Comments on: Aikman suggests getting rid of helmets

By: County K 66ers

County K 66ers — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:35:06 +0000

Pigsty said:
There are no helmets in boxing.
There are brain contusions in boxing.
There is subarachnoid brain hemorrhaging in boxing.
There are epidural, subdural & parenchymal brain hematomas in boxing.
There is diffuse axonal brain injury in boxing.
There is irreversible brain damage in boxing.
There are brain deaths in boxing.
There is no shortage of brain dead idiots in sports, including Troy Aikman.
Injuries resulting from padded gloves. Take off the gloves and you’ll see a decrease in all of the above.

By: bear

bear — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:40:36 +0000

The problem here is it is no longer tackle football. The tackling in this league is horrible. Everyone want to knock the guy out. That was not the intention of the game when it was invented. Everyone wants to get on Sportscenter so they feel they need that big hit. The game is just as good if not better played as was meant to be played. I agree with Troy Aikmen.

By: urallwrthlss&weak

urallwrthlss&weak — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:43:48 +0000

Concussions are as much about the brain accelerating into and impacting on the inside of the skull as they are about the skull accelerating and impacting on the inside of the helmet. Improved helmet design only addresses the latter. As long as humans have brains in their skulls, concussions will be a part of impact sports. Its physics and physiology. Period. Aikman’s correct, eliminate the desire for high deceleration in football by removing helmets, concussions go away.

By: dave

dave — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:08:14 +0000

What separates the NFL and makes it that much more popular than all other sports is the speed and ferociousness of the game. When ESPN shows their highlights its mostly about great hits. If you make it like rugby than prepare to watch the rating’s plummet. Just make a better helmet, don’t screw around with success

By: slipkid

slipkid — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:01:04 +0000

there is the seed of a good idea in it. the helmet design needs some fixing.
i agree, make them wear mouthpieces and get rid of the humongous grilles.
in the olden days ballplayers were actually tough. and they played both ways. nowadays they hide behind the gear.
end the star system.

By: eagledan

eagledan — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:55:12 +0000

Having played Rugby for 14 years, I suffered my share of Concussions, including one that put me out over night.
Removing helmets wont stop them from happening, but would reduce some of them!
The little pusy CB’s like Deion, would never make a tackle again!

By: Cleric John Preston

Cleric John Preston — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:37:11 +0000

Rugby doesn’t have a forward pass. Everything is laterals, so the speed of colisions is so different, as are the angles.
Lets honestly stop being STUPID and equating Rugby to football. If they were the same, why isn’t everyone on here also big rugby fans? Thought so.
Here’s a better idea, Aikman; makes players use mouthpieces, buckle their chinstraps and use the best helmets available.
The tech and equipment is there, but you still have dummies not using it, and thats their choice. Risk reward. I’m suprised when I see anyone not a kicker use a soft chin-strap, but you still see it. YOu also see players constantly unbuckling their helmets everytime they make a play. How many times do they not get re-buckled properly?
Concussions are a problem but removing helmets ain’t teh solution.

By: TigerS Boy ToY

TigerS Boy ToY — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:34:32 +0000

The first football players wore leather helmets ..
Does anyone know if the Indians ever played the Piligrims in a football game.hmmmmmmmmmm
merry x-mas

By: Tony Miller

Tony Miller — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:17:59 +0000

It does seem that the league is full of head hunters now. That most players have lost the fundamentals of tackling. So, they lead with there head in all the wrong ways.
It think we need to get back to players playing and learning the game. Coaches coaching. The helmet is not the problem. It’s supposed to be a protective device.
I’ve played many game without a helmet, I am sure we all have. It’s called pick up. And, the majority of the time you don’t suffer head injuries. But, we know the helmet prevents serious injury and if it helps just once it’s worth it.
Still, fundamentals need to change. And, players who lead with the TOP of there heads need to be taken out, fined, whatever….And, the catch of it all, they need to be left to play. Catch 22.
Get in position, head up, hit and wrap. Some how that has gone away. People just want to fly around with abandoned. Flying around works, abandoned doesn’t.

By: dboom92

dboom92 — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:15:00 +0000

A few years back some doctor proved that padded helmets would reduce head injury, but the NFL felt the sound of colliding helmets was too important to the game.

By: Nate_G

Nate_G — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:13:43 +0000

Someone else already said it. Rugby is played without helmets, and they don’t have much in terms of concussions… that’s because players know how to protect their heads… NFL players don’t know this b/c they are too reliant on the helpments…
kind of like all the sheeple out there who don’t know how to protect themselves b/c they think the government will do it for them.

By: smushrodrigez

smushrodrigez — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:11:36 +0000

Same thing with hockey. Soon as players started wearing facemasks, the stick to face penalties went up.

By: yem123

yem123 — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:48:40 +0000

Troy has a good point. There are less head injuries in rugby.
The more high tech the helmets get, the more reckless players are with their heads.

By: Run Ramone Run

Run Ramone Run — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:40:59 +0000

“leading a few economists to argue for the installation of a spike in the steering wheel to encourage “safer” driving…”
LOL It would work, too!

By: leaguemvp

leaguemvp — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:37:04 +0000

Bob Buckowski says:
December 22, 2009 9:41 PM
Troy Aikman, is that the guy whose mouth looks like it should have a hook in it?
No, he’s the guy with all those super bowl rings.

By: TheDPR

TheDPR — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:20:36 +0000

Like many other posters, I believe helmets can be improved and that players should be required to wear mouth guards. Also, elimination of the problem isn’t possible but continual improvement of equipment is. I don’t think you need to change the game or its rules, though.

By: meyerb72

meyerb72 — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:49:12 +0000

Florio,
From an economics standpoint, Aikman’s argument makes sense and he is actually describing what we call “moral hazard” (you may have read about that recently when the Treasury and Fed bailed out those mega-banks). It is a situation where one party is insulated from bearing all possible risks, causing said party to behave in a different manner than they would if bearing all the risk. In this case, helmets lead players to believe that they are “safe” from risk, causing them to play in a risky manner. Removing helmets would take away the insulation, likely leading to safer play and fewer concussions.
On the other hand, this argument rests on the assumption that football players would act “rationally,” and not act like a bunch of roid freaks with invincibility complexes…
Another well known instance of moral hazard involves increasing saftey features in cars (seat belts, airbags, crash sensors, etc) and the evidence that these features likely do not improve, on net, crash statistics; leading a few economists to argue for the installation of a spike in the steering wheel to encourage “safer” driving…

By: Rosenthal's babysitter

Rosenthal's babysitter — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:47:22 +0000

I agree with Aikman completely. He has the foresight to see where this trend will lead to: Flag football, or two-hand touch. Players need to accept the inherent risks as a part of the game, and, likewise, will have to play a little smarter and make the critical decision as to when to walk away from it.

By: LaBronx_James

LaBronx_James — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:35:27 +0000

While no helmets may improve the quality of tackles, it will just open things up for even more injuries. Did anyone see Brian Westbrook’s first concussion? It was a knee to the head. Not having a helmet on wouldn’t have improved the outcome of the blow, it may have made it worse.

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 08:22:27 +0000

Some fans wouldn’t care if these guys all died after their team wins a SB. The same that some NASCAR fans go to the races to watch the wrecks.

By: Carl

Carl — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:53:51 +0000

Florio, give credit where credit is due, Ditka has been saying this for years!

By: Pestilence1972

Pestilence1972 — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:51:40 +0000

Aikman is on to something here. Seriously.
I think there needs to be a study of Rugby players and concussions. Rugby might be equally as violent as the NFL. Now imagine Rugby players with NFL-style helmets on! Probably MORE violent.
I have felt for years that the NFL needs to consider going back to the soft (leather) helmets and remove the face masks. Those idiot DBs would be less likely to leave their feet head first with Shockey or Gonzalez coming down the middle. My guess is that, overall, form-tackling would improve as well.

By: hotchick

hotchick — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:36:57 +0000

It is worth thinking about. I believe removing the face mask is enough. But all this talk of softer shells and jelly instead of air…. If the head stops moving abrubtly and/or changes direction suddenly the brain is going to smash into the skull. The damage comes from the brain/skull collision, not the helmet to helmet hit.
A person can get a concussion without anything even touching the head.
Yes removing helmets will stop a guy from driving into a player or a pile head first. But what about the shoulder pad to head contact or the head to ground contact? Zero protection against that, which happens way more often, will equal more concussions.

By: EdgarSnyder

EdgarSnyder — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:27:38 +0000

yeah, tag football, I will go watch baseball or golf.

By: Newguy

Newguy — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:39:00 +0000

A redesign to a “soft” shell, with continous fiber reienforcement should reduce spearing and still protect the head against slamming against the ground and forearms etc.
It’s probably a more difficult political problem to implement than engineering and materials problem.

By: PatricktheDookie

PatricktheDookie — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:53:40 +0000

Leather helmets sound great to me.

By: smiley

smiley — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:23:55 +0000

Lavar did hit him pretty hard.

By: Bwa Ha Ha

Bwa Ha Ha — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 05:20:31 +0000

Glenn Beck said that too?
Would they have to tattoo the team logo on a guys head?
Wouldn’t that mess up the trade market?
So many questions of life can be answered here………

By: Ben Bernanke

Ben Bernanke — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:53:41 +0000

leatherheads

By: AutumnWind999

AutumnWind999 — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:25:12 +0000

“For years,” he writes, “I’ve said the best way to eliminate head injuries is to take away helmets. Players would be a lot less willing to jump in and stick their heads in if their noggins weren’t protected.
“I used to say that tongue-in-cheek. But I’m starting to believe that’s a pretty good idea.”
P.S. – I am not a crackpot.