Mevins31 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1824779-nfl-ends-official-helmet-partnership-with-riddell My question is say: Andrew Luck wears a Riddell... next year will his helmet still say 'Riddell' on the front, just no longer be the exclusive helmet of the NFL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debo0775 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 I'm totally behind this.Hopefully this leads to the NFL disallowing branding on helmets completely (i.e. nose and neck bumpers are blank or team-branded). Way too many kids buy helmets because they look "sick," and that's not at all what it's about.I blasted Schutt on facebook for this in the past - when they introduced the Vengeance or whatever one of their newest helmets is (the one Eli wears), they touted its safety features esp. a new facemask designed to deflect hits to work with the shell better. And then a few days later, they added a post about being able to customize your helmet with DNA-style masks. It's all a load of marketing bull , and it's really kind of disgusting (esp. since they do have some really intriguing technology behind the helmet to make players safer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Why are we linking to bleacher report as a "source" of some bit of news to comment on? While most of us here know that the Riddell exclusive contract is up after this year, none of us should have to waste brain cells reading an "article" posted on bleacher report. "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 More sharing options...
debo0775 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Great...I didn't know about this (though I should have).Why not contribute to the thread instead of poo-poo it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mevins31 Posted October 26, 2013 Author Share Posted October 26, 2013 I guess I should ask this again..Andrew Luck wears a Riddell... next year will his helmet still say 'Riddell' on the front, just no longer be the exclusive helmet of the NFL? Or will it be blank like all the other brands? Or will all brands allow to be advertised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debo0775 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 The NFL's history suggests that they'll be void of manufacturer's marks (look at headsets this season), though I suppose they'll do whatever the hell they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 I'm expecting instead that we'll see multiple manufacturers logos on helmet bumpers, but I really hope you're right. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 If they're serious about safety, then they'll take everyone's check and let them advertise on the bumper. That would theoretically give them more incentive to innovate and win athletes over to their brand, which would give their logo a bigger presence. "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 More sharing options...
LETSGOBLUEBEATMSU Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 The helmet won't say riddell on the bumper and will stay blank just like how Schutt, Rawlings , Xeineth are now. The only thing this means is riddell can't have their name on the helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 What they should do is ban the Riddell VRs and Schutt series which have the lowest safety ratings. That would show they give a crap about safety. Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBLUEBEATMSU Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 What they should do is ban the Riddell VRs and Schutt series which have the lowest safety ratings. That would show they give a crap about safety.Yeah I don't understand why the NFL is so mad at Riddell when their newest helmet the 360 is the safest helmet there is and very few NFL players wear them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 What they should do is ban the Riddell VRs and Schutt series which have the lowest safety ratings. That would show they give a crap about safety.Yeah I don't understand why the NFL is so mad at Riddell when their newest helmet the 360 is the safest helmet there is and very few NFL players wear them.While it was the "official helmet" team equipment managers were on the take and were given bonuses for putting rookies in a Riddell shell. It was a dirty cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perfesser Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 If the NFL doesn't allow manufacturers' names on the bumpers, the makers will have more incentive to design helmets and facemasks that are "distinctive" in appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancealot Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 The thing about the 360 is its heavier than most other helmets, and riddell don't make titanium masks with didn't help make it any lighter. The only reason I wear a riddell and not a lighter shutt is because I don't like the way they fit (how the cheek pads come in and you have to pull them out to get your helmet on) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Yeah I don't understand why the NFL is so mad at RiddellWhere on earth are you getting that from? The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debo0775 Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 If the NFL doesn't allow manufacturers' names on the bumpers, the makers will have more incentive to design helmets and facemasks that are "distinctive" in appearance. Eh, maybe. They're already doing that to stand out - even Riddell is doing that WITH the manufacturer's contract.Until players themselves start to understand the importance of the helmet and not using it for individual #swag, we'll continue to see safety compromised by looks.The thing about the 360 is its heavier than most other helmets, and riddell don't make titanium masks with didn't help make it any lighter. The only reason I wear a riddell and not a lighter shutt is because I don't like the way they fit (how the cheek pads come in and you have to pull them out to get your helmet on)Bingo.The 360 really isn't that great of a helmet from what I glean looking at it. Players need much, much lighter helmets. This is why I'm hoping Simpson's helmet starts to take off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 What they should do is ban the Riddell VRs and Schutt series which have the lowest safety ratings. That would show they give a crap about safety.Yeah I don't understand why the NFL is so mad at Riddell when their newest helmet the 360 is the safest helmet there is and very few NFL players wear them.What the hell are you talking about? "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 More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I had never heard of those Simpson helmets before, but they sound promising. I hope they get a chance. It's probably not possible at this time, where a helmet still has to look cool so a player will choose to wear it, but I think football helmets need to get bigger. If you can make it weigh half as much and even protect better than a regular helmet, that's great... use some of that saved weight to make the helmet bigger. It probably looked weird when players went from the very thin leather helmets to the relatively huge plastic helmets, but people got used it. Whatever cushioning you can provide in (just for example) two inches of space, you should be able to provide significantly more in four inches of space. Padding in a helmet is all about spreading the force of an impact over a longer period of time. If you were jumping from a high height, would you rather land on a one foot thick cushion or a two foot thick cushion made of the same materials? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Bigger? No. Helmets need less padding, not more. That's how we got ourselves in to this mess to begin with. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debo0775 Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Bigger? No.Helmets need less padding, not more. That's how we got ourselves in to this mess to begin with.Ehh, I think growing shoulder pads had more to do with the idea of "bigger is better." Still, helmets don't need to be bigger. They need to provide adequate protection in as small and as light of a package as possible.I had never heard of those Simpson helmets before, but they sound promising. I hope they get a chance. It's probably not possible at this time, where a helmet still has to look cool so a player will choose to wear it, but I think football helmets need to get bigger. If you can make it weigh half as much and even protect better than a regular helmet, that's great... use some of that saved weight to make the helmet bigger. It probably looked weird when players went from the very thin leather helmets to the relatively huge plastic helmets, but people got used it. Whatever cushioning you can provide in (just for example) two inches of space, you should be able to provide significantly more in four inches of space. Padding in a helmet is all about spreading the force of an impact over a longer period of time. If you were jumping from a high height, would you rather land on a one foot thick cushion or a two foot thick cushion made of the same materials?This is assuming that the thickness of the cusion will always provide a change in relief - this isn't the case (i.e. at some point, your beneficial return is negligible).It also assumes that padding technology doesn't improve. It does, and it should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.