Helmet Stripes Out Dated?

[wonderbread]

Actually, the bike helmet I use is engineered to dissipate the force of an impact by cracking, instead of transmitting that force to the head. Sort of like a Volvo's crumple zones.

I don't believe any of the wild claims made by helmet manufacturers about their products. As I said up thread, they have the credibility of cigarette companies who found a doctor to promote its "calming properties". Let's see the data, have it analyzed by independent third parties first.

How about Virginia Tech's study? It's reasonably impartial. Interestingly enough one of the relatively "traditional" looking Rawlings helmets is #2, right behind the fairly over-engineered looking Riddell 360 helmet. The Xenix (also relatively "traditional" looking) is #3. I would have thought that Bill Simpson's helmet would have scored higher, but it came in as a 4-star helmet (#5 on the VT list) given his experience in racing.

Here's the link:

http://www.sbes.vt.edu/nid.php

it actually has the 360 as #1, the regular speed helmet is #4

[BrandMooreArt]

Actually, the bike helmet I use is engineered to dissipate the force of an impact by cracking, instead of transmitting that force to the head. Sort of like a Volvo's crumple zones.

I don't believe any of the wild claims made by helmet manufacturers about their products. As I said up thread, they have the credibility of cigarette companies who found a doctor to promote its "calming properties". Let's see the data, have it analyzed by independent third parties first.

How about Virginia Tech's study? It's reasonably impartial. Interestingly enough one of the relatively "traditional" looking Rawlings helmets is #2, right behind the fairly over-engineered looking Riddell 360 helmet. The Xenix (also relatively "traditional" looking) is #3. I would have thought that Bill Simpson's helmet would have scored higher, but it came in as a 4-star helmet (#5 on the VT list) given his experience in racing.

Here's the link:

http://www.sbes.vt.edu/nid.php

it actually has the 360 as #1, the regular speed helmet is #4

Thats a tad different than what i remember but stil Ridell scored well there and they were not happy with that study. I also thought Simpson would rate better. Austin Collie was wearing one for a while. At that time Simpson said helmets need to be lighter and the weight of the helmets was a big factor in concussions.

[Cosmic]

Actually, the bike helmet I use is engineered to dissipate the force of an impact by cracking, instead of transmitting that force to the head. Sort of like a Volvo's crumple zones.

I don't believe any of the wild claims made by helmet manufacturers about their products. As I said up thread, they have the credibility of cigarette companies who found a doctor to promote its "calming properties". Let's see the data, have it analyzed by independent third parties first.

and the new ones do crack, so by that logic they are safer then.

Football helmets just might be safer if they were indeed designed to do just that.

You're also supposed to replace your bike helmet every time it's in a collision.... high schools/high school players can barely afford a single helmet. You really can't ditch the model of the quasi-permanent football helmet, unless you're talking about getting rid of helmets altogether.

[Gothamite]

unless you're talking about getting rid of helmets altogether.

That's exactly what I'm talking about, and have been for half a decade.

Reducing the ludicrous body armor, and requiring players to feel their impacts today instead of delaying them until an unspecified time in the future, is the only way to make the game safer.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Makes sense to me.

[Guest]

I don't know how much good that would do. Yeah a lot of concussions come from helmet-to-helmet contact but a significant amount also come from helmet-to-knee and helmet-to-turf impacts. The latter types would only increase if you take helmets away.

[Gothamite]

Not necessarily. Players wouldn't throw their bodies around as much without the false sense of security that helmets bring.

Players won't be as reckless with their bodies when they have to face the consequences immediately and not decades down the road.

And for the record, it's not about concussions. While a very serious issue, they pale in comparison with the real threat. Concussions are a red herring, a bit of legerdemain intended to keep us from noticing the real challenge facing the sport. It's about the accumulation of tiny impacts made on every play, aided by the false sense of security polycarbonate shells bring.

[wonderbread]

Not necessarily. Players wouldn't throw their bodies around as much without the false sense of security that helmets bring.

Players won't be as reckless with their bodies when they have to face the consequences immediately and not decades down the road.

And for the record, it's not about concussions. Concussions are a red herring, a bit of legerdemain intended to distract us from the real challenge facing the sport. It's about the accumulation of tiny impacts made on every play, aided by the false sense of security polycarbonate shells bring.

people will still throw their bodies around and be reckless, I played rugby and no one gave any :censored:s about their bodies, I hade my bell rung in every practice, and in games it was worse. in football it happened maybe twice during my entire high school playing career.

i think it's more of a problem with nobody wearing mouth guards anymore, which do help prevent concussions

[Gothamite]

Nobody's suggesting that the change will happen overnight. It'll take years for players' attitudes to change.

If you were getting your "bell rung" at every practice, you were doing it wrong.

[wonderbread]

Nobody's suggesting that the change will happen overnight. It'll take years for players' attitudes to change.

If you were getting your "bell rung" at every practice, you were doing it wrong.

no i wasn't, it was people taking me out when i would be ten yards away from the play

[Gothamite]

Then your teammates were doing it wrong, as were your coaches for allowing it.

And mouth guards would be good (as would relatively minor rules changes like eliminating the 3-point stance), but this isn't really about concussions...

[wonderbread]

Then your teammates were doing it wrong, as were your coaches for allowing it.

And mouth guards would be good (as would relatively minor rules changes like eliminating the 3-point stance), but this isn't really about concussions...

why get rid of the three point stance, and I'm sure they were doing it wrong which is why i quit

[Gothamite]

Eliminating the three-point stance was one of the first tactics suggested when CTE was becoming acknowledged. It gives linemen too much leverage and intensifies the first impact when the ball is snapped.

[Gothamite]

I agree that coaches need to be held responsible, so games aren't as reckless and dangerous as yours were. There's no excuse.

That recklessness isn't actually predictive of future behavior, however, especially when we start to hold adults responsible for it. We won't see it in the pros if we don't encourage it in youth football.

[wonderbread]

i still think even with it played the right way you would be creating worse problems than eliminating them.

[Cosmic]

If Gothamite is on the anti-helmet warpath again, then I think this is the part where I say if getting rid of helmets is too radical, then the physics dictate that helmets should not be hard on the outside; they should be soft and bigger than they are now. It spreads the force of an impact over a longer period of time and lessens the force actually experiences by the player's brain.

[Jungle Jim]

[Harmening]

Facemask needs work...

[CubsFanBudMan]

Facemask needs work...

Must be a punter. But look at those beautiful helmet stripes.

[Cosmic]

Also doubles as a Faraday cage. No more lightning delays!