It is called the Guardian Cap, and it is meant to cover football helmets in training. It is used for certain positions where head impact is likely. This would include all the linemen and linebackers, of course. The new rules state that the soft-shell, foam-like covers would be worn through all practices and to at least the second pre-season game.
The manufacturer has data that shows the caps could reduce up to 20 percent of head trauma.
Said Dr. Sills, the NFL’s paid medical expert on head trauma:
“Even if there are no change to the concussion numbers with this intervention, we would still consider this worthwhile if it reduces the force that each player receives.”
According to an ESPN piece (March 29, 2022):
“The NFL has brought down its concussion numbers since Sills issued a call to action in 2018. There were 187 reported concussions in 2021 between the start of training camp and the end of the regular season, down from an average of 266.3 between 2015 and 2017.”
According to Dr. Sills and other medical experts, the first weeks of training camp produce the highest frequency of concussions. There are more players on the field and the intensity of competition for spots is higher.
After the second pre-season game, the practice load is lower. According to NFL mandates, practice sessions after that point will not require the wearing of the Guardian Cap, but will strongly encourage its wearing.
There are also wearable technologies that are designed to measure impact. This technology will continue to be used in all practice sessions and walk-throughs, and finally, teams will be required to tape videos of a few practice sessions to ensure that the practices duplicate the planned practice schedules submitted to the league.
Impressive staging
The NFL is trying and I must give them credit for the effort, but it is difficult to wonder if the head trauma issue as it now stands, might be “a bus” that has gone about as far as it can go? For example, Dr. Sills saying in regard to the effectiveness of the guard: “even if there are no change to the concussion numbers with this intervention…”
Wouldn’t this suggest that no one is certain the guard is effective at all? And, while we applaud a lighter practice load after the second pre-season game, doesn’t that skew the statistics on concussion frequency? And, what team wouldn’t videotape practices in accordance with the practice “script” if those were the practices being sent to the league office?
Are all of these attempts staging the results to match the desired outcome? While I appreciate the efforts (as someone who cares deeply about ethics), are the data and the efforts going into trying to support the data, statistically significant in the long-term.
I am hardly the first to say this, but year-in and year-out, at the end of each season it appears as though concussions and other severe injuries over the course of the season are every bit as severe on a case-by-case basis. While we applaud the improvement we wonder what these statistics would look like were the training camp period separated from regular season play?
Sports Ethics obviously does not play out in the determination of equipment policy. We instead wonder if the congratulatory tone of the league is not an intentional effort to hide the obvious: the game remains inherently dangerous, and while equipment may help to a degree, there might be fundamental changes required to the game itself.
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS!
