AP

Brett Favre does not have a son. But he has talked quite a bit about whether he would let his nonexistent son play football.

Favre said in November that he would be leery of letting a son play football, and in an interview today Favre reiterated that. Favre said one reason is that he wouldn’t want his son to feel he had to live up to his father’s legacy, but a bigger reason is that Favre thinks the risks of injury are significant.

“It’s a violent sport, and for two reasons I don’t know if I’d let him play,” Favre told WDAM in Mississippi. “The pressures to, you know, live up to what your dad had done, but most importantly the damage that is done by playing. I don’t know if I would let him play.”

There are, of course, risks associated with playing football. But there are also risks associated with every other sport, risks associated with activities like bicycling and skateboarding, risks associated with putting your son in the car and driving him to school, and risks associated with the sedentary lifestyle that comes with an avoidance of risky activities.

There are also benefits associated with playing football. Favre knows that well. It’s odd to hear someone who loved playing football so much that he kept coming back, over and over again, even after saying he was retired, and immediately went into coaching high school football when he was finally done playing, say now that he’s not sure it’s worth it.