Jump to content
Woz

NFL/NFLPA release helmet testing results, 10 models now prohibited

Recommended Posts

Helmet testing results:

helmet1-767x1024.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have any sons, nephews, younger brothers playing in youth football and high school, you might want to have them check with their staffs to see if they're using any of the "red" helmets and see if those will be replaced ASAP. Even the "yellow" models should probably not be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to know the NFL is actually doing something... Progress is progress I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DoleINGout said:

Came into thread looking to see pictures of the ten models.😟

Odd part was when I typed in "SG Varsity" into google, I get a lot of young ladies modeling clothes ... so maybe that helps you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further info:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this actually is a step in the right direction. Amazing that it's taken them this long to finally do something here. Though honestly I don't see why they aren't going even further with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprised that the NFL is actually taking steps, but at least it's progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I skimmed the article, but I wonder if this was independent. Meaning, did companies pay money to ensure they didnt have their helmet on the bottom end of the list, cause that happens, A LOT. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mike23md said:

I skimmed the article, but I wonder if this was independent. Meaning, did companies pay money to ensure they didnt have their helmet on the bottom end of the list, cause that happens, A LOT. 

My first thought BUT how greedy can the NFL get before they're a caricature of themselves? I feel like the potential crap-storm if something like that leaked wouldn't be worth the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cddolphin said:

My first thought BUT how greedy can the NFL get before they're a caricature of themselves? I feel like the potential crap-storm if something like that leaked wouldn't be worth the risk.

Sure but pharmaceuticals do it all the time. The NFL is  a business and I don't consider the league to completely ignore the money aspect if say Riddell threw 500M dollars at them. This is an annual labratory study which means the helmet manufacturers are well aware of when the study happens and who conducts it.

The disclaimers are at the bottom of the article, which usually means its a CYA. 

If it was at the front of the article, its usually meant to ensure the legitimacy of the study. Part of the exec sum if you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mike23md said:

Sure but pharmaceuticals do it all the time. The NFL is  a business and I don't consider the league to completely ignore the money aspect if say Riddell threw 500M dollars at them. This is an annual labratory study which means the helmet manufacturers are well aware of when the study happens and who conducts it.

The disclaimers are at the bottom of the article, which usually means its a CYA. 

If it was at the front of the article, its usually meant to ensure the legitimacy of the study. Part of the exec sum if you will.

Skepticism is good, but in this case - I don't think its an issue.

The independent lab, Biokinetics isn't going to ruin their entire business over some out-of-production helmets. Both the NFL and the NFLPA agreed on the independent lab and they each brought in their own independent consultants. And the testing was subjected to an independent statistician for review and analysis.

The NFL wants to cover their ***** - by telling players which helmets are better than others. If players choose to wear the sub-standard ones, that may or may not impact their future ability to collect damages. The concussion issue revolves around what the NFL knew and when they knew it.

Now they are out front with the information so nobody can claim they buried it. Many of the poor performing helmets aren't even made anymore, so why would anybody pay money to keep those items off a list ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shanedorf said:

Skepticism is good, but in this case - I don't think its an issue.

The independent lab, Biokinetics isn't going to ruin their entire business over some out-of-production helmets. Both the NFL and the NFLPA agreed on the independent lab and they each brought in their own independent consultants. And the testing was subjected to an independent statistician for review and analysis.

The NFL wants to cover their ***** - by telling players which helmets are better than others. If players choose to wear the sub-standard ones, that may or may not impact their future ability to collect damages. The concussion issue revolves around what the NFL knew and when they knew it.

Now they are out front with the information so nobody can claim they buried it. Many of the poor performing helmets aren't even made anymore, so why would anybody pay money to keep those items off a list ?

Agree on all accounts. Yes, out of production helmets should be on the list. That makes sense. I am talking about a competing vendor whose line is limited in which one of those products may be testing poorly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, mike23md said:

Sure but pharmaceuticals do it all the time. The NFL is  a business and I don't consider the league to completely ignore the money aspect if say Riddell threw 500M dollars at them. This is an annual labratory study which means the helmet manufacturers are well aware of when the study happens and who conducts it.

The disclaimers are at the bottom of the article, which usually means its a CYA. 

If it was at the front of the article, its usually meant to ensure the legitimacy of the study. Part of the exec sum if you will.

No they don't. The FDA is actually one of the most stringent regulatory agencies in the world when it comes to testing. Other companies do this all of the time, no doubt, but not pharmacuetical companies. A family member of mine is a biotech patent attorney so I am well versed.. but this is a topic for another thread so I'll just leave it at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×