A05: Proposal+5 — dragon570

No More Helmets In Football

For my research paper I will examine that football players shouldn’t wear helmets and tackle like rugby players tackle. Over the years people are starting to wonder if helmets are really helpful in the NFL because the players can still get head injuries. Helmet companys are answering back by adding more padding inside the helmets. Padding in helmets can only work but so far because padding in inside each helmet can provide some type cushion for the skull but not for the brain. The brain is surrounded by fluid that can cushion it also but to a certain extent. As a scenario, a player is gets hit on his blind side at full speed and the defensive player accidentally hit the player helmets the amount of fluid in our brain can’t stop the brain from hitting the skull. Also, the way a football player may dive for a tackle can cause a concussion because their head could hit the ground hard or even worse they could land on their head.

If people watch the sport of rugby they will see the differences in the way they tackle versus the way football player tackle. The obvious difference is that they don’t use as much padding as football players do. The less padding players have the more cautious they are. In football, players wear a bunch of padding and some may think they are indestructible when they have it on and hit other players extremely harder than if they didn’t have padding on them.  That is a misconception because padding can only help but so much when it comes to certain types of hits.

They state that football players should be taught to not use their heads as a weapon when going in for a tackle, instead they should tackle like rugby player do. Another reason that can result in concussions in football is that the ball carrier can get blind sided by another player from a defensive player. On the practice field players should try tackling a different way… without helmets for some of the drills to help them get in the habit of not leading the tackle with their heads but instead with their arms.

1) Football helmets are creating more problems than they solve

The Essential Content of the Article: Sporting News reports on how football players shouldn’t wear helmets or pads because they could tackle just like the rugby players tackle.

What It Proves: It provides videos of legal and also illegal hits in the NFL which can cause a player to receive a concussion or even worse. Also, it provides evidence of people who agree with the idea of football players not wearing helmets.

2) Lemco: Why Football Needs Less Pads

The Essential Content of the Article: Football players wear a lot of padding and think they can get hit as hard as they want and not get hurt, however, in rugby the players wear less padding and they are more conscious of receiving or giving injuries.

What it Proves: The different mindset of football player versus the mindset of rugby players and how they go about taking or giving injuries.

3) Concussions: Rugby Can Help Football

The Essential Content of the Article: Rugby players should teach football player how to tackle right that would lessen the rate of concussions in the NFL.

What it Proves: It goes over that tackling rules of rugby and that some of the tackles in the NFL that are legal are illegal in rugby.

4) Pads and Helmets: Rugby vs. Gridiron

The Essential Content of the Article: The collisions in football are greater than in rugby. “Rugby is a contact sport and football is a collision sport.”

What it Proves: Rugby only have one on one collisions the other player on the field are their for support. Whereas, football collisions are occurring at every down.

5) Helmetless Football? It’s the New Practice at New Hampshire

The Essential Content of the Article: The University of New Hampshire tried a new way of practice by tackling without helmets. New Hampshire is one of the leading college in head and neck injuries. They tried a different approach to tackle players by not wearing their helmets or some of the drills

What it Proves: Football players can tackle without using helmets. They just have to tackle a different way. For example instead of going into a tackle with their heads they can tackle with their bodies or perform a method of wrapping their arms around a player to make a tackle.

3 thoughts on “A05: Proposal+5 — dragon570”

  2. Happy to help, Dragon. Let’s get started.

    Before I offer feedback, a note about grading. Only essays will receive grades for each of four criteria A(rgument), R(hetoric), M(echanics), and S(cholarship). Non-essay assignments such as this one will receive one grade only. Early grades are often VERY POOR. You can improve your grade at any time with strong revisions.

    You’ve asked for help with your thesis and your first two paragraphs.

    Your hypothesis is not entirely clear from your post. You do seem to be making some claims that could be combined into a thesis. Here are the obvious claims:

    • Football players should not wear helmets.
    • They should tackle as rugby players tackle.
    • NFL players get head injuries.
    • Helmets have not eliminated head injuries.
    • Rugby players wear less padding than football players wear.
    • Rubgy players tackle more cautiously than football players do.
    • Football padding makes players feel indestructible.
    • Because they don’t fear injury, they hit harder.
    • The extra padding is useless against certain types of hits.
    • Football players use their heads to tackle.
    • Rugby players do not.
    • Football ball carriers get blind-sided by defensive players.
    • Football players should practice without helmets to learn to tackle with their arms.

    There are many assumptions in the spaces between your claims that you haven’t filled in for us, Dragon. Furthermore, you claims don’t yet add up to a narrow argument.

    Here are a few things you’d have to address for your thesis to begin to gel:

    • Do you want to eliminate padding, or just helmets?
    • Is leading with the head the only difference between football tackling and rugby tackling?
    • Do football players actually get more head injuries than rugby players?
    • Have helmets had ANY effect on reducing head injuries? Or are you claiming there’s no benefit at all?
    • Do rugby players wear less padding OVERALL, or is the only difference the lack of helmets?
    • Do most football plays end with a defensive player taking down a ball carrier by leading with his head?
    • Is it all the padding, or just the helmet, that makes an NFL player feel indestructible?
    • Do you really mean they “hit harder,” or is this another way of saying they lead with their helmets?
    • What “certain types of hits”?
    • Who is injured when a player tackles with his head? The ball carrier? Or the tackler?
    • Does your thesis boil down to “helmets should be eliminated because they don’t prevent concussions to tacklers but instead CREATE more chances for concussions to tacklers because they make tacklers feel they can safely tackle with their heads”?
    • Why would a lack of helmets reduce blindside tackling?
    • Who benefits from arm tackling? Ball carriers? Tacklers?

    So:
    1. Eliminate the confusion about whether you want to ban helmets or reduce padding overall.
    2. Clarify whether your goal is to reduce injuries overall or simply concussions.
    3. Identify who is suffering the injuries (if that’s your thesis) or just the concussions (if that’s your thesis).
    4. Persuasively speculate about how practicing (or playing) without helmets (or padding) would change tackling (or ball carrying) to reduce injuries (or concussions).

    I’m not asking you to provide evidence at this early stage to PROVE your speculations, but you do need to be clear about what you BELIEVE to be the case you’re investigating.

    Does that help, Dragon?
    First Grade: L
    Reply please.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment