Buffalo

NFL 2017 changes?

742 posts in this topic

16 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

 

i did a quick look for references, but all i could find right now was references to the interior of helmets and shell materials. i think Schutt might have some more info, there's some PDFs on their site i dont have a chance to read right now. will look again for shell design later though

 

Once again I'm calling Bullsh-it on this whole policy. There is absolutely no measurable or controllable variable in having 2 helmets vs one. Let's examine the alternative from a process perspective.

 

Scenario 1: 1 helmet for the season

  1. Equipment makes annual purchase
  2. Preseason prep and conditioning is done
  3. Players are fit at OTA/camp
  4. Players break in helmets at camp
  5. Helmets maintained for 20 games pre+regular
  6. End of season conditioning and storage
  7. Repeat for next season.

Scenario 2: 2 helmets for the season

  1. Equipment makes annual purchase for 2x the quantity
  2. Preseason prep and conditioning is done for 2 sets
  3. Players are fit for 2 helmets at OTA/camp
  4. Players break in 2 sets of helmets at camp
  5. Primary helmets maintained for 18 games pre+regular
  6. Alternate helmets maintained for 2 games regular
  7. End of season conditioning and storage
  8. Repeat for next season.

 

Once games start, there is zero net burden on a week to week basis. The only real burden is the fitting during camp and storage of an extra set. If teams are willing to commit to spending a negligible time in the offseason and camp to get the players in an extra helmet, they should be able to.

 

The safety aspect is a complete falsehood and red herring. If a player is fit properly and the helmet goes through proper maintenance, all the other variables are uncontrollable. I would say there's significantly more effort and risk disrupting the proper fit by changing masks since often times padding has to be removed thus disrupting the fit.

 

There is simply no reason other than BS optics to make the league look engaged in safety.

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak from experience, but I have had professional equipment managers tell me it's a bigger deal than you're saying.  So I can only guess your summary is missing something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, guest23 said:

 

Once again I'm calling Bullsh-it on this whole policy. There is absolutely no measurable or controllable variable in having 2 helmets vs one. Let's examine the alternative from a process perspective.

 

Scenario 1: 1 helmet for the season

  1. Equipment makes annual purchase
  2. Preseason prep and conditioning is done
  3. Players are fit at OTA/camp
  4. Players break in helmets at camp
  5. Helmets maintained for 20 games pre+regular
  6. End of season conditioning and storage
  7. Repeat for next season.

Scenario 2: 2 helmets for the season

  1. Equipment makes annual purchase for 2x the quantity
  2. Preseason prep and conditioning is done for 2 sets
  3. Players are fit for 2 helmets at OTA/camp
  4. Players break in 2 sets of helmets at camp
  5. Primary helmets maintained for 18 games pre+regular
  6. Alternate helmets maintained for 2 games regular
  7. End of season conditioning and storage
  8. Repeat for next season.

 

Once games start, there is zero net burden on a week to week basis. The only real burden is the fitting during camp and storage of an extra set. If teams are willing to commit to spending a negligible time in the offseason and camp to get the players in an extra helmet, they should be able to.

 

The safety aspect is a complete falsehood and red herring. If a player is fit properly and the helmet goes through proper maintenance, all the other variables are uncontrollable. I would say there's significantly more effort and risk disrupting the proper fit by changing masks since often times padding has to be removed thus disrupting the fit.

 

There is simply no reason other than BS optics to make the league look engaged in safety.

 

 

Most people here (who for some reason fancy themselves as experts on helmets and concussions) feel that this policy is the NFL saying that they've made a correlation between number of helmets and concussions.  Or that it's an "insurance thing".

 

What if they haven't made that correlation, but need to gather some data in order to do just that?  Maybe going 5 years under the one-helmet plan gives them enough of a sample to compare the number of concussions before the rule to the number after, and if they're the same, then the rule goes away.  If it's now better, then most of the people here look like idiots.  If it's worse, then the league looks like idiots and probably opens themselves up to even more lawsuits.

 

It could be all about research, not about anything that's currently known, or anything with immediate financial ramifications.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Esco said:

Lions in these lids would be really nice.

Ohio-State-Throwback-Uniforms-3.jpg

 

These would be better.

 

IMG_6341.PNG

18 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Esco said:

Lions in these lids would be really nice.

Ohio-State-Throwback-Uniforms-3.jpg

yes makes perfect sense to go from removing all black in the color scheme to an almost black helmet.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lions in these lids would be really nice.

 

I wasn't talking about the shade of color.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Esco said:

Lions in these lids would be really nice.

 

I wasn't talking about the shade of color.

 

So... you're just saying it would be nice if they wore football helmets?

 

I guess... I agree?

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

So... you're just saying it would be nice if they wore football helmets?

 

I guess... I agree?

 

I guess hes saying he wants that matte/texture effect on the lions helmet

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dmhtfld said:

 

I guess hes saying he wants that matte/texture effect on the lions helmet

 

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The explanation I've heard for why teams only have one helmet is because NFL players can wear any helmet shell they like, including shells that have been out of production for a long time. VSR4 helmets from Riddell haven't been made in almost 10 years, but there are multiple players who wear them, including Tom Brady. There is limited available stock on these. In order for a team to wear a second helmet, they would either have to burn through there extra stock of these twice as fast for a game or two, or force a player to wear a helmet style different from their own. I assume that would be an insurance liability, or at least a potential for a lawsuit from an injured player.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ben5 said:

The explanation I've heard for why teams only have one helmet is because NFL players can wear any helmet shell they like, including shells that have been out of production for a long time. VSR4 helmets from Riddell haven't been made in almost 10 years, but there are multiple players who wear them, including Tom Brady. There is limited available stock on these. In order for a team to wear a second helmet, they would either have to burn through there extra stock of these twice as fast for a game or two, or force a player to wear a helmet style different from their own. I assume that would be an insurance liability, or at least a potential for a lawsuit from an injured player.

 

There you go... makes sense.  In college, the school puts the players in whatever helmet they want, and if the kids don't like it they can basically pound sand. An NFL player, making gobs of cash, and, unlike a college kid, actually relatively in control of his own damn life, gets to choose his own helmet. And, oddly enough, he probably considers that ability to choose to be more important than somebody's desire to see cool throwbacks twice a year.  But hey, don't let that stop you from coming on here to bitch about "that stupid one helmet rule!"

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ben5 said:

The explanation I've heard for why teams only have one helmet is because NFL players can wear any helmet shell they like, including shells that have been out of production for a long time. VSR4 helmets from Riddell haven't been made in almost 10 years, but there are multiple players who wear them, including Tom Brady. There is limited available stock on these. In order for a team to wear a second helmet, they would either have to burn through there extra stock of these twice as fast for a game or two, or force a player to wear a helmet style different from their own. I assume that would be an insurance liability, or at least a potential for a lawsuit from an injured player.

 

Yeah that story has been around but it seems very unlikely to me that players like Vince Wilfork and Antonio Gates have continued to wear a VSR4 and equipment managers have been relying upon dead stock inventory for almost a decade that is likely past its expiration date (foam, plastic, and glue decay over time). This is especially puzzling as this would seem to be a huge liability issue on the part of riddell and the league to be enabling such a practice. Think of this as an auto recall, if the risk is severe enough you pull everything off the market and replace the previously purchased product. My best guess is that riddell still has the ability to produce small quantities for the players that use them. Also at some point a player would be down to 1 helmet and what happens if that helmet breaks mid game, do they have a completely different model for them as a backup? For a multi-billion $ outfit like the nfl this sure seems like the risks outweigh the benefits to keep this practice going.

 

The whole "burn through stock" is overstated. Correct that a VSR4 user would likely need 4 helmets at the beginning of the season (primary+replacement) to have an alt helmet as opposed to the current two. Also since the alt helmet would be used 2/20 weeks, it's only bearing 10% of the seasonal wear/tear which would extend helmet life span. Lastly that argument is basically saying that to meet the preferences of about 1-3% of its players that want to wear sub-standard equipment, the league has no choice but to institute a one shell policy.

 

I guess anything is possible but being logical is a completely different story.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they really wanted to bring back alt helmets that bad, could they use second helmets for everyone that wears a current style and then limit the repaints or "skins" to only those few players who wear the old style?  Obviously nobody wants to have to paint a silver helmet white and then paint it silver again twice a year, but if it's only one or two on the whole team, is it that big a deal?  I guess one question would be how quickly it can be done - would it be ready for the next practice?  Typically there's an off day and either a padless day or a film day after games, to it should be doable.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

If they really wanted to bring back alt helmets that bad, could they use second helmets for everyone that wears a current style and then limit the repaints or "skins" to only those few players who wear the old style?  Obviously nobody wants to have to paint a silver helmet white and then paint it silver again twice a year, but if it's only one or two on the whole team, is it that big a deal?  I guess one question would be how quickly it can be done - would it be ready for the next practice?  Typically there's an off day and either a padless day or a film day after games, to it should be doable.

I don't see what the big deal is when they are going to safer helmets. It's not like they are going back to leather helmets.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, dont care said:

I don't see what the big deal is when they are going to safer helmets.

 

Objection, Your Honor.  Assumes facts not in evidence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dont care said:

I don't see what the big deal is when they are going to safer helmets. It's not like they are going back to leather helmets.

 

If you're used to the same helmet for all those years and then change, even if there was evidence to say that it's safer (evidence that I don't think exists), if it changes the way you play because you "feel" the difference, then that could negate any other benefits and actually increase the risk of injury.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said:

 

If you're used to the same helmet for all those years and then change, even if there was evidence to say that it's safer (evidence that I don't think exists), if it changes the way you play because you "feel" the difference, then that could negate any other benefits and actually increase the risk of injury.

http://www.beam.vt.edu/helmet/helmets_football.php

there is plenty of research that shows just that, the VSR-4 is rated as the second to last in terms of safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So...If the Redskins dislike their color rush uniform enough that they want to institute a rule making color rush optional, why not just design a better color rush uniform in the first place?

 

It's like someone jn their front office just got a memo and said, "Wait, we actually have to WEAR these? Like, in an actual game??"

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CitizenTino said:

So...If the Redskins dislike their color rush uniform enough that they want to institute a rule making color rush optional, why not just design a better color rush uniform in the first place?

 

It's like someone jn their front office just got a memo and said, "Wait, we actually have to WEAR these? Like, in an actual game??"

Yeah this really made me wonder as well. Why not go with an all burgundy or white look if they were that opposed t it?

 

Eagles, Chiefs, 49ers, Titans, and Bears all used existing jerseys/pants. It's a bit of a head-scratcher as to why the Redskins made the choice they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now