|
|
Post by ratbastich on Apr 29, 2024 14:00:17 GMT -5
They should add airbags
|
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:00:24 GMT -5
They need to figure out a way to use the tech in motorcycle helmets. Huge difference in protection. Huge! Just got to figure out how to combat the heat. Curious to see how the Guardians hold up during a full game vs practice. Would grabbing someone from one of those nubs be a penalty like a facemask? So many questions. Yes, this. |
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 29, 2024 14:01:15 GMT -5
lol, what? Taking off pads will make it safer? How about eliminating the contact which would make more sense than taking off the protection during contract? I think what he is suggesting, is that taking off helmets and pads, you wont see the violent hits anymore, especially the head shots. Accidentally it might happen, but I cant see a Safety or LB coming in to hit a player head to head on a hit on purpose. WRs coming over the middle wont get those bell ringing head shots. RBs wont get shots to the head as much if neither the RB nor defender are wearing the helmet. However, Rugby actually has a slightly higher concussion rate than the NFL... They dont use pads or helmets. Its not really a significant amount however.  As I said though, the accidental shots would be brutal. What they keep doing is changing the rules which from this front, is probably the best option now that they know what it’sdoing to the brain years after. They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football |
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:02:45 GMT -5
I think what he is suggesting, is that taking off helmets and pads, you wont see the violent hits anymore, especially the head shots. Accidentally it might happen, but I cant see a Safety or LB coming in to hit a player head to head on a hit on purpose. WRs coming over the middle wont get those bell ringing head shots. RBs wont get shots to the head as much if neither the RB nor defender are wearing the helmet. However, Rugby actually has a slightly higher concussion rate than the NFL... They dont use pads or helmets. Its not really a significant amount however. As I said though, the accidental shots would be brutal. What they keep doing is changing the rules which from this front, is probably the best option now that they know what it’sdoing to the brain years after. They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football The tackling is different because they don't have pads protecting them from the impact. You are making their entire point in an attempt to disagree. |
|
jerky
Special Teams
Posts: 1,049 
|
Post by jerky on Apr 29, 2024 14:03:54 GMT -5
I think what he is suggesting, is that taking off helmets and pads, you wont see the violent hits anymore, especially the head shots. Accidentally it might happen, but I cant see a Safety or LB coming in to hit a player head to head on a hit on purpose. WRs coming over the middle wont get those bell ringing head shots. RBs wont get shots to the head as much if neither the RB nor defender are wearing the helmet. However, Rugby actually has a slightly higher concussion rate than the NFL... They dont use pads or helmets. Its not really a significant amount however. As I said though, the accidental shots would be brutal. What they keep doing is changing the rules which from this front, is probably the best option now that they know what it’sdoing to the brain years after. They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football I think the point is if they got rid of helmets and pads, the end result would be that hitting in football would change. It would probably end up being more like rugby. No one is going to launch themselves headfirst at someone else without a helmet on. |
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 29, 2024 14:12:24 GMT -5
They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football The tackling is different because they don't have pads protecting them from the impact. You are making their entire point in an attempt to disagree. hey Mike. They don’t pass against zone defenses so save the lame attempt. It’s not the same sport and if you played either or both you would know. |
|
|
|
Post by SG88 on Apr 29, 2024 14:12:44 GMT -5
My thoughts are that even though they look odd, I'm all for player safety. If you actually were, you never would have started watching football in the first place. That goes for anyone who claims they care about player safety. You can't be a football fan for any length of time and be "all for player safety." It just makes absolutely zero sense, it is double think. These two things can not both be true at the same time. It would be the same as a boxing fan being for "boxer safety". Or a professional wrestling fan being against steroid use. Or a NHRA fan being about reducing our carbon footprint. Or a Taylor Swift fan being all about the music. Some things simply do not make sense together and a football fan being "all for player safety" happens to be one of them. Um ok. I guess I'm never watching football again since I am not allowed to enjoy the sport and care about their safety and well/being at the same time. 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:14:55 GMT -5
The tackling is different because they don't have pads protecting them from the impact. You are making their entire point in an attempt to disagree. hey Mike. They don’t pass against zone defenses so save the lame attempt. It’s not the same sport and if you played either or both you would know. I played rugby. I know it isn't the same sport. I am not agreeing with them but your "argument" is supporting their point. So if you disagree, try an argument that doesn't support their point. |
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:18:44 GMT -5
If you actually were, you never would have started watching football in the first place. That goes for anyone who claims they care about player safety. You can't be a football fan for any length of time and be "all for player safety." It just makes absolutely zero sense, it is double think. These two things can not both be true at the same time. It would be the same as a boxing fan being for "boxer safety". Or a professional wrestling fan being against steroid use. Or a NHRA fan being about reducing our carbon footprint. Or a Taylor Swift fan being all about the music. Some things simply do not make sense together and a football fan being "all for player safety" happens to be one of them. Um ok. I guess I'm never watching football again since I am not allowed to enjoy the sport and care about their safety and well/being at the same time. 😆 Oh, I didn't say you aren't allowed to lie to yourself. Go ahead. But when you have contradictory thoughts don't expect others to believe the nonsense. You cannot both care about player safety and support a sport like football. Sorry, but it is contradictory. I hear people say it all the time and they actually believe they care about player safety. If everyone who claims to care actually did care, the sport would have failed from lack of interest decades ago. So no. No football fan actually cares even if they think they do. |
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 29, 2024 14:26:21 GMT -5
hey Mike. They don’t pass against zone defenses so save the lame attempt. It’s not the same sport and if you played either or both you would know. I played rugby. I know it isn't the same sport. I am not agreeing with them but your "argument" is supporting their point. So if you disagree, try an argument that doesn't support their point. it doesn’t support their point. How about take all day to explain it your way and then I’ll discredit it? |
|
cdngfan
Starter
Posts: 3,788
Member is Online
|
Post by cdngfan on Apr 29, 2024 14:26:32 GMT -5
Player safety is probably the #1 issue facing the future of the NFL.
Doesn’t mean it’s their only consideration, but it has an impact on the quality of the game, huge financial liability, and the ability to attract youth to the game competing with basketball and baseball.
And whether they change the drop tackle rules or where these crazy helmets, we all keep watching. Don’t think that’s not discussed at the highest levels of the league. It is. And they know you’re not becoming a CFL fan because of the helmets.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:31:32 GMT -5
Little history here on helmets, really short on detail.
Had a broken skull issue so they started wearing leather helmets (this is why the rugby, no pads argument doesn't work. Different sport, more spread out and collisions will always be at higher speeds no matter what you do).
They then saw a large increase in serious neck injuries due to the leather helmets' interaction friction. So the solution to the neck injury issue was the hard shell smooth helmet.
Now we have a concussion issue with the hard shell helmet. Which is bad, but better than cracked skulls and broken necks.
So now our solution is to have a soft shell on the outside of the hard shell to go back to the interaction friction issue. So less concussions and more broken necks forthcoming.
Football is a collision sport. There is no way to make the sport "safe". Which is why the "all for player safety" point is hypocrisy at it's finest for any football fan.
If you want to make the sport safer, the best way to do that is to slow down the players. The NFL has zero interest in creating rules that do that. So any talk about the NFL being interested in player safety is just PR bullshit. They don't care, they are only interested in appearing to care to appease fans who pretend to care.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:39:59 GMT -5
I played rugby. I know it isn't the same sport. I am not agreeing with them but your "argument" is supporting their point. So if you disagree, try an argument that doesn't support their point. it doesn’t support their point. How about take all day to explain it your way and then I’ll discredit it? Your defense point got close to it. Rugby tackling is a much slower speeds because less of the field is in play for serious collisions and when they do happen they are at slower speeds and in more confined space. Without completely overhauling the entire game to make it a completely different game, no pads will not result in the lower speed collisions in football that you find in rugby. Yes without pads players will tackle differently to protect themselves, it will still result in many more injuries than you will find in rugby simply because of the space a speeds involved. Whenever trying to solve a single problem we end up creating new and foreseen issues just because we want to appear to be doing "something" about it. The kick off return rules are actually quite good to protect players by closing the space and slowing down the players prior to impact. |
|
|
|
Post by SG88 on Apr 29, 2024 14:41:17 GMT -5
Um ok. I guess I'm never watching football again since I am not allowed to enjoy the sport and care about their safety and well/being at the same time. 😆 Oh, I didn't say you aren't allowed to lie to yourself. Go ahead. But when you have contradictory thoughts don't expect others to believe the nonsense. You cannot both care about player safety and support a sport like football. Sorry, but it is contradictory. I hear people say it all the time and they actually believe they care about player safety. If everyone who claims to care actually did care, the sport would have failed from lack of interest decades ago. So no. No football fan actually cares even if they think they do. I get your argument. I just don't agree with it. A spectator can enjoy the sport and also care about a player's wellbeing out there IMO. I think it is a blessing every time they make it off unharmed. How about a player's parents who both love their son and are football fans Respectably, how are they supposed to feel in your opinion? |
|
|
|
Post by Danke Schoen on Apr 29, 2024 14:43:04 GMT -5
I think what he is suggesting, is that taking off helmets and pads, you wont see the violent hits anymore, especially the head shots. Accidentally it might happen, but I cant see a Safety or LB coming in to hit a player head to head on a hit on purpose. WRs coming over the middle wont get those bell ringing head shots. RBs wont get shots to the head as much if neither the RB nor defender are wearing the helmet. However, Rugby actually has a slightly higher concussion rate than the NFL... They dont use pads or helmets. Its not really a significant amount however. As I said though, the accidental shots would be brutal. What they keep doing is changing the rules which from this front, is probably the best option now that they know what it’sdoing to the brain years after. They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football I think that's what he's getting at. Remove the pads/helmet and players will tackle differently. |
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 29, 2024 14:45:37 GMT -5
it doesn’t support their point. How about take all day to explain it your way and then I’ll discredit it? Your defense point got close to it. Rugby tackling is a much slower speeds because less of the field is in play for serious collisions and when they do happen they are at slower speeds and in more confined space. Without completely overhauling the entire game to make it a completely different game, no pads will not result in the lower speed collisions in football that you find in rugby. Yes without pads players will tackle differently to protect themselves, it will still result in many more injuries than you will find in rugby simply because of the space a speeds involved. Whenever trying to solve a single problem we end up creating new and foreseen issues just because we want to appear to be doing "something" about it. The kick off return rules are actually quite good to protect players by closing the space and slowing down the players prior to impact. Ty for my point that it isn’t the same game so the idea removing pads will the game safer is false. Great |
|
|
|
Post by repeatchamps on Apr 29, 2024 14:48:50 GMT -5
I imagine they will affect the QB's downfield vision is the linemen are wearing them. Add that to the Jones excuse scroll.  You stole my reply idea!  |
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:58:06 GMT -5
Oh, I didn't say you aren't allowed to lie to yourself. Go ahead. But when you have contradictory thoughts don't expect others to believe the nonsense. You cannot both care about player safety and support a sport like football. Sorry, but it is contradictory. I hear people say it all the time and they actually believe they care about player safety. If everyone who claims to care actually did care, the sport would have failed from lack of interest decades ago. So no. No football fan actually cares even if they think they do. I get your argument. I just don't agree with it. A spectator can enjoy the sport and also care about a player's wellbeing out there IMO. I think it is a blessing every time they make it off unharmed. How about a player's parents who both love their son and are football fans Respectably, how are they supposed to feel in your opinion? Not sure what you are asking. People can feel however they want to feel. That is an unanswerable question. What I am saying from a logical standpoint is you can't actually care about player safety and be a fan of a dangerous sport. You can feel like you do, feelings are of course irrational by nature. But my point is to recognize no matter how you "feel" on the subject, if you watch and support the sport you do not actually care about the safety of these players. You can disagree with my statement of reality all you want but it doesn't make it not true. A football fan cannot care about player safety, those two thoughts are contradictory and contradictory thoughts can not both be true at the same time. Would we prefer the sport to be safer than it currently is? Sure. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. But if the game were to be made safe, nobody would be watching the sport at all anymore. It would be boring. |
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 14:59:19 GMT -5
Your defense point got close to it. Rugby tackling is a much slower speeds because less of the field is in play for serious collisions and when they do happen they are at slower speeds and in more confined space. Without completely overhauling the entire game to make it a completely different game, no pads will not result in the lower speed collisions in football that you find in rugby. Yes without pads players will tackle differently to protect themselves, it will still result in many more injuries than you will find in rugby simply because of the space a speeds involved. Whenever trying to solve a single problem we end up creating new and foreseen issues just because we want to appear to be doing "something" about it. The kick off return rules are actually quite good to protect players by closing the space and slowing down the players prior to impact. Ty for my point that it isn’t the same game so the idea removing pads will the game safer is false. Great You are welcome. I am always trying to be helpful. |
|
|
|
Post by Analyst on Apr 29, 2024 15:36:15 GMT -5
I think what he is suggesting, is that taking off helmets and pads, you wont see the violent hits anymore, especially the head shots. Accidentally it might happen, but I cant see a Safety or LB coming in to hit a player head to head on a hit on purpose. WRs coming over the middle wont get those bell ringing head shots. RBs wont get shots to the head as much if neither the RB nor defender are wearing the helmet. However, Rugby actually has a slightly higher concussion rate than the NFL... They dont use pads or helmets. Its not really a significant amount however. As I said though, the accidental shots would be brutal. What they keep doing is changing the rules which from this front, is probably the best option now that they know what it’sdoing to the brain years after. They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football Exactly the point qith this thinking. They won't tackle that way anymore. And they won't get those big head shots. I'm not agreeing with it since I haven't studied all the analysis on the subject but I get that angle of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 29, 2024 15:47:39 GMT -5
They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football Exactly the point qith this thinking. They won't tackle that way anymore. And they won't get those big head shots. I'm not agreeing with it since I haven't studied all the analysis on the subject but I get that angle of it. If we put them on ice with skates we can call it hockey too. Maybe the NFL never thought of that idea of removing pads. The idea originated right here. |
|
|
|
Post by jmike on Apr 29, 2024 15:58:37 GMT -5
Exactly the point qith this thinking. They won't tackle that way anymore. And they won't get those big head shots. I'm not agreeing with it since I haven't studied all the analysis on the subject but I get that angle of it. If we put them on ice with skates we can call it hockey too. Maybe the NFL never thought of that idea of removing pads. The idea originated right here. Football on ice skates would be both faster and more dangerous. Might be a blast to watch though. 100 yards of ice and players on skates? Walls instead of sidelines? The collisions would be incredible. Pass blocking would be virtually impossible. Couple of players would probably die each season also. |
|
|
|
Post by Rangers13 on Apr 29, 2024 16:10:25 GMT -5
If we put them on ice with skates we can call it hockey too. Maybe the NFL never thought of that idea of removing pads. The idea originated right here. Football on ice skates would be both faster and more dangerous. Might be a blast to watch though. 100 yards of ice and players on skates? Walls instead of sidelines? The collisions would be incredible. Pass blocking would be virtually impossible. Couple of players would probably die each season also. it’s called ice hockey but they took the pads offs and used a ball . . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Zimonami on Apr 29, 2024 16:11:11 GMT -5
Perhaps you're right. But, if they do indeed help to protect players, then I am ok with that trade-off. True, but it's got to affect the game. It looks like it would be adding at least a couple of inches in height. I could see defenses wearing the highest version allowable. I can see the coaches wanting every DLineman to wear these. Just another impediment in QB's downfield vision. It adds about 3" of height to obscure QB's downfield vision. |
|
|
|
Post by Zimonami on Apr 29, 2024 16:16:12 GMT -5
Um ok. I guess I'm never watching football again since I am not allowed to enjoy the sport and care about their safety and well/being at the same time. 😆 Oh, I didn't say you aren't allowed to lie to yourself. Go ahead. But when you have contradictory thoughts don't expect others to believe the nonsense. You cannot both care about player safety and support a sport like football. Sorry, but it is contradictory. I hear people say it all the time and they actually believe they care about player safety. If everyone who claims to care actually did care, the sport would have failed from lack of interest decades ago. So no. No football fan actually cares even if they think they do. Fans usually don't think twice when an opponent gets hurt. Only when one of their own starters gets hurt do they care. |
|
|
|
Post by lt56 on Apr 29, 2024 16:19:45 GMT -5
look ridiculous but hey if it can help reduce Concussions drastically then who cares how ridiculous it looks
|
|
|
|
Post by Analyst on Apr 29, 2024 16:21:40 GMT -5
If we put them on ice with skates we can call it hockey too. Maybe the NFL never thought of that idea of removing pads. The idea originated right here. Football on ice skates would be both faster and more dangerous. Might be a blast to watch though. 100 yards of ice and players on skates? Walls instead of sidelines? The collisions would be incredible. Pass blocking would be virtually impossible. Couple of players would probably die each season also. It already exists |
|
|
|
Post by Danke Schoen on Apr 29, 2024 16:23:11 GMT -5
If we put them on ice with skates we can call it hockey too. Maybe the NFL never thought of that idea of removing pads. The idea originated right here. Football on ice skates would be both faster and more dangerous. Might be a blast to watch though. 100 yards of ice and players on skates? Walls instead of sidelines? The collisions would be incredible. Pass blocking would be virtually impossible. Couple of players would probably die each season also. Two steps away from Rollerball. I'm fine with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Zimonami on Apr 29, 2024 16:23:32 GMT -5
It's coming!!!
NFFL
National Flag Football League.
They already started it in the 2023 Pro Bowl weekend
|
|
te88
Special Teams
Posts: 1,996
|
Post by te88 on Apr 29, 2024 20:32:43 GMT -5
I think what he is suggesting, is that taking off helmets and pads, you wont see the violent hits anymore, especially the head shots. Accidentally it might happen, but I cant see a Safety or LB coming in to hit a player head to head on a hit on purpose. WRs coming over the middle wont get those bell ringing head shots. RBs wont get shots to the head as much if neither the RB nor defender are wearing the helmet. However, Rugby actually has a slightly higher concussion rate than the NFL... They dont use pads or helmets. Its not really a significant amount however. As I said though, the accidental shots would be brutal. What they keep doing is changing the rules which from this front, is probably the best option now that they know what it’sdoing to the brain years after. They don’t tackle the same in rugby and the hitting is different. They would break their shoulders if they hit like football The only reason they hit the way they do in football is because the pads and helmets enable them to do so. |
|
