Football safety :

[Capt. Tuttle]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

 

[retro44]

it would be much safer if they tested for steriods once a month if you are under contract and or scholarship,then you will an improvement

 

[RMH44]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

I think so...no need to eliminate helmets, just loose the face masks.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Hockey people say head injuries have gone way up since the helmet was mandated in 1979. The better protected people are, the harder players play- there by negating the better protection.

 

[Rocco]

They do away with helmets, might as well include a nice set of dentures in their contracts.

 

[Tornado91]

Same reason recorded boxing deaths went up with the introduction of padded gloves. It allows more direct head trauma with less damage to the weapon.

 

[Faegan]

I think that there are so many clear plays where players get away with using their helmets/facemasks illegally. The answer is simple: eject players without warnings that do it, and have suspensions for plays that are missed and found upon review of game tape.

 

[orangenirvana]

Get rid of all equipment - pads and helmets.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Rugby has it right. Players feel invincible with helmets on. You would think, based on pen and paper description of the sports, Rugby would have more injuries. Not even close to the case.

 

[Millhouse]

uh football wasn't exactly safe pre pads and helmets.

it's easy to get too cute with moral hazard arguments.

helmets more than offset the costs of riskier behavior

 

[OrangeMojo]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

would it be safer? yeah, probably

would it be as fun to watch? not at all

and comparing back to the pre-helmet/padding days of football is pretty useless as those guys weren't playing with guys anywhere near the size and strength of current players

 

[NovaOrange]

I say no without a helmet your going to have several players getting messed up when they hit there head on the grass surface. I have had 3 kids get concussions at flag football practice over the past 7 years and I have only had 2 players get concussions in tackle over the same period of time

 

[OrangePA]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

Yup.

 

[xc84]

Maybe an even swap. Less protection means players would not be as wreckless with their bodies and use their head as a weapon. Less padding means less protection and therefore, some hits will cause injuries that would have been avoided had protection have been worn.

 

[RF2044]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

That sounds a lot like rugby.

But one implication of not having all that armor in rugby is that those guys don't launch themselves and use their bodies as projectile weapons. They hit hard, but below the shoulders and above the knees.

I'm not advocating the removal of football pads. But I do think that players are more inclined to look to lay somebody out without regards to safety when they're effectively armored up from head to toe.

 

[orangenirvana]

uh football wasn't exactly safe pre pads and helmets.

it's easy to get too cute with moral hazard arguments.

helmets more than offset the costs of riskier behavior

No contact sport is 100% safe. There would still be injuries of course, just like there are in basketball, rugby, wrestling, etc.

But with sufficient rule changes, the devastating brain deterioration would be vastly reduced, and in turn playing careers would increase (the longer star players play, the better the sport).

The game of football will need to be revolutionized. I personally have no problem with that.

Of course, I'm more chess (strategy) than monster trucks (tackles that result in unconsciousness).

would it be safer? yeah, probably

would it be as fun to watch? not at all

I disagree.

To me, the enjoyment of football is not only the competitive nature of the sport, but even more than that - the chess-like strategies.

It's the ultimate team sport, unifying 11 men and getting them all on the same page in order to beat the opponent with game adjustments. That would not change. And there would still be contact and numerous one-on-one battles on the field throughout the course of a single play - wrestling matches in the trenches, pass coverage, etc.

I'm just not into the huge hits that result in receivers being knocked out wondering if they'll ever wake up again.

And as I said above - the safer the sport, the longer star players can play, which is good for the sport.

Not to say the blood-thirsty meatheads who watch football for the bone-jarring hits from the comfort of their couches are wrong...

 

[RMH44]

Hockey people say head injuries have gone way up since the helmet was mandated in 1979. The better protected people are, the harder players play- there by negating the better protection.

Completely different scenario. Hockey players (usually) hit shoulder to shoulder and are penalized for leaving their feet when delivering a hit. I think hockey helmets tend to do more protecting from the "secondary" impacts i.e. head bouncing off the boards or ice due to contact with other players.

 

[Orangemen]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

How many concussions do they have in Rugby?

I have no idea, but I imagine it would answer your question.

 

[orangenirvana]

Completely different scenario. Hockey players (usually) hit shoulder to shoulder and are penalized for leaving their feet when delivering a hit. I think hockey helmets tend to do more protecting from the "secondary" impacts i.e. head bouncing off the boards or ice due to contact with other players.

I think you may have missed his point. There are more head injuries now than back when players didn't wear helmets. Why do you think that is?

 

[All4SU]

Most of those questions are addressed here:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2027053,00.html

 

[RMH44]

I think you may have missed his point. There are more head injuries now than back when players didn't wear helmets. Why do you think that is?

You're right...reading comp issues on my end.

I think one issue is that head injuries are more widely reported and taken far more seriously than in the past. Additionally, hockey players are getting bigger and faster which leads to some really violent collisions.

Many old-school hockey people despise the face shields and blame them for the increase in high sticking incidents.

Ultimately, I think players in all collision sports need to have more respect for their opponents...head-hunting needs to be severely punished.

 

[OrangeMojo]

I disagree.

To me, the enjoyment of football is not only the competitive nature of the sport, but even more than that - the chess-like strategies.

It's the ultimate team sport, unifying 11 men and getting them all on the same page in order to beat the opponent with game adjustments. That would not change. And there would still be contact and numerous one-on-one battles on the field throughout the course of a single play - wrestling matches in the trenches, pass coverage, etc.

I'm just not into the huge hits that result in receivers being knocked out wondering if they'll ever wake up again.

And as I said above - the safer the sport, the longer star players can play, which is good for the sport.

Not to say the blood-thirsty meatheads who watch football for the bone-jarring hits from the comfort of their couches are wrong...

you know, there just might be a middle ground between not wearing pads/helmets and having huge life-threatening hits for blood thirsty meatheads (good lord).

For my entire lifetime football has been a game played in pads and helmets - if you remove those it becomes a different game to me and one that is less enjoyable to watch. I've watched rugby games, and I don't enjoy them as much.

There are rules that can be put in place to keep players safer, and I'm all for them. They can be implemented without altering the game back to an almost unrecognizable form.

 

[Millhouse]

make everyone wear kelso helmets

we have pads to protect people from getting hit hard with hard objects. why not put pads on the hard objects?

but these stupid knuckleheads are too concerned with looking cool

 

[sutomcat]

Would football be safer with no helmets, limited padding and only grass fields?
Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk 2

Yes. Without question.

Would it be as entertaining to watch?

Not so sure about that.

 

[Guinness]

The game of football will need to be revolutionized. I personally have no problem with that.

I think it is safe to say the football we know will not be the football our kids and grandkids know. I don't believe the NFL will ever go away but it will fall from it's perch atop the American sport world much like boxing did. As more NFL players die young and others like Kurt Warner and Troy Aikman comment publicly that based on what we know now about concussion and long term damages they would not let their kids play the more parents are going to steer their kids to sports with less risk.