    And the August days banging against each other’s bodies,

    The slow walks home alone in the dusky light—
    After all those injury-prone autumns, not
    One of us could explain why he had done it.

    What use now is the language of traps
    And draws, of power sweeps and desperate on-side
    Kicks, of screen passes, double reverses?

    But still there was the memory of a sharp cut
    Into the open and the pigskin spiraling
    Into your hands from twenty yards away,

    The ecstasy of breaking loose from a tackle
    And romping for daylight, for the green
    Promised land of the empty endzone.

    Someone said, I remember running onto the field
    And seeing my girlfriend in the stands at midfield—
    Everyone around her was chanting and shouting

    And the adrenalin was coursing through my body;
    I felt as if I would explode with happiness,
    As if I would never falter, or waver, or die…

    Someone else recollected the endless, losing,
    Thirteen-hour drive home after he had bruised
    A collarbone on the last play of the game,

    The whole bus encased in silence, like a glass
    Jar, like the night itself, clarified. Afterward,
    He recalled the wild joy of his first interception…

    The fire sputtered and smoldered, faded out,
    And our voices trembled in the ghostly woodsmoke
    Until it seemed s if we were partly warriors

    And partly boyscouts ringed around the flame,
    Holding our helmets in our arms and trying
    To understand an old appetite for glory,

    Our raging, innocent, violent, American
    Boyhoods, gone now, vanished forever
    Like the victories and the hard losses.

    It was late. A deep silence descended
    As twilight disintegrated in the night air
    And the fire glowered down to embers and ashes,

    To red bits of nothing. But no one moved. Oh,
    We were burning, burning, burning, burning…
    And then someone began singing in the darkness.

  24. December 13, 2011 @ 7:47 pm Emily Bajet, Opinions Editor

    All comments S&B editors find inappropriate will be deleted. This includes offensive and irrelevant remarks about any individual, not solely the authors. In no way does Marcus or Thomas control what is cut, only editors may make that decision.

  25. December 13, 2011 @ 8:51 pm Clint Williamson '13

    asserting, resulting from, or characterized by belief in the equality of all people, especially in political, economic, or social life.

    As previously stated, a culture which propagates misogyny, homophobia, violent, and separatist behavior is in and of itself an opposition to egalitarian values. Their is an inherent difference between individuals and a culture. When one makes an argument regarding cultural values it does not mean individual team member’s values (i.e. people make up a collective cultural but are more than just members of said culture). Additionally, the poem proves little more than the idealization/fetishization of an institution. Grinnellians choose to question all institutions and to do so in regards to an extracurricular activity is entirely warranted,reasonable, and reflective of our collective campus values. Finally, a note from my own subjective experience with members of the football team (not implying an objective whole): When I quit hearing members of the football team using the word “faggot” and “bitch,” I will possess infinitely more respect for their cultural institution and reconsider its place within Grinnell.

  26. December 13, 2011 @ 10:48 pm Skeptical Observer

    As an observer to multiple disturbing instances this past weekend involving the football team, I can assure “Dugan Knoll” that their confrontation with the author of this article on Saturday was anything but “a couple” drunk football players executing their freedom of speech. It looked a lot more like 6 or 7 members of the football team engaging in both verbal and physical intimidation. In no situation would I see disbanding the football team to be the best resolution to these issues, more than the vast majority of the players are not only great guys but impressive classmates. Rather, it seems, a few exceptions to a generally well behaved group have created a bad name for everyone associated with Grinnell Football. Hopefully these issues will be addressed in the near future before Grinnell becomes a further divided campus, something no one wants to see happen.

    -Also, the fact that anyone would argue that football isn’t damaging to the brain, as well as the rest of the body, is delusional… In this article by a former NFL lineman he explains the conscious decision all football players make, trading significant portions of their life for the huge salaries that would otherwise be unattainable.


  27. December 14, 2011 @ 12:34 am Holden Bale '12

    Maybe we should take this article (or at least the comments) off of the website because it is only causing more harm than good. Why publicly attack these individuals?

  28. December 14, 2011 @ 2:10 am Football mom

    My son is on the football team and i find this very disturbing. How can someone not not express their political views without being attacked, yet it is ok to discriminate against the football program? This is blasphemy and if anything we should get rid of the anthropology department, I mean for crying out loud Gary Kahn was an anthro major. If he can study anthro then any of the non athletic students that dont know what else to major in can. or history, why should we worry about things that already happened, lets look towards the future and the success of the football program in the upcoming years 🙂

  29. December 14, 2011 @ 12:02 pm Be Honest

    As someone for whom sports injuries have been a painful part of my family past and who still must live with that worry, this article angers me. The authors have taken a legitimate concern of mine and use it to attack a population. They are not ‘defending’ the players, but taking advantage of the dangers that come inherent in any sport. The only ones who can make a decision about whether a player should participate or not are the player, sports staff and medical professionals. Mr Eagan and Mr Neil are none of these. If they have a problem with any aspect of the football team, whether with it’s members or it’s budgets, they should address it directly.

  30. December 14, 2011 @ 5:57 pm Recent grad

    This article is wildly off the mark! There are a series of studies strongly suggesting soccer players are especially prone to brain injuries. Hooliganism, violence and excessive alcohol consumption has also been associated with the game of soccer throughout the world. And at the small college level, a recent study shows soccer players are socioeconomically privileged particularly when compared to college football players. Don’t we have enough of the upper-crust at Grinnell already? The football team adds to Grinnell’s diversity which is a value, that rhetorically at least, the school claims to value (although judging from some of the comments perhaps not). I do think serious consideration should be given to dropping soccer as a sport.

  31. December 14, 2011 @ 7:31 pm Drax Sleeta

    On the very first day that I attended Grinnell College, I went and joined a football keg party on the top of Cowles. Quickly after my entrance one of the players started bragging to me about how he had gotten into the college despite getting only a 560 on the SATs. Guess they were pretty desperate for a good running back…Btw, the “They bring down our GPA” argument is silly. There are certain classes taught by certain professors at Grinnell that people like my friend from the top of Cowles can take and breeze through (It’s not an uncommon practice in American colleges, by any means). If you really want to see the “brain drain” going on, there should be a push for an audit of the records of the Admissions Office to see just how low the standards of the college could go when Coach needed a new left tackle or fullback or whatever the fuck. The football team does bring diversity to Grinnell…a diverse group of people who normally wouldn’t come close in anyway whatsoever to meeting any normal standard of admission. Stay classy, Grinnell.

  32. December 14, 2011 @ 9:05 pm Kainoa Inafuku '14

    I’m sorry Marcus, I am indeed a Coward. Your courage in writing this article, knowing that it would be received unfavorably by a portion of the community has inspired me. my post was labeled as Random Student and I feel horrible about not owning up to it. I’m sorry for delegitimizing the forum with my nonsense and immaturity, I understand that it was irrelevant to the discussion and I only sought to lighten the mood. I hope that the Grinnell College environment can help me graduate from my group of cronies and that someday soon I can contribute something intellectually on-par enough to be submitted into this discussion without soiling it with subjective, baseless and hurtful comments. Until then I think I will go and research the debilitating effects that drugs have on the brain, so that I can contribute something substantial to the Grinnell College community and spark discourse among the student body.

  33. December 15, 2011 @ 7:43 am Will Frampon '08

    delete my comment will you? I thought Grinnell was open-minded. I didn’t even swear or call anyone out. All I did was pose a question. Excuse me for being inquisitive and questioning “the man.”

  34. December 15, 2011 @ 2:12 pm Tim Tebow

    I really feel that everyone should just get along and play some football

  35. December 15, 2011 @ 9:29 pm WTF

    why do Will frampon’s comments keep getting deleting. he speaks the Paul Pierce. by that I mean he speaks Da truth!

  36. December 16, 2011 @ 7:29 pm John Q Public

    It’s hard for me to take counter-accusations of discrimination and abuse seriously when I see that only ONE side is

    1) Keeping lists of their critics
    2) Intimidating witnesses
    3) Threatening those who speak against them

    I would give my name, but while I applaud Marcus’ idealism, I’ve seen what happens to people who speak up.

    I totally understand that these people aren’t representative of the team. That argument is totally valid. Groups are aggregations of individuals; they aren’t self-aware. However, I don’t think that’s the issue here. The issue is more about statistics.

    We can’t prevent “bad” things from happening–be they alcohol poisoning, aggressive behavior, misogyny, etc. What we CAN do is to try to reduce their frequency and severity. I would think about this issue as being less about prevention than about mitigation. I know that Grinnell prides itself on idealism, but there comes a point where we have to realize that we aren’t going to ever have a perfect community. The pro-football argument is right on one thing: not all football players are doing bad things, and not all bad things are done by football players. We can’t draw clear lines in the sand here; to do so would be simplistic and confrontational.

    However, if members of a certain group are consistently causing more than their proportional share of trouble, than perhaps there’s something to be said about such associations. No one ever believes that generalizations apply absolutely to all members of a group. Rather, generalizations *generalize*–they are lines of best-fit that, when based on statistics rather than unfounded hate or bigotry, are not inherently evil or useless.

    To that end, we should pay heed to some of these generalizations (apologies to all post-modern idealists; I don’t live in an ivory tower). The fact is that there have many incidents this year and in years past that have involved groups of football players. Not the group of football players generally, but subsets of that group who–nevertheless–self-identify as football players. It’s not their membership to that group that’s the issue: the issue is fact the that this group consistently attracts “bad apples.”

    I’m not saying that we should cut the football program, but I am saying that these discussions are relevant–even pressing. I think that a better way to reduce these incidents would be to attract fewer “bad apples”. I also think that the best way to do this would be to examine and restructure the football recruitment process. The football program doesn’t turn anyone “bad” or “un-Grinnellian”. I’d actually argue the opposite; I think that it builds character through hard work and commitment. But the number of “pushes” that the program has is ridiculous, and promotes the recruitment of people who come here for the Grinnell’s football program rather than for Grinnell itself. It’s good to win, but winning isn’t everything–especially if it comes at the cost of admitting recruits who, through their actions, endanger the whole program.

    So instead of cutting football, let’s try to recruit athletes who are Grinnellians first and football players second. Seriously, let’s talk about this. This discussion doesn’t have to be hostile or confrontational. I think that we can all find a reasonable solution.

    As for the sentiments of Mr. Bale et al.: we didn’t elect you to silence debate even if you don’t like it.

  37. December 17, 2011 @ 7:49 pm Isaac Wilder

    I know that this article is about Hockey, but it does seem to present some very well reasoned arguments about the dangers of repeated impacts to the noggin:

    I agree with Dugan – putting aside all of the juvenile and ad hominem responses, I hope that we can talk about the actual issue at hand: the science of brain trauma, and the well being of student athletes. It really does seem to me that the school would do well to end the football program. It brings us little, and costs us much. We don’t even need to talk about the misbehavior of program participants – the science speaks for itself.

    Given the copious evidence present by Thomas and Marcus, I’m not sure that the science really even ought to be considered inconclusive. Even if it were, I think the reasoning from the above article quite cogent:

    “By waiting for science, thousands of asbestos workers and millions of smokers died. The fact is, as a society we rarely have the luxury of waiting for science on big, difficult, potentially dangerous questions to meet its standard of proof. We need to take the best science we have, generate more and better information, then apply to it our best intuition and common sense — and decide. Scientists are always disparaging of politicians and other decision-makers for being so influenced by anecdote. But an anecdote, well observed, thorough, rigorous, and truth-seeking (not ax-grinding), can tell a lot. At any moment, it may also be the best information we have.” -Ken Dryden

  38. December 19, 2011 @ 9:48 am Recent grad

    Released three weeks ago here is another of a long line of studies that strongly suggests soccer leads to brain injuries: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/238396.php You all are barking up the wrong tree. Time to ban soccer. NOW!

  39. December 20, 2011 @ 9:33 am John Kirriemuir

    I find the vitriol of the comments somewhat disappointing. And, not for the first time, it’s an indicator that Americans need to play more cricket and less of other, less cerebral, sports.

    Why? And why a sport where a single match can take up to five days – and still end in a draw?

    Because cricket is not a violent contact sport. Instead, it is a cognitive, psychological sport (often described as ‘chess on a field’). It requires the highest levels of mental discipline and concentration, of sportsmanship, and of teamwork and collaboration. In addition, skills that can only be developed through committed training.

    It can also be mentally vicious. At the heart of it is the batsman, who can be in the middle of the field for hours, even a few days. With just the other batsman for company out there, and surrounded by eleven people trying to wear him (or her) down into making a mistake. Play cricket; you gain mental strength, a necessity for a successful life.

    Cricket is also more widespread in America than most people think. And, the first cricket match between two countries – which became the world’s oldest international sporting rivalry – involved the USA in 1844 (sorry, but you lost, to Canada):


    Cricket in the US is played mostly in places with a diversity of population. With the added attribute that it is a sport played mostly in the mind, there are few colleges more suited to the sport than Grinnell. If you want a starting point, read up on the history, and the shared roots of baseball and cricket (there are a lot of similarities, especially with the short form of cricket).

    And if you get good at it then you may end up bowling like this, or batting like this.

  40. December 22, 2011 @ 1:52 pm Koward Inafuku

    The school does not pay for drugs

  41. December 22, 2011 @ 10:51 pm Response to koward

    The school does not adequately control the drug problem on campus. Allowing any funding for the Alice party on south campus each year shows the lack of concern for student’s health.

  42. December 31, 2011 @ 2:41 pm Buse '11

    Maybe comments should require real names. All of this anonymity made for some nasty conversation and unbalanced talk.

    If an author is required to use his or her name, the commentators should be as well, specifically in a community the size of Grinnell.

  43. January 6, 2012 @ 7:16 pm Dugan Knoll '12

    Clint, in my experience as baseball player, I have heard derogatory statements spoken loosely by underclassmen. Yet the upperclassmen players will call them out and challenge those beliefs. I expect the same from the football team and therefore believe the team culture does not propogate misogyny, homophobia, or violence. Every Grinnell student, regardless of team affiliation, develops their morals and values throughout their time on campus.

    I agree with John Q. Public that there are a few bad apples and we should take steps to limit their number. His argument was egalitarian and respectful.

    Also the admissions office should treat football players (and other athletes) the same as any other student who participates in an extracurricular activity and contributes those abilities to the college community. If a student is extraordinary at some activity, then it is an example of their propensity for achievement and it should be considered. If the admissions office is unreasonably favoring athletes, then it is not improving our college.

    And finally, to the disheartened parents:
    As a student athlete, you are surrounded by teammates and fellow students that are intellectual and open-minded. The athlete/non-athlete separation on campus exists in some extents, but it does not ruin this great college experience. Don’t worry about it too much.

  44. January 7, 2012 @ 11:24 am Drax Sleeta

    @Dugan- I’m sure that football is treated exactly the same as any other extracurricular activity and that an exceptional violinist or fencer with a 560 could get in just as easily. Yep, 100% sure…I don’t want to make this strictly about football though, because I’m *actually* 100% sure that auditing the records of the Admissions Office will turn up all kinds of scandalous little tidbits. I’d be especially interested in the pre-college academic records of wealthy foreign exchange students and even wealthy domestic ones…For an environment that gets so high on its progressive airs, Grinnell sure does play host to a lot of idiot children of banana republic aristocracies

  45. January 18, 2012 @ 12:43 pm Recent grad

    Wow Drax, you hate everybody, don’t you? Football players, foreign students, kids with wealthy parents. What about the Jews?

  46. January 18, 2012 @ 2:25 pm Dugan Knoll '12

    @Drax — I knew some idiots back in high school, but a 560 is the lowest score I have ever heard of. I’m sure some athletes are given an unfair advantage in admissions, but maybe you misheard the score? A student with a score that low would fail out in the first semester. As to your claim on wealthy foreign and domestic students: I am sure those students are trained to take the act/sat and have studied at the best private institutions, and so I doubt their pre-college academic records are poor. Grinnell has a much higher number of low-income students than other higher education institutions because of its financial aid policies. International students reflect well on college ratings, and I doubt you’ll make progress there.

    If enough students want to make a change to the admissions policies to reduce favoritism towards athletes, then what would be the action to take? I agree that an audit is not the solution. If a few students write letters of concern, would it have an effect?

    @ Buse — I agree that anonymous posting allows nasty conversation. The solution that I see is only allowing students with an @grinnell.edu email to post. That would be the only way to verify identity. However that eliminates parents and alumni that do not have that e-mail address.

  47. May 25, 2012 @ 11:31 am Will the real

    Marcus Eagan please stand up:

    I never posted here, not as myself. Nor did Thomas. Shout out to all the articles supporting my points, and the Grinnell College football team.

  48. December 25, 2012 @ 11:20 pm John Dionne

    Hey, this is still pretty serious. Football needs reform.

Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published.