If you’re into that football thing (American NFL, Canadian CFL) then here’s an interesting article discussing the idea of not wearing any helmets. It seems that head injuries don’t really decrease with helmet use, and wearing a helmet, as opposed to not, only creates “…a sense of invulnerability that encouraged players to collide more forcefully and more often.“ Of course not wearing helmets would drastically change the look of the game. But for the better?
Taking the brute force out of it will, in my opinion, increase the skill level. Sure, the excitement of that raw power will be gone, but in its place you’ll get players who’ll develop an entirely different skill-set that, hopefully over time, might be appreciated even more than the freight train careening recklessly through that defensive gap looking to inflict damage on a QB. Perhaps that’s the exciting part though? Anyway, with reduced head gear you’d also need to restrict other protective equipment.
It’s the same thing with hockey …you see more injuries with enhanced equipment (not to mention game design/rules and increased player size) and while that equipment protects, it also encourages risky/careless behavior ….like boarding. Helmets make sense when frozen projectiles are involved, but ‘armored suits‘ for the body only encourage rougher play. In this report (pdf file) body checking accounts for 86% of game time injuries …23% of which were to the head. With less gear players would think twice about going so hard into one another.
Certainly you’ll have accidents, that’s part of any physical activity, but overall I think you’ll get a faster, more skilled game as well as longer careers from those involved. But it’s a trade-off I suppose. The game now (NFL) is about power and finesse, and going back to leather ‘hats’ would definitely knock that power part down a few notches. The finesse aspect would increase …but would that be enough to keep it a respectable game in the eyes of those who watch it?
And isn’t it the viewers who ultimately set the rules?
