Troy Aikman: The Genius

[sharpe1027]

Players get concussions even when there is no serious head impact. Coup and contracoup injuries occur from the brain "sloshing around" inside the skull and impacting the skull. It is difficult to see how helmets can prevent this. Basically the deceleration of the skull has to be slowed so that it slows with the brain, rather than the brain slamming against the inside of the skull when the brain is moving faster than the skull.

Make the players smaller and slower and concussions will decrease, but never be eliminated.

That's probably the only solution that would make significant differences, other than changing the rules.

Could you explain how the player size matters when talking concussion? Wouldn't a collision of two 300 lb Linemen result in the same deceleration as two 150lb DBs colliding at the same speed?

Also, while helmets don't prevent all concussions, don't they help ? Aren't they designed to spread the decelerating of the impact over a longer time frame and thus reduce the effective amount of G-force experienced by the head?

[Noodle]

Again, I'm no friggin expert here, but padding of any kind will help prevent concussions from impacts such as hitting your head on the ground. A leather, well-padded helment would serve this functionas well as the plastic models.

But no helmet can protect you from happens to your brain when you get your head snapped due to a violent collision or from a facemask-first tackle. The only thing I can think of to mitigate this is to have the players run, block, and tackle with a little less reckless abandon, which I think would happen if you took the facemask off and removed the hard plastic helmet shell.

That's my theory, anyway. You'll never eliminate concussions, but I bet you'd reduce them big time.

[Patler]

Could you explain how the player size matters when talking concussion? Wouldn't a collision of two 300 lb Linemen result in the same deceleration as two 150lb DBs colliding at the same speed?

Also, while helmets don't prevent all concussions, don't they help ? Aren't they designed to spread the decelerating of the impact over a longer time frame and thus reduce the effective amount of G-force experienced by the head?

Decrease the mass of players, decrease the speed at which they move and you decrease the forces that are generated upon impacts between them, impacts with the ground, etc. In simple terms, think of it this way, a running backer decelerates more slowly when he hits a DB and drives him a few yards than when he hits a 350 pound lineman and stops dead in his tracks.

If you slam the brakes in your car, loose things fly off the seat; if you brake slowly they do not. The same happens with your brain inside your skull. Hitting the DB is braking slowly, running into the 350 lb tackle is slamming your brakes. How fast the players are moving at the time also affects the result.

I'm sure helmets can help to a degree, but the argument in hockey has been that the helmets provide a false sense of security and players do things they wouldn't do without a helmet, so the net result is actually increasing injuries. I don't know if I agree with that conclusion or not, I'm just relaying it.

My real point is that you will never eliminate concussions, and helmets can do only so much. As players continue to get bigger and faster, forces increase and injuries will occur. I think it was SI a few years ago that wrote about the changing types of injuries seen in the NFL, which the medical community attributed to the forces from bigger, faster players.

[MadScientist]

Lesser helmets would only help with some concussions by reducing the helmet-helmet type collisions. It would not help so much with the knee - helmet hits or helmet - turf crashes. Perhaps if the helmet consisted of eye - nose protection (like a variant of ski goggles) and a shell of thick but soft material, like memory foam to the size of a 70's 'fro, we could reduce the number or severity of concussions. It would take a bit of getting used to the new look.

[sharpe1027]

Decrease the mass of players, decrease the speed at which they move and you decrease the forces that are generated upon impacts between them, impacts with the ground, etc. In simple terms, think of it this way, a running backer decelerates more slowly when he hits a DB and drives him a few yards than when he hits a 350 pound lineman and stops dead in his tracks.

I got the speed part, but the size doesn't make sense to me. In your hypothetical, wouldn't the situation actually be worse? Sure, it may be better for the RB, but the DB ends up worse because his direction hasn't just been stopped, it has actually been reversed.

Perhaps the problem is not size, but the disparity of sizes between players? IDK.

[Patler]

Think force, think mass, think acceleration.

[sharpe1027]

Think force, think mass, think acceleration.

Acceleration is what causes the problem.

Hypothetical #1: Two 300 lb players each moving at 5mph in opposite directions meet and accelerate to zero in 1 second. A=dv/dt = 10mph/1sec.

Hypothetical #2: Two 100 lb pee-wee players moving at 5mhp in opposite directions meet and accelerate to zero in 1 second. A=dv/dt = 10mph/1sec.

Same result, what am I missing?

[mraynrand]

dp

[mraynrand]

Think force, think mass, think acceleration.

Acceleration is what causes the problem.

Hypothetical #1: Two 300 lb players each moving at 5mph in opposite directions meet and accelerate to zero in 1 second. A=dv/dt = 10mph/1sec.

Hypothetical #2: Two 100 lb pee-wee players moving at 5mhp in opposite directions meet and accelerate to zero in 1 second. A=dv/dt = 10mph/1sec.

Same result, what am I missing?

F=MA!

[sharpe1027]

Think force, think mass, think acceleration.

Acceleration is what causes the problem.

Hypothetical #1: Two 300 lb players each moving at 5mph in opposite directions meet and accelerate to zero in 1 second. A=dv/dt = 10mph/1sec.

Hypothetical #2: Two 100 lb pee-wee players moving at 5mhp in opposite directions meet and accelerate to zero in 1 second. A=dv/dt = 10mph/1sec.

Same result, what am I missing?

F=MA!

Doesn't that prove my point? Reduce the mass and you may reduce the force, but the acceleration remains constant.

[RashanGary]

I agree that the speed at contact is far more important than the F=MA equation would equate.



When a DB hits a QB or WR square in the noggin at full speed, a sudden, head jarring action is caused. Whether the head keeps moving or not means little after the intial jarring action took place adn the size of the body attached to either head isn't going to make much of a difference after the initial jar happens.



If you increased the mass somewhere near infinity and decreased the acceleration to a turtles pace, I don't think it would matter that you ramed that sky scrapper into your head at 2 miles per hour. But if you took an open palm and went up to a person as hard and fast as you can right up side the most delicate part of their head, you'd have a pretty good chance at a concussion.


F=MA is a useful equations. I'm not so sure it's applies as directly as Patler indicates here to the concussion problem. Speed with enough mass to cause sudden jarring but with the size not mattering much after that crucial threshold is met would seem more applicable. Finding an equation that maps it? I don't know, let's test it on some heads here and see how it plots out.

[Patler]

More important are the changes and distributions of forces and the abilities of materials (body parts or otherwise) to withstand those forces. I tried to simplify by suggesting systems in which a moving object (the RB) hit a movable object (the DB) compared to an immovable object (Grady Jackson!) in which accelerations are different for the RB. Obviously, there are also considerations for the DB and DT, not just the RB.

[RashanGary]

I think if we plotted the sudden jarring impacts on a chart, the sack where a DL slams a QB to the ground and seemingly vertebrae by vertebrae the spine connects with the ground almost like a golf swing uncoiling or a towel whipping a hinder until the very climax where the head finishes with a lash against the turf.

Even if a big guy hits you in the head, there's still some absorbtion into his boyd and into yours. With the hit to the ground, there's no absorption, no where to disipate the energy, plus the speed is so great. That's the bad one I think.

[sharpe1027]

I agree that the speed at contact is far more important than the F=MA equation would equate.



When a DB hits a QB or WR square in the noggin at full speed, a sudden, head jarring action is caused. Whether the head keeps moving or not means little after the intial jarring action took place adn the size of the body attached to either head isn't going to make much of a difference after the initial jar happens.



If you increased the mass somewhere near infinity and decreased the acceleration to a turtles pace, I don't think it would matter that you ramed that sky scrapper into your head at 2 miles per hour. But if you took an open palm and went up to a person as hard and fast as you can right up side the most delicate part of their head, you'd have a pretty good chance at a concussion.


F=MA is a useful equations. I'm not so sure it's applies as directly as Patler indicates here to the concussion problem. Speed with enough mass to cause sudden jarring but with the size not mattering much after that crucial threshold is met would seem more applicable. Finding an equation that maps it? I don't know, let's test it on some heads here and see how it plots out.

As I see it, the properties are all linked, but acceleration is the key. How quickly the head changes directions dominates how much the brain is jarred.

[Patler]

I agree that the speed at contact is far more important than the F=MA equation would equate.



When a DB hits a QB or WR square in the noggin at full speed, a sudden, head jarring action is caused. Whether the head keeps moving or not means little after the intial jarring action took place adn the size of the body attached to either head isn't going to make much of a difference after the initial jar happens.



If you increased the mass somewhere near infinity and decreased the acceleration to a turtles pace, I don't think it would matter that you ramed that sky scrapper into your head at 2 miles per hour. But if you took an open palm and went up to a person as hard and fast as you can right up side the most delicate part of their head, you'd have a pretty good chance at a concussion.


F=MA is a useful equations. I'm not so sure it's applies as directly as Patler indicates here to the concussion problem. Speed with enough mass to cause sudden jarring but with the size not mattering much after that crucial threshold is met would seem more applicable. Finding an equation that maps it? I don't know, let's test it on some heads here and see how it plots out.

Acceleration of the skull is important, because acceleration of the brain will lag behind. But, to accelerate the skull you must apply force from another player, the ground, etc. and that force depends on both the mass and acceleration of the opposing player.

Think of the "bone jarring" tackles from a lineman at the line of scrimmage who gets his legs into an RB hitting straight on. Not much acceleration from the DT, but a lot of mass with it.

Rather than hit the person with an open palm as you suggested, try using a sledgehammer. How fast do you have to swing it? Not very.

Mass counts!