Tua’s Broken Dome (now being placed on IR-out at least 4 games)

[Meatloaf63]

2 hours ago, Saint Doug said:

None of us saw Morse laying on his back trying to play Cats Cradle with hands. 

No use arguing, he took a bad stance and is going to defend it to the grave.

[Mr. WEO]

14 hours ago, Figster said:

It would be interesting If owners could offer a player bonus for wearing them.

 

Win, win, win for all concerned. 

 

Owners aren't here to give out extra money, that's for sure.

 

14 hours ago, Saint Doug said:

None of us saw Morse laying on his back trying to play Cats Cradle with hands. 

 

This was covered multiple times in several posts upstream.  Scroll up.

 

[Figster]

13 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Owners aren't here to give out extra money, that's for sure.

 

 

This was covered multiple times in several posts upstream.  Scroll up.

 

When a starting QB goes down with an injury. Especially one that may be career ending.

 

I call it protecting the most valuable player on the team, protecting your investment as an owner IMO.

 

Owners would jump at the chance IMO.

 

Its good business...(protecting brains)

Edited 17 hours ago by Figster

[Mr. WEO]

12 hours ago, Figster said:

When a starting QB goes down with an injury. Especially one that may be career ending.

 

I call it protecting the most valuable player on the team, protecting your investment as an owner IMO.

 

Owners would jump at the chance IMO.

 

Its good business...(protecting brains)

it hasn’t really been shown,  clinically, that  wearing these things will actually lower incidence of concussion or post career disorders.

 

Theres nothing stopping owners for adding any type of bonus to a contract.  None of them do for wearing these things therefore they don’t believe they would protect their investment 

[RiotAct]

Sal mentioned a few minutes ago on WGR that Tua was at the Jags-Bills game last night?

[Figster]

22 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

it hasn’t really been shown,  clinically, that  wearing these things will actually lower incidence of concussion or post career disorders.

 

Theres nothing stopping owners for adding any type of bonus to a contract.  None of them do for wearing these things therefore they don’t believe they would protect their investment 

Wrong

 

Schools and sports programs across the country have successfully reduced and in some cases completely eliminated concussions all together. Parents are allowing more kids to participate and the kids themselves are playing with more confidence wearing the Guardian cap.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Figster said:

Wrong

 

Schools and sports programs across the country have successfully reduced and in some cases completely eliminated concussions all together. Parents are allowing more kids to participate and the kids themselves are playing with more confidence wearing the Guardian cap.

there is really no way that any piece of equipment “eliminates concussions”.  
 

I don’t doubt that parent feel more comfortable that they are doing something.  
 

wear in college or even high school are these being widely used?

[Figster]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

there is really no way that any piece of equipment “eliminates concussions”.  
 

I don’t doubt that parent feel more comfortable that they are doing something.  
 

wear in college or even high school are these being widely used?

Everywhere including the NFL in practices. I agree, no piece of equipment can guarantee you won't get a concussion. The Guardian cap however does guard against them and there have been documented cases of football programs reducing the number of concussions down to zero when used. The damage from concussions is cumulative with many going undetected IMO. The problem with concussions in the NFL is worst then it appears on the surface IMO.

 

It's a no brainer to ignore...

[Mr. WEO]

23 minutes ago, Figster said:

Everywhere including the NFL in practices. I agree, no piece of equipment can guarantee you won't get a concussion. The Guardian cap however does guard against them and there have been documented cases of football programs reducing the number of concussions down to zero when used. The damage from concussions is cumulative with many going undetected IMO. The problem with concussions in the NFL is worst then it appears on the surface IMO.

 

It's a no brainer to ignore...

if these caps did all that, every school district in the country would mandate them for liability reasons alone.  Yet they don’t.  Nor do colleges.  Forget the pros.  If players/parents/programs/schools felt that theses caps might get them to zero concussions, of course they would mandate them.

 

clearly they don’t believe in their purported effectiveness. 
 

CTE results from a  an entire life experience of countless small cranial impact/deceleration events.  Most pros who will display neuro deficits in the future—their fate was sealed before they were drafted. 

[Figster]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

if these caps did all that, every school district in the country would mandate them for liability reasons alone.  Yet they don’t.  Nor do colleges.  Forget the pros.  If players/parents/programs/schools felt that theses caps might get them to zero concussions, of course they would mandate them.

 

clearly they don’t believe in their purported effectiveness. 
 

CTE results from a  an entire life experience of countless small cranial impact/deceleration events.  Most pros who will display neuro deficits in the future—their fate was sealed before they were drafted. 

Takes time.  We have the makers of the Guardian cap coming into the picture doing something top of the line helmet makers haven't been able to accomplish. Eventually some form of Guardian protection will be mandated IMO. The technology needs to be built into the helmet to reduce its bulky appearance.

 

The damage from an entire life experience you speak of is why the Guardian cap is being implemented at an early age across the country.

 

TSW was discussing exterior helmet padding 15 years ago.

 

Takes time...

Edited 3 hours ago by Figster

[x-BillzeBubba]

 

[Mr. WEO]

24 minutes ago, Figster said:

Takes time.  We have the makers of the Guardian cap coming into the picture doing something top of the line helmet makers haven't been able to accomplish. Eventually some form of Guardian protection will be mandated IMO. The technology needs to be built into the helmet to reduce its bulky appearance.

 

The damage from an entire life experience you speak of is why the Guardian cap is being implemented at an early age across the country.

 

TSW was discussing exterior helmet padding 15 years ago.

 

Takes time...

 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9980188/:  ":These data suggest no difference in head kinematics data (PLA, PAA and total impacts) when GCs are worn. This study suggests GCs are not effective in reducing the magnitude of head impacts experienced by NCAA Division I American football players."

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5634228/:"The Guardian Cap failed to significantly improve the helmets' ability to mitigate impact forces at most locations. Limited evidence indicates how a reduction in GSI would provide clinically relevant benefits beyond reducing the risk of skull fracture or a similar catastrophic event."

 

https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/football-helmet-add-ons.htmls.    "Moreover, the effectiveness of these add-ons can vary significantly depending on the helmet model. The helmet model itself is crucial as it sets the baseline level of protection. While helmet shell add-ons can enhance a helmet's performance, it's important to note that a poor-performing helmet with an add-on may not perform as well as a high-performing helmet without an add-on.

It's also important to note that the reductions in accelerations and star scores are specific to the impact conditions used in our tests. As not everyone experiences these same impacts, individual risk will vary from the averages presented here. It must be stressed that regardless of the helmet or add-on used, any player can still sustain a concussion. Our results represent average risks across the football player population for a given head impact exposure and should not be interpreted as absolute risk measurements for individual players."

 

It's safe to say the data are not overwhelmingly in favor of these things.  The clinical data is minimal---most likely because the number of witnessed concussions (the only way to document them) is, given the sheer number of participants at every level and the almost infinite number of collisions experienced by them in a lifetime, small. And with so few players at any level using them (particularly in the NFL, where they essentially are unused in games), there can be no meaningful conclusion drawn form such miniscule sample sizes.  

 

 

[Sweats]

3 hours ago, RiotAct said:

Sal mentioned a few minutes ago on WGR that Tua was at the Jags-Bills game last night?

 

 

 

 

......is Tua aware he was at the game?

[Figster]

49 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9980188/:  ":These data suggest no difference in head kinematics data (PLA, PAA and total impacts) when GCs are worn. This study suggests GCs are not effective in reducing the magnitude of head impacts experienced by NCAA Division I American football players."

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5634228/:"The Guardian Cap failed to significantly improve the helmets' ability to mitigate impact forces at most locations. Limited evidence indicates how a reduction in GSI would provide clinically relevant benefits beyond reducing the risk of skull fracture or a similar catastrophic event."

 

https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/football-helmet-add-ons.htmls.    "Moreover, the effectiveness of these add-ons can vary significantly depending on the helmet model. The helmet model itself is crucial as it sets the baseline level of protection. While helmet shell add-ons can enhance a helmet's performance, it's important to note that a poor-performing helmet with an add-on may not perform as well as a high-performing helmet without an add-on.

It's also important to note that the reductions in accelerations and star scores are specific to the impact conditions used in our tests. As not everyone experiences these same impacts, individual risk will vary from the averages presented here. It must be stressed that regardless of the helmet or add-on used, any player can still sustain a concussion. Our results represent average risks across the football player population for a given head impact exposure and should not be interpreted as absolute risk measurements for individual players."

 

It's safe to say the data are not overwhelmingly in favor of these things.  The clinical data is minimal---most likely because the number of witnessed concussions (the only way to document them) is, given the sheer number of participants at every level and the almost infinite number of collisions experienced by them in a lifetime, small. And with so few players at any level using them (particularly in the NFL, where they essentially are unused in games), there can be no meaningful conclusion drawn form such miniscule sample sizes.  

 

 

Mouth guard study suggests something ?

 

Limited evidence vs actual trial usage in sports programs showing a significant decrease in concussions?

 

Of course the helmet design itself matters.

 

This is your argument?

 

Side note : The safer barrier was added in racing because regardless of what was done inside the car hitting a solid wall with no give at high speeds without them could cause serious injury to the driver or worse. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Figster