Jump to content

Football Safety Solution Exchange


neo_prankster

Recommended Posts

We've all heard about the stories related to pro football and concussions and CTE.

 

But now, we should discuss solutions to make the game safer. Nothing infuriates me more than the extreme fringe out there that wants to completely ban the game outright, which strikes me as blatantly reactionary. On the other part of the spectrum, there are those who want to take away helmets, which I think would make the situation even worse.

 

Some of the solutions that some writers have thrown around have been taking out kickoffs and eliminating the three point stance.

 

Also, I think Riddell, Schutt and other helmet manufacturers are innovating helmet technology way too slowly.

 

What other ways should the game change and still be a viable product for generations to come? What can be reasonably done without resorting to outlawing the sport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it all has to do with the designs of helmets. The fact that it is made of a hard shell, no amount of padding will cause the head and brain from shaking violently causing concussions and CTE. A soft helmet would probably help but also Washinhton is using a new helmet that flexes a lot dispersing the energy and makes impacts much less violent. I forget what the helmet is called but I feel other manufacturers should use what ever technology they are using into their own helmets and I feel make things safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dont care said:

I think it all has to do with the designs of helmets. The fact that it is made of a hard shell, no amount of padding will cause the head and brain from shaking violently causing concussions and CTE. A soft helmet would probably help but also Washington is using a new helmet that flexes a lot dispersing the energy and makes impacts much less violent. I forget what the helmet is called but I feel other manufacturers should use what ever technology they are using into their own helmets and I feel make things safer.

 

Besides Riddell, Schutt, Maxpro and maybe Rawlings, the other two I can think of are Simpson Ganassi (as in Simpson the auto racing safety guy) and Vicis. The Simpson Ganassi models use a lighter shell on the outside (I forget the exact materials), and a special foam on the inside instead of what Riddell uses.

 

By Washington did you mean the Washington Huskies, or the Washington DC NFL team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if you don't like it, but eliminating or drastically reducing helmets is the only thing that's going to save the sport.   The problem is all the little head hits that happen on every single play of every single game.   Allowing players to ignore the impacts means kicking the consequences down the road, means making them worse.  Protective armor needs to be scaled back. 

 

Well, that and getting back to fundamentals.  No more knocking players to the turf, we need to get back to tackling.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted this is the NFL Offseason thread. These helmets have been approved for use in the NFL this year. 

 

 

probably won't eliminate concussions or head trauma entirely, but less movement of the head inside the helmet means the brain's not sloshing around inside the skull and that's what causes the tiny concussions that over a lifetime of playing football lead to CTE. I think this has promise. 

 

Here's a video of how it works (around 3:00 is when they start talking about the science of the helmet)

 

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen these Vicis products, but I didn't know they got approved. I think this is going to be the future direction of football helmets. 

 

One other thing is that we really won't know the impact of rules already in place until 10+ years from now. Although we are seeing more concussions, we're also looking for more concussions. The most recent players who died of CTE didn't have Heads Up training or limited full contact days in their youth careers. Maybe 15 years from now, the results will be different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2004 I sustained a concussion in a hockey tournament, went to the hospital that night, and nobody thought it was a problem when I played the next day. If that happened today I would've been out at least a week. What we've learned in the last decade about concussions is incredible. 

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I'm sorry if you don't like it, but eliminating or drastically reducing helmets is the only thing that's going to save the sport.   The problem is all the little head hits that happen on every single play of every single game.   Allowing players to ignore the impacts means kicking the consequences down the road, means making them worse.  Protective armor needs to be scaled back. 

 

Well, that and getting back to fundamentals.  No more knocking players to the turf, we need to get back to tackling.  

The game has to evolve, and it will.  Look at football 50+ years ago and look at it today.  Things are different.

 

I'd be curious to see if something like those rugby skullcaps with bumpers on them could be a possibility.  I understand that the helmet is so much of the brand itself, but what would you rather have?  it's a give an take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, AstroBull21 said:

The game has to evolve, and it will.  Look at football 50+ years ago and look at it today.  Things are different.

 

I'd be curious to see if something like those rugby skullcaps with bumpers on them could be a possibility.  I understand that the helmet is so much of the brand itself, but what would you rather have?  it's a give an take.

This image popped into my twitter feed this morning

FBheadgear.png

 

I don't know where this is from because nothing in the article explains why they're using that specific headgear. 

http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2016/8/2/12348834/ohio-state-recruiting-2017-tyjon-lindsey-markquese-bell-shaun-wade-anthony-hines-tate-martell

 

It was about this Ohio State recruit. 

 

 

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, AstroBull21 said:

The game has to evolve, and it will.  Look at football 50+ years ago and look at it today.  Things are different.

 

I'd be curious to see if something like those rugby skullcaps with bumpers on them could be a possibility.  I understand that the helmet is so much of the brand itself, but what would you rather have?  it's a give an take.

I think you can have rugby style headwear and still have the regular helmet for branding purposes. Helmets can only be so safe to a certain point. As Gothamite said, it's a fundamental issue. Proper tackling needs to be taught and practiced. Helmets, as they are now, are used as a weapon. That needs to be stopped. Helmet to helmet contact penalties can only do so much. So, the only other option is to get rid of helmets as we know them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, McCarthy said:

This image popped into my twitter feed this morning

FBheadgear.png

 

I don't know where this is from because nothing in the article explains why they're using that specific headgear. 

http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2016/8/2/12348834/ohio-state-recruiting-2017-tyjon-lindsey-markquese-bell-shaun-wade-anthony-hines-tate-martell

 

It was about this Ohio State recruit. 

 

 

The photo is from a 7 on 7 tournament. Many of those, as well as flag football tournaments require a softshell helmet. However, it's somewhat confusing as the organizers exclusively partner with specific brands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think a helmet or some kind of protective head equipment should be required. Even with a proper tackle, the ball carrier's head will still likely bounce off the turf/grass. So some sort of padding should be in place to protect the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The future of football will look more like those two guys pictured above than it will continue as we know it now. Talking decades from now, not tomorrow. I don't think you can eliminate tackling without destroying the essence of the sport, but the game will evolve to emphasize speed and quickness versus size and power. Rule changes will make contact less intense, equipment changes will help. 

 

It all stems from the helmet. We have the hard plastic shell that we have to protect our bodies and shoulders from so they wear the hard plastic shoulder pads and those shoulder pads can inflict has much damage as a helmet can. If we go to softer equipment I can see an evolution of equipment where a softshell cap, probably with some kind of flexible facemask and not the metal wire finger smashers we have now. Hard plastic shoulder pads will be replaced with smaller, foam shoulder pads. And then require thick foam knee pads to protect the heads of other players. 

PvO6ZWJ.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, neo_prankster said:

We've all heard about the stories related to pro football and concussions and CTE.

 

But now, we should discuss solutions to make the game safer. Nothing infuriates me more than the extreme fringe out there that wants to completely ban the game outright, which strikes me as blatantly reactionary. On the other part of the spectrum, there are those who want to take away helmets, which I think would make the situation even worse.

 

Some of the solutions that some writers have thrown around have been taking out kickoffs and eliminating the three point stance.

 

Also, I think Riddell, Schutt and other helmet manufacturers are innovating helmet technology way too slowly.

 

What other ways should the game change and still be a viable product for generations to come? What can be reasonably done without resorting to outlawing the sport?

If you are a helmet company constantly in litigation over your products (like the one filed two weeks ago), I'd also be weary about bringing unproven technology to the marketplace. 

 

In addition, concussions and CTE is the long term problem while spinal injuries/death are the immediate problems, especially at the youth level for helmet manufacturers. 

 

As we enter August and teams of all ages begin fall practice, football also has the specific safety issues which deal with the size of the participants, and also issues related to heat-related deaths.  We generally get two deaths per summer over heat-related issues and on average, there is a prep death per week during the season.

 

National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, neo_prankster said:

But now, we should discuss solutions to make the game safer. Nothing infuriates me more than the extreme fringe out there that wants to completely ban the game outright, which strikes me as blatantly reactionary. On the other part of the spectrum, there are those who want to take away helmets, which I think would make the situation even worse.

I am not part of that.

 

But I am starting to think that there are no solutions to make the game appreciably safer.  A big hit, no matter how property done, is always going to contribute to the long-term quality of life of both players involved...isn't it believed that a perfect hit (arms wrapped around the waist, no contact at all with either head) still causes that "neck-snapping" action that leads to head problems in the long run?  It's not entirely about concussions any more.  It's about collisions...collisions on the line, collisions tackling the ball carrier, big blocks, etc.

 

We can mitigate.  But we cannot solve.  As long as the game is played in a fashion that actually attracts fans, the collisions are numerous enough that many players will come out of their careers with an impacted quality of life.  My gut (and yeah, that's all I have) is that helmet technology will have roughly no impact. Maybe removing helmets will, though.  

 

Regarding kickoffs, are those plays a big part of the CTE problem?  Maybe they are, but they are such a small proportion of the plays that I wonder.  Not that I care; I actually don't like the impact that long kick returns have on the game; I'd probably be happier with getting rid of it than most.

 

Some ways to potentially MITIGATE could include:

  • Getting rid of helmets?  Part of me thinks it would work and part of me thinks we'd just get a bunch of horrid injuries in pre-season game #1.
  • Flat out removing contact from practices.  I am not sure about this.  How much full-contact do guys take in practice vs. games?  Then, how much is the quality of play impacted if practice is dialed down so much?  It's a tough balance because no-contact practices could hurt in-game technique. 
  • 18 game schedule.  Stop it. Stop it now.
  • Eliminate youth football?  Is there a way to tech proper techniques but not have kids, who are still developing, butting heads with each other from age 10 to 18?  Is that contact a big part of the long term problem?  Maybe only seniors (or juniors/seniors) should be playing full-contact high school ball.  Again, I am sort of just thinking out loud but I wonder if slashing the number of hits players take as kids could be beneficial.
  • Cap a player's career at a certain number of years?  I dunno, there'd probably be a successful lawsuit over that one.
  • Strict benching of players with concussion-like symptoms or even after any helmet-to-helmet hit.  Of course, you'd have a ton of star players missing a lot of time.  I think it was the NFC Title Game a couple of years ago when Russel Wilson was playing and should not have been...we want him in there, not T-Jack.  We'd really get to know our depth charts.  
  • NFL: really try to be a positive player in this.  Acknowledge the problem we all know is there.  That would at the very least get them to stop with the extending the season non-sense.  They've determined there is about a 1/1000% chance that having more than one helmet can impact safety; so what's the chance that Thursday games could?  Maybe consider dropping that greedy endeavor in favor of safety?  

There are two problems we have today that we did not have in the old days. First (and most importantly) we no longer have the blissful ignorance that if you can remember you own name you are fine.  We are learning more and the news is grim.  Secondarily, the combination of speed and size players have today would have been unheard of in the 1980s.  The impacts probably have become greater on many hits.  And, short of taking the "football" out of football, I am not sure what can be done about that.

 

We can mitigate all we want; and I suppose we should.  But players and parents still need to understand that long-term quality of life is not well-served by playing football.  If the players that are playing are well-informed* I guess I'll feel OK about watching them damage each other.

 

*Most today are not; or, at least they were not when they were getting into the game as kids.  Even as recently as five years ago, we thought it was all about concussions and helmet-to-helmet.  If only it were that simple.

 

I don't have (or want) kids.  But if I did, it's the one sport I would not let them play (well, boxing/MMA, maybe). You could make arguments about, say, hockey, but given the way youth hockey is played, I tend to doubt the risks would be nearly as great (and anyone related to me is not playing pro).  OMG, I would be a participant in the Wussifacation of America I'd be thinking of their long-term future.  There are risks of broken bones, etc.  I can live with that.  CTE, not so much.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The safer you make the helmets, the more players are going to feel that it's safe to launch themselves head first in to someone.  Linemen could benefit from the technology, but the problem will still remain.  Even someone who is "just" a lineman today may have been a LB or TE back when he played both ways in high school.

 

You'd have to legislate the ever living :censored: out of the game - even more than it is today - and that would make it simply unwatchable.  There should not be much subjectivity when it comes to officiating, and the amount in football (when it comes to pulling players from games or flagging head-first hits) would increase dramatically.

 

Football is like sex - the only way to be safe is to abstain.  My gut says that the game will 1) short term (0-10 years): adopt safer helmets but increase stoppages, pulling players, and throwing flags, until it becomes unwatchable.  2) medium term (10-20 years) evolve into something different than what we know today, either become more rugby like, or somehow otherwise different, then 3) long term: cease to exist.

 

Hey - once the game ceases to exists and all our great athletic youth don't have dreams of NFL, they'll find another sport to pursue and maybe then the US will be able to compete at a world level in soccer.

 

 

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2016 at 10:14 PM, Gothamite said:

I'm sorry if you don't like it, but eliminating or drastically reducing helmets is the only thing that's going to save the sport.   The problem is all the little head hits that happen on every single play of every single game.   Allowing players to ignore the impacts means kicking the consequences down the road, means making them worse.  Protective armor needs to be scaled back. 

 

Well, that and getting back to fundamentals.  No more knocking players to the turf, we need to get back to tackling.  

 

It amazes me how much this aspect gets overlooked in conversations around the brain injury issue.

 

So much of the (badly needed) discussion centers on concussions from hard hits that happen a few times a game at most, but there doesn't seem to be as much awareness of subconcussive hits that occur on every snap of the ball when the defensive and offensive lines come together. These are so much more insidious, both because they're undetectable when they happen and the damage they cause is cumulative, and because collisions at the line of scrimmage are so much more fundamental to the way football is played than dangerous tackles, which seem to have the potential to be controllable through player training and referee regulation.

 

To me, this is much more central to the question of whether it's possible to legislate and/or innovate football without changing it too much than violent tackles of receivers or quarterbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.