Should we do away with facemasks?

Joe Paterno thinks we should go back to the his days playing ball. Get rid of the facemask in order to prevent injuries.



http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/JoePa-didn-t-wear-a-facemask-He-doesn-t-think-t?urn=ncaaf-278329" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



What do you think? Good idea? Bad idea?

I never take anything seriously that I see on the front page of the Yahoo home page. They are more desperate for a "story" than any website/news station/etc. I've ever seen. They're taking something we've known for years - that Paterno wants to do away with facemasks - and trying to make a story out of it. I hate Yahoo "news."

Less injuries? What about broken noses and teeth?



Okay, these are pretty tame compared to the potential grabbing a guy's facemask has for neck injury. It would also keep people from leading with the helmet and spearing people (less concussions). Last but not least it would help market the game, as you could see player faces once again.

As much as I love Joe-Pa, I gotta say no. Today's game is much more physical (and, in my opinion, dirty) and we'd end up with tons of broken noses, gouged eyes, and missing teeth.

Schmoe wrote:
As much as I love Joe-Pa, I gotta say no. Today's game is much more physical (and, in my opinion, dirty) and we'd end up with tons of broken noses, gouged eyes, and missing teeth.

I agree. I can't imagine what sorts of facial injuries a player at the bottom of a pile would come out with.

Bluma wrote:
Less injuries? What about broken noses and teeth?



Okay, these are pretty tame compared to the potential grabbing a guy's facemask has for neck injury. It would also keep people from leading with the helmet and spearing people (less concussions). Last but not least it would help market the game, as you could see player faces once again.

Spearing is when a player lowers his head and launches himself like a rocket, starting impact with the crown of his helmet, which we'd probably see more of since people wouldn't want to tackle face-first.

Schmoe wrote:

Less injuries? What about broken noses and teeth?



Okay, these are pretty tame compared to the potential grabbing a guy's facemask has for neck injury. It would also keep people from leading with the helmet and spearing people (less concussions). Last but not least it would help market the game, as you could see player faces once again.

Spearing is when a player lowers his head and launches himself like a rocket, starting impact with the crown of his helmet, which we'd probably see more of since people wouldn't want to tackle face-first.

agreed. this idea is like a bad thread. it will fade away quickly.

It will never happen, but it could be a way to reduce injuries. Kurt Wawrner made a good point yesterday on NFL Network. He said the NFL isn't tackle football anymore. It's hitting football. Guys are out to make the big hit not wrap up and tackle.



With all the padding and the technology of helmets today, guys know they can use their helmets as part of the tackle. So instead of trying to wrap up, and drive a player back and to the ground, they have confidence their equipment will protect them if they just throw themselves at the ball carrier.

I read somewhere that rugby players have far fewer head injuries (concussions) than american football.



the transition from what Warner describes (hitting back to tackling) could be ugly though

kitic77 wrote:
It will never happen, but it could be a way to reduce injuries. Kurt Wawrner made a good point yesterday on NFL Network. He said the NFL isn't tackle football anymore. It's hitting football. Guys are out to make the big hit not wrap up and tackle.

With all the padding and the technology of helmets today, guys know they can use their helmets as part of the tackle. So instead of trying to wrap up, and drive a player back and to the ground, they have confidence their equipment will protect them if they just throw themselves at the ball carrier.

I thought the same thing when the talking heads were debating the NFL's new rules on helmet-to-helmet and and "devastating hits", whatever those are.



My thought is that the new rules will discourage flying missle hits and encourage wrapping, dropping hips, and driving back.

And I'm sorry, but all this talk about how they're trying to legislate hitting out of the game and how were going to be playing flag football is just bluster. What happens when someone is not just paralyzed, but dies from a hit? You really think defensive players are going to still talk all this tough-don't-be-a-pansy talk?



Results matter. Intentions sometimes get trumped by consequences. INJURIES should be minimized. Safety should be paramount. I've heard a lot of people say we're looking a few hard hits and trying to change the rules because of just a few, very small amount of hits. Well how many players need to be knocked unconscious before we've now reached the level that requires a change of rules? 100 players, 50, 500?

I don't know what ramifications it would present but I've often wondered why they don't have full, clear lenses from the top of the helmet down to where a facemask normally reaches. That way there is clear vision (except in bad storms or when they're breathing too hard :lol: ) and there would be nothing for other players to grab onto. btw, couldn't we use rainex or whatever they put on windshields to keep the rain from causing problems?



Go Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID

AmmonCougar1 wrote:
I don't know what ramifications it would present but I've often wondered why they don't have full, clear lenses from the top of the helmet down to where a facemask normally reaches. That way there is clear vision (except in bad storms or when they're breathing too hard :lol: ) and there would be nothing for other players to grab onto. btw, couldn't we use rainex or whatever they put on windshields to keep the rain from causing problems?



Go Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID

So, start having them wear full face motorcycle helmets?

Do you remember playing tackle football as kids? People still tried to make big hits, but it was more with their shoulders into the chests of people. You tried to keep your head out of it. I think its kind of an illogical idea, but I can see where he is coming from.

OR do away with padding altogether. IF you have to use your muscle instead of a padding to bang into people, it would reduce the violence of the game. Take your average Turkey Bowl, for example. Most injuries I have witnessed coming out of the Turkey Bowl are from over exertion of out of shape people, not from the contact injuries that occur. Take away the hard helmets and hard pads, and people generally become better tacklers instead of launching themselves as missiles.

Just one more illustration of how the game has gotten away from Joe Pa.

Cougarfan87 wrote:
OR do away with padding altogether. IF you have to use your muscle instead of a padding to bang into people, it would reduce the violence of the game. Take your average Turkey Bowl, for example. Most injuries I have witnessed coming out of the Turkey Bowl are from over exertion of out of shape people, not from the contact injuries that occur. Take away the hard helmets and hard pads, and people generally become better tacklers instead of launching themselves as missiles.

The past two years, both my turkey bowl injuries were from contact. First, knee to knee (hurt real bad but didn't tear anything) and second, elbow to eyebrow/forehead...mine (didn't hurt much but bled like crazy) thank goodness by BIL is a PA and stitched me up for free :D



And to the other post...yes, like motocycle helmets basically.



Go Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID

AmmonCougar1 wrote:

OR do away with padding altogether. IF you have to use your muscle instead of a padding to bang into people, it would reduce the violence of the game. Take your average Turkey Bowl, for example. Most injuries I have witnessed coming out of the Turkey Bowl are from over exertion of out of shape people, not from the contact injuries that occur. Take away the hard helmets and hard pads, and people generally become better tacklers instead of launching themselves as missiles.

The past two years, both my turkey bowl injuries were from contact. First, knee to knee (hurt real bad but didn't tear anything) and second, elbow to eyebrow/forehead...mine (didn't hurt much but bled like crazy) thank goodness by BIL is a PA and stitched me up for free :D



And to the other post...yes, like motocycle helmets basically.



Go Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID

It's just a flesh wound. :D

Cougarfan87 wrote:
OR do away with padding altogether. IF you have to use your muscle instead of a padding to bang into people, it would reduce the violence of the game. Take your average Turkey Bowl, for example. Most injuries I have witnessed coming out of the Turkey Bowl are from over exertion of out of shape people, not from the contact injuries that occur. Take away the hard helmets and hard pads, and people generally become better tacklers instead of launching themselves as missiles.

Joe Pa's argument makes a lot of sense--it's a classic moral hazard situation. Because people are insured, they tend to take on more risks than they would if they weren't insured.



Going along with Cougarfan87, look at rugby or Aussie football. Sure, there are contact injuries, but also a lot less violent hitting in those sports. Players don't lead with their shoulders because they'd separate their shoulders if hit like NFL players--instead, tackling is a lot of wrapping up.

Mingjai wrote:

OR do away with padding altogether. IF you have to use your muscle instead of a padding to bang into people, it would reduce the violence of the game. Take your average Turkey Bowl, for example. Most injuries I have witnessed coming out of the Turkey Bowl are from over exertion of out of shape people, not from the contact injuries that occur. Take away the hard helmets and hard pads, and people generally become better tacklers instead of launching themselves as missiles.

Joe Pa's argument makes a lot of sense--it's a classic moral hazard situation. Because people are insured, they tend to take on more risks than they would if they weren't insured.



Going along with Cougarfan87, look at rugby or Aussie football. Sure, there are contact injuries, but also a lot less violent hitting in those sports. Players don't lead with their shoulders because they'd separate their shoulders if hit like NFL players--instead, tackling is a lot of wrapping up.

I do need to go on the record and state that though I think it would make the sport much safer to take away the padding, it would also do away with the wreckless abandon that makes the game so much fun to watch. I won't let my kid play it (unless he develops into a great field goal kicker or punter), but we sure have fun watching others blow themselves up on the field. I am sure that is some kind of character flaw. :whistle: