WASHINGTON -- Nearly 40 percent of NFL players last season wore a helmet model that got the second-lowest rating for reducing the risk of concussions in a study by Virginia Tech researchers.

 

Riddell's VSR-4 helmet received just one star in a study of football helmets led by Virginia Tech professor of biomedical engineering Stefan Duma and released Tuesday. Another Riddell model -- the Revolution Speed -- was the only helmet that earned five stars, the top rating.

 

Five models -- two made by Riddell, two by Schutt and one by Xenith -- received four stars.

 

According to Riddell, 38 percent of NFL players wore the low-rated VSR-4 in 2010. The company also said 39 percent wore one of the various models that fall under the Riddell Revolution name or the new Riddell 360.

 

"It is our hope that based upon this and other independent research, that players and teams at all levels will continue to migrate to the Revolution family of helmets," Riddell Sports president Dan Arment said in a statement emailed to The Associated Press by an outside PR firm that represents the manufacturer.

 

Each NFL player is allowed to choose which brand and model of helmet he wears.

 

LINK

Here's the results from VT: http://www.sbes.vt.edu/nid.php

 

Thanks for posting this, Guru. My son has suffered a few concussions and may sit out this season. I was going to buy him a Xenith, but may go with the Revolution now, when/if he goes back out.

For only $1040 you can purchase the Revolution IQ HITS, it records every impact.

Makes me feel good to know that my son is in the Revolution Speed. He loves his helmet.

All of this testing is great .... but we are getting to a dangerous point.

The reason why = we are now speaking more about helmet testing than we are about proper technique.

Very rarely does an athlete get hurt by NOT leading with their head and using proper technique.

 

Things are starting to take a more dangerous turn .... It isn't just about helmets.

All of this testing is great .... but we are getting to a dangerous point.

The reason why = we are now speaking more about helmet testing than we are about proper technique.

Very rarely does an athlete get hurt by NOT leading with their head and using proper technique.

 

Things are starting to take a more dangerous turn .... It isn't just about helmets.

 

A blow to the head , concussions are the brain shifting in the skull as far as I know. My question is , does the damage vary in what part of the head is impacted . On equal hits to the head , does it cause more damage to the brain being hit in the temple area or on top of the head ? What about impacts to the front or back of the head . I don't know so that's why I am asking . Maybe someone on here has some medical back ground on concussions and want to share their knowledge .

 

If I had a son that was playing football , he would be wearing the best helmet made regardless of cost !! What ever the cost of the helment , I'm sure that it is cheaper than brain surgery and the complications that come with it. Football players are our kids and every parent is dedicated to keep their children safe ! We've kept them safe so far why stop now ? ( That's my two cents worth !)

All of this testing is great .... but we are getting to a dangerous point.

The reason why = we are now speaking more about helmet testing than we are about proper technique.

Very rarely does an athlete get hurt by NOT leading with their head and using proper technique.

 

Things are starting to take a more dangerous turn .... It isn't just about helmets.

 

Agree 100%....:thumb:

 

Kids need to start being taught how to play behind their pads.

All of this testing is great .... but we are getting to a dangerous point.

The reason why = we are now speaking more about helmet testing than we are about proper technique.

Very rarely does an athlete get hurt by NOT leading with their head and using proper technique.

 

Things are starting to take a more dangerous turn .... It isn't just about helmets.

 

True, quickslick, but my son got two concussions last year - both from having his head slammed into the ground. Would a better helmet have made a difference? I don't know, maybe. Fact is, if he plays football again he will have the best rated helmet available even if I have to pay for it myself.

All of this testing is great .... but we are getting to a dangerous point.

The reason why = we are now speaking more about helmet testing than we are about proper technique.

Very rarely does an athlete get hurt by NOT leading with their head and using proper technique.

 

Things are starting to take a more dangerous turn .... It isn't just about helmets.

 

You're right, this isn't just about helmets. Still, who wouldn't want to see the helmet be improved to protect our players better? I can tell you that I've seen more than a few hits on quarterbacks and receivers that led to their concussions and had nothing to do with their technique - they just got hammered and the blow rang their bell, so much so that they were concussed. You can teach technique all day (and that's a good thing), but the fact is, there will still be concussions and hopefully improvements to equipment will begin reducing those numbers.

True, quickslick, but my son got two concussions last year - both from having his head slammed into the ground. Would a better helmet have made a difference? I don't know, maybe. Fact is, if he plays football again he will have the best rated helmet available even if I have to pay for it myself.

 

:thumb:

Each NFL player is allowed to choose which brand and model of helmet he wears.

 

LINK

 

I see this being changed somewhat in the next five or so years. My bet would be that the NFL will supply a (small) list of approved helmets that the players can choose their brand/model from, and my money would be on all of those helmets being rated four stars or higher.

 

When it comes down to it, the NFL has a product to sell. That product doesn't look so good when people read about the likes of Terry Bradshaw, Jim McMahon suffering from permanent memory loss, and the less fortunate like Chris Henry, and Dave Duerson who were both diagnosed post-mortem with CTE following the troubled ends of their lives. The NFL will see to it that they do what they can to prevent this from reoccurring. It may not be because they have the true best interest of their players at heart, but it will happen.

All of this testing is great .... but we are getting to a dangerous point.

The reason why = we are now speaking more about helmet testing than we are about proper technique.

Very rarely does an athlete get hurt by NOT leading with their head and using proper technique.

 

Things are starting to take a more dangerous turn .... It isn't just about helmets.

 

I don't disagree with the premise that we should not favor increased technology at the expense of less safety/technique teaching.

 

However, I would have to say that MOST of the concussions I've witnessed in football have been due to a 'whiplash effect' when a player is tackled and the head snaps back or forward into the GROUND. In other words, nothing 'technique teaching' could've assisted in (save, perhaps, more neck strength training).

 

In these cases, a better helmet COULD have made a difference.

 

My child will have the best we can get him even if it means I have to mow some neighbor's lawns.

Revo speed is the best thing out there as far as I'm concerned.

Interesting Link

 

In a statement provided to PFT, Xenith called into question the methodology of the Virginia Tech researchers and suggested that the use of star ratings for helmets is silly.

 

“Do not believe any overly simplistic claims, any short story, and do not rely on anyone’s granting of stars,” the statement said. “Stars are for kindergartners.”

Interesting Link

 

In a statement provided to PFT, Xenith called into question the methodology of the Virginia Tech researchers and suggested that the use of star ratings for helmets is silly.

 

“Do not believe any overly simplistic claims, any short story, and do not rely on anyone’s granting of stars,” the statement said. “Stars are for kindergartners.”

 

Sounds like Xenith is just bitter about people bringing their technology into question and not giving them the highest rating. Their argument about a "star" rating system is childish too. It's just semantics.

 

Your article refers to another article from ESPN The Magazine where Xenith dispute's the NFL's helment testing process as well...yet they don't offer an alternate method of testing. Seems like sour grapes to me.

 

The only comment I saw of any value anywhere (also in the ESPN article cited above) was where the vice president of the board of directors of the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment said "It's also just not realistic to study concussions by looking at a small group where players hit other players like missiles, which is what the NFL is doing." Now that argument I can understand. Still, he doesn't offer any suggestions for a better method of testing either.