Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Lombardi Never Tolerated Head to Head Hits
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jaybadger82" data-source="post: 503277" data-attributes="member: 6211"><p>Yeah, I don't believe it's reasonable to think that any combination of rule changes/safety equipment can eradicate the risk of injury and concussions. From a practical standpoint, it's more a matter of reducing the risk such that the sport isn't destroyed by its reputation for long-term negative health affects.</p><p> </p><p>I don't think the bike helmet analogy is a good one: I would recommend a helmet to anyone riding a skateboard, bike, or motorcycle. The helmet primarily protects wearers from fracturing their skulls. The NFL's problem right now is concussion from repeated head trauma, not skull fracture. That's an important difference.</p><p> </p><p>Unlike riding or cycling, football is a contact sport involving repeated head trauma and when a player "puts on his armor," there's a psychological impact: when you've got your equipment on and you're jacked up for a game, you start thinking you're invincible and that sense of invincibility begins with the helmet.</p><p> </p><p>Regardless of what the rules might say, I'll tell you from experience that the helmet is often used by offensive and defensive players alike as a tool for applying a force. Smaller tacklers will lead with the helmet when attempting to bring down a larger player, just like smaller ball-carriers often try to give larger defenders a shot before going down. The helmet masks the impact of these hits on the player delivering the shot and it magnifies the force on the player struck because the exterior surface is hard and unforgiving. That's just how it is on the field: hard-shelled helmets invites dangerous play. <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/04/hines-ward-if-you-want-to-prevent-concussions-take-the-helmet-off/" target="_blank">Players understand this.</a></p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Interesting stuff but I don't share your conclusions.</p><p> </p><p>My layman's understanding of concussions is that they are basically the result of one's brain striking the inside of the skull with too much force or velocity. I can imagine how rotational force would contribute to the problem and <a href="http://www.fastcodesign.com/1671752/why-nfl-helmets-will-never-be-concussion-proof" target="_blank">Physicists seem to think</a> that that the problem is pretty baked into the nature of the sport.</p><p> </p><p>I'm not sure how many folks (outside of Hines Ward- see first link above) would seriously advocate for the <em>elimination</em> of helmets tomorrow. I just question the utility of today's hard-shelled designs. They're swell for preventing skull fractures but if the goal is to prevent force from <em>affecting the brain inside the skull</em>, then the hard exterior surface doesn't seem to accomplish much except to diffuse force across a wider surface area. The problem, as described above, is that players tend to use helmets' hard exteriors aggressively.</p><p> </p><p>In terms of concussion prevention, it seems like the padding within helmets is what actually does the important work of quickly reducing the force of football collisions and protecting the brain from concussion...</p><p> </p><p>...Many of the recent rule changes have been targeted at reducing the number and severity of collisions on the field and these rule changes are probably more important than helmet technologies in fixing the sport's problem. But I believe replacing hard-shelled helmets with soft-exterior models would effectively nip the tendency amongst players to use the helmet as a dangerous implement on the field.</p><p> </p><p>FWIW, the sport of rugby is just as physical as football. <a href="http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Rugby-vs-The-NFL.html" target="_blank">Rugby players wear far less padding and headgear is optional, yet the rate of injury is significantly lower than football.</a> This isn't because the sport is less physical. Rather <em>the nature of the contact is different</em>: less about getting a running start in order to smash into one another and more about tackling with proper form. IMO, the absence of padding has a significant impact on the psychology of players in learning and practicing proper form.</p><p> </p><p>(If anyone is still reading at this point) Do you remember those bulbous-looking, over-sized helmets worn by a few players the last couple years? What's the story on those?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jaybadger82, post: 503277, member: 6211"] Yeah, I don't believe it's reasonable to think that any combination of rule changes/safety equipment can eradicate the risk of injury and concussions. From a practical standpoint, it's more a matter of reducing the risk such that the sport isn't destroyed by its reputation for long-term negative health affects. I don't think the bike helmet analogy is a good one: I would recommend a helmet to anyone riding a skateboard, bike, or motorcycle. The helmet primarily protects wearers from fracturing their skulls. The NFL's problem right now is concussion from repeated head trauma, not skull fracture. That's an important difference. Unlike riding or cycling, football is a contact sport involving repeated head trauma and when a player "puts on his armor," there's a psychological impact: when you've got your equipment on and you're jacked up for a game, you start thinking you're invincible and that sense of invincibility begins with the helmet. Regardless of what the rules might say, I'll tell you from experience that the helmet is often used by offensive and defensive players alike as a tool for applying a force. Smaller tacklers will lead with the helmet when attempting to bring down a larger player, just like smaller ball-carriers often try to give larger defenders a shot before going down. The helmet masks the impact of these hits on the player delivering the shot and it magnifies the force on the player struck because the exterior surface is hard and unforgiving. That's just how it is on the field: hard-shelled helmets invites dangerous play. [URL='http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/04/hines-ward-if-you-want-to-prevent-concussions-take-the-helmet-off/']Players understand this.[/URL] Interesting stuff but I don't share your conclusions. My layman's understanding of concussions is that they are basically the result of one's brain striking the inside of the skull with too much force or velocity. I can imagine how rotational force would contribute to the problem and [URL='http://www.fastcodesign.com/1671752/why-nfl-helmets-will-never-be-concussion-proof']Physicists seem to think[/URL] that that the problem is pretty baked into the nature of the sport. I'm not sure how many folks (outside of Hines Ward- see first link above) would seriously advocate for the [I]elimination[/I] of helmets tomorrow. I just question the utility of today's hard-shelled designs. They're swell for preventing skull fractures but if the goal is to prevent force from [I]affecting the brain inside the skull[/I], then the hard exterior surface doesn't seem to accomplish much except to diffuse force across a wider surface area. The problem, as described above, is that players tend to use helmets' hard exteriors aggressively. In terms of concussion prevention, it seems like the padding within helmets is what actually does the important work of quickly reducing the force of football collisions and protecting the brain from concussion... ...Many of the recent rule changes have been targeted at reducing the number and severity of collisions on the field and these rule changes are probably more important than helmet technologies in fixing the sport's problem. But I believe replacing hard-shelled helmets with soft-exterior models would effectively nip the tendency amongst players to use the helmet as a dangerous implement on the field. FWIW, the sport of rugby is just as physical as football. [URL='http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Rugby-vs-The-NFL.html']Rugby players wear far less padding and headgear is optional, yet the rate of injury is significantly lower than football.[/URL] This isn't because the sport is less physical. Rather [I]the nature of the contact is different[/I]: less about getting a running start in order to smash into one another and more about tackling with proper form. IMO, the absence of padding has a significant impact on the psychology of players in learning and practicing proper form. (If anyone is still reading at this point) Do you remember those bulbous-looking, over-sized helmets worn by a few players the last couple years? What's the story on those? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Pkrjones
Capitol 8805
Latest posts
M
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: mradtke66
18 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Badgers Football 2025-2026
Latest: Voyageur
46 minutes ago
Wisconsin Badgers Forum
Movies and TV shows Thread
Latest: Voyageur
Today at 1:29 PM
Movies and Entertainment
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: CarryTheG14
Today at 11:42 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 9:48 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Lombardi Never Tolerated Head to Head Hits
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
