Re:
movingtarget said:
This is the same helmet made by Vicis that I posted about here last summer (Vicis Pro) and again a month or so ago. They have obviously made improvements in their marketing seen on their website to explain how the helmet can reduce forces of impact from ALL angles of impact. But they only demonstrate direct impact to the top of the helmet. And they have obviously made improvements in their design, which went back to the drawing board last fall after the universities of Washington and Oregon pulled the helmets from their planned college debut because of fit and comfort issues (that update I posted about a month ago). The newer model is the ZERO1. So it is encouraging to see they have made progress in the design. Also encouraging to see that the product (from the Vicis startup company) has not yet flamed out.
The opening demonstration video (4:26 duration) on the company's website has been revamped with support from former and current NFL stars (Roger Staubach, Tony Dorsett, and Doug Baldwin). Nice touch. But the demo video fails to demonstrate forces to the helmet from ALL angles. The video only demonstrates (shows) impact to the top of the helmet. From the explanation preceding the demo, it LEADS one to believe the same protection benefit is provided against impacts from ALL angles (e.g. helmet crown, temple/ear hole, and rear angles). The design idea is still a great one, but they really, really need to prove and show by demonstration that the helmet has greater protection benefit from ALL angles.
Why am I so critical and hung up on proving the helmet for ALL angles of impact? After viewing the company website video, some young kids and young adults will see the demonstration and possibly come away thinking "I can now strike with the top of the helmet".
That is the WRONG impression to give! So I am critical of the video makers for that. Anyone who's been around football from youth hopefully knows and has been taught not to tackle by striking with the top of the helmet by dropping the head because why? It could break your neck. If lucky, you just have a strained or broken neck. If not so lucky, you could end up paralyzed, or worse yet dead.
Check out the company website and video yourself here:
http://vicis.co/
The other reason why I am critical of the Vicis progress is that if significant additional benefit is not gained from sideways or rear hits, then while the helmet may be better, it would not be good enough because many concussions come from those different angles.
Right now, Vicis is still a startup company, and you pay startup prices for new technology. $1500 per helmet compared to a typical Schutt or Riddell for $500. So if I am a high school AD, the company better do a better job of showing me why I should spend 120 times $1500 ($180,000 total because a good sized high school may have around 120 players in the program from freshmen to seniors) instead of 1/3 for new helmets. And Vicis needs to get the price way down. Which is where the NFL and college programs with the money can help by getting the company's cash flow moving.
But there is hope in technology, right? Hold on. Maybe, maybe not. There are naysayers who think technology will not save the NFL. Read that argument here:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/01/01/Why-High-Tech-Helmets-Won-t-Save-NFL
To me, that article is speculative. It is far too early to believe the NFL, and college, and youth football will vanish. But it does explain why the leagues and owners should be concerned now if player safety is not reason enough to be concerned.