Ncaa Must Pay $18m Over Alleged Failure to Warn Player About Concussion Risks
Posted2 months agoActive2 months ago
theguardian.comOtherstory
calmnegative
Debate
0/100
NcaaConcussion RisksSports LawPlayer Safety
Key topics
Ncaa
Concussion Risks
Sports Law
Player Safety
The NCAA must pay $18M for allegedly failing to warn a player about concussion risks, highlighting concerns about player safety and institutional responsibility.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
19m
Peak period
1
0-1h
Avg / period
1
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 3, 2025 at 11:24 AM EST
2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 3, 2025 at 11:43 AM EST
19m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
1 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 3, 2025 at 11:43 AM EST
2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45800794Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 7:50:28 AM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
According to the newspaper, the jury determined the NCAA “unreasonably increased the risk of harm of head impacts to Robert Geathers over and above the risks inherent to playing football.” And it also determined the NCAA “voluntarily assumed duties to protect the health and safety of Robert Geathers” and that the NCAA “negligently breached their duties” to him.
The NCAA is obviously going to appeal this decision and the onus would be identifying how the NCAA "unreasonably increased the risk of harm of head impacts over and above the risks inherent to playing football" - which is a wild statement for the jury to make, and also that the NCAA "voluntarily assumed duties to protect the health and safety" of the plaintiff. How?
I'm not a fan of the NCAA by any means but these are wild claims for the jury to have made.