This study by a clinical psychologist about "mass marathon training" like Landmark, covers this issue precisely and professionally.
If Landmark really wants to stop people from being hurt and run credible programs they would address the issues raised within the above linked study.
There is no reason to take needless risks with Landmark, given their history and the readily available alternatives through support groups, community social services/counseling or college educational programs.
That is, an individual's personal issues and/or problems can be addressed safely and responsibly by licensed professionals and accountable agencies regulated by state boards.
And if someone wants to study philosophy, they are better served by taking classes at a university or college, which is far more objective and better qualified, than learning a biased and subjectively supported "paradigm" offered by Landmark.
Why bother with Landmark when qualified professionally led and more objective opportunities abound in virtually any community?
Your football analogy falls flat and is not responsive to the real issues raised about Landmark.
This simply seems to be an effort to change the subject and is essentially a false argument.
There are enough Landmark victims to make it easy for anyone objective to see why this for-profit company is not worth bothering with.
And again, there is no scientific peer-reviewed published study that offers any objective proof of measurable long-lasting positive results achieved through Landmark.
But there are credible professional reports about the mental breakdowns previously mentioned.
Ignoring the facts and obfuscation isn't a meaningful response Jack. But it does bring out your bias regarding Landmark, by your refusal to meaningfully address the well-established facts.