Coyle 1

Brian Coyle

Ms. Bocchino

Writing 2

9 June, 2024

The Interdisciplinary Exploration of American Football (Revised)

Looking at a broad topic, there are several methods of research that could be used to

conform sources for that topic. Topics mostly are interdisciplinary, meaning that they could be

defined and researched by several fields of knowledge. American football as a sport, requires a

lot of research daily to help innovate its future. However, it is also important to note what has

been recorded in the past. The two disciplines that are present here under the broad theme of

American football are science and history. Science, specifically sports medicine, will dive into

the technology of the equipment used, what causes injuries, and statistical data to back up these

ideas. History will dive into the past and previous methods used in the sport’s early years and

accounts from previous international sports to show how it came to be the sport it is today.

Ultimately, these two disciplines share and differ in their evidence, researchers, target audience,

and writing styles in order to make up sources that support the broader theme of American

football.

The first aspects between the two genres that will be discussed are the evidence and

researchers involved. The researchers involved comprise different fields of expertise but align

with the overall theme of American football. Emily A. Harrison, the author of “The First

Concussion Crisis: Head Injury and Evidence in Early American Football”, is a historian that

specifically focuses on public health and medical development. She mainly focuses on how
 Coyle 2

medical issues were discovered, managed, and solved at the time. Harrison argues that the

concussion crisis has been ongoing since the late 19th century with evidence of players and

coaches mentioning concerns of health risks within the sport. Through the article, Harrison

provides scientific research and data evidence to show the seriousness of the concussion crisis.

The seriousness of the crisis was stressed in the article by an account of Former Penn football

player in 1894, William Harvey, when he referred to the concussion crisis as the “silent

epidemic” (Harrison)1, as no one truly knew the impact that it would have on athletes. Some

other evidence that is provided in this discipline are statistical numbers from the CDC related to

concussions in which they estimated in 2006 “that 1.6 to 3.8 million concussions occur annually

in sports and recreational activities, among which football is the greatest contributor” (Harrison).

This stat, derived from 2006, gives the high amount of concussions from the sport even with the

improved safety equipment compared to years prior. This stat gives insight to the seriousness of

the crisis through scientific research, and invokes thoughts of how badly players in the late 19th

and 20th centuries suffered from head injuries. Harrison also draws upon historical

documentation such as accounts from players and physicians during the period of the late 19th

century where Harvey had written an account on his love for playing the sport but has edited it to

remove any signs of his head injuries (Harrison). This gives more insight to the improper safety

technology during the time as concussions and head injuries must have been extremely common

in the sport. Harrison adds insight to the topic through this discipline by providing early accounts

of head injuries and gives context of medical efficiency of the time. She provides a glimpse of

the evolution of sports medicine and how concussions were perceived, dealt with, and caused

1
Emily A. Harrison, “The First Concussion Crisis: Head Injury and Evidence in Early American
Football,” American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 5 (2014): 822–833.
 Coyle 3

during the early stages of the sport. On the other hand, the other article, “The Effect of

Subcritical Bone Loss and Exposure on Recurrent Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

in Intercollegiate American Football”, consists of the thoughts of multiple authors: Jonathan F.

Dickens, Brett D. Owens, Kenneth L. Cameron, Thomas M. DeBerardino, Brendan D. Masini,

Karen Y. Peck, and Steven J. Svoboda. Unlike Harrison, these authors work directly in the

medical field as orthopedic surgeons and sports medicine specialists. They are also highly

regarded amongst universities, due to their expertise in clinical research and practice regarding

sports medicine. The majority of the evidence presented in this article are statistical numbers and

quantitative data from clinical studies of intercollegiate American football injuries specifically

orthopedic and arthroscopic levels. The article contains background information of the tests that

they are performing where they attempt to have a control group of football athletes who have

sustained significant shoulder injuries. The research method of the article is the scientific method

to prove the significance of bone loss during shoulder injuries taken in football and how stable

patients are post surgery. All of the data was collected in a closed health care system where

physicians evaluated football players and their injuries. The authors include much of the data in

tables below the description of the experiment. The data collected includes, the number of

patients, age, football position, bone loss percentages of recurrent injuries, and more2.

Ultimately, Harrison as a historian uses historical evidence but also provides statistical numbers

to give quantitative data similar to the scientific genre. However, the other article’s scientific

genre provides in depth scientific data regarding the sports medical aspects of the injuries

sustained in American football. The evidence is backed with multiple patients, recurring

checkups, and various data of the patients tested.

2
Jonathan F. Dickens et al., "The Effect of Subcritical Bone Loss and Exposure on Recurrent
Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Intercollegiate American Football," The
American Journal of Sports Medicine 45, no. 8 (July 2017): 1769-75.
 Coyle 4

The next conventions between the two genres discussed are the writing styles and target

audiences of each. Harrison provides a very scholarly text regarding the history of concussions

within American football, but yet still accessible for many. As it maintains its academic tone and

writing style, it is not as complex of a read compared to a clinical article such as the science

article written by Dickens et al. Harrison’s article contains large body paragraphs regarding the

subject divided by subheadings and even photographs to provide visual aid to the reader. On the

other hand, Dickens et al. provide more concise writing and more statistical data in their article.

The authors provide several subheadings with information that may even be as concise as one

sentence to give the reader a clear response. There are also visual aids in the article in a different

sense, such as graphs and tables giving direct data regarding the tests that were performed on the

athletes. The information in the article contains complex language and untraditional writing

formats. The article mainly follows the scientific method format, providing sections like

introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. As for the target audiences of each,

Harrison’s article would most likely appeal to a broader audience as it is an easier read than

Dickens’ article. Harrison’s article would most likely appeal to sports medicine scholars and

historians such as herself, public health enthusiasts, and any academic reader interested in the

evolution of sports medicine with American football. On the broader aspect, non medical or

historian scholars may have interest such as sports fans, enthusiasts, or researchers. As for the

scientific article, this may not appeal to a broad audience due to its unusual format to the public.

The language and format used in this article would most likely be targeted towards many

healthcare experts such as doctors, orthopedic surgeons, sports medicine specialists and

rehabilitation researchers. This would be an introductory format to those new to the sports

medicine field, such as students and athletic trainers. Ultimately, the tone and select jargon in
 Coyle 5

Harrison’s article is academic but remains more accessible to the public while the article by

Dickens et al. has a writing style and format that makes it unappealing for the broad audience.

Their article would appeal to experts in the field of sports medicine, orthopedics, and

rehabilitation.

The interdisciplinary exploration of American football reveals the vast variety of research

within this field. By integrating insights from science and history, scholars can provide

comprehensive perspectives on the sport's evolution and impact. The study of science dives into

critical issues of player safety, offering scientific research such as statistical numbers and

evidence to inform readers about injuries and recovery in the sport. The discipline of history

dives into cultural and social contexts that have shaped American football, provides past

accounts from players and coaches, as well as highlighting the sport's international origins. Both

fields contain great research and analysis with scholars in both disciplines contributing valuable

insights that enhance our understanding of American football as a whole. Although some people

may only consider one aspect of research for a topic, having two different methods of research is

necessary to conform to a true understanding of a topic. In contrast to each other, science

provides more concrete statistics as evidence, while history provides past accounts to highlight

the evolution of American football. Ultimately, the integration of diverse fields of research and

perspectives benefits the entirety of knowledge on this topic, providing a true understanding of

its aspects in the past, present, and future. The collaboration between science and history shows

the interdisciplinary nature of research in a broad topic such as American football.

 Coyle 6

Works Cited

Harrison, Emily A. “The First Concussion Crisis: Head Injury and Evidence in Early American
Football.” American journal of public health (1971) 104, no. 5 (2014): 822–833.

Dickens, Jonathan F., Brett D. Owens, Kenneth L. Cameron, Thomas M. DeBerardino, Brendan

D. Masini, Karen Y. Peck, and Steven J. Svoboda. "The Effect of Subcritical Bone Loss and

Exposure on Recurrent Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Intercollegiate American

Football." The American Journal of Sports Medicine 45, no. 8 (July 2017): 1769-1775. Los

Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.