Position Specific Helmets?

Cobrabit said:
Same. None of celebrities/
Athletes lives/ opinions mean much to me.

I don't like people/ organizations/ government telling me I can't do something that helps my family and doesn't affect others outside of their own monopoly if it's not against the law.
Click to expand...
I don't really see this as a case of an organization telling someone that they can't do something to help their family.

If I work at a movie theater and start offering Pepsi products to customers on the side when my company has a contract with Coca-Cola to provide refreshments, I'm going to either be told to stop or fired. The movie theater wouldn't be preventing me from doing something to help my family. I'd be the one breaking rules that I knew were in place when I agreed to work for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Me
phillyphilly said:
I don't really see this as a case of an organization telling someone that they can't do something to help their family.

If I work at a movie theater and start offering Pepsi products to customers on the side when my company has a contract with Coca-Cola to provide refreshments, I'm going to either be told to stop or fired. The movie theater wouldn't be preventing me from doing something to help my family. I'd be the one breaking rules that I knew were in place when I agreed to work for them.
Click to expand...
if Pepsi wanted to pay you to do commercials on the side while you worked for a Coke movie theater, you'd be allowed.
 
phillyphilly said:
I don't really see this as a case of an organization telling someone that they can't do something to help their family.

If I work at a movie theater and start offering Pepsi products to customers on the side when my company has a contract with Coca-Cola to provide refreshments, I'm going to either be told to stop or fired. The movie theater wouldn't be preventing me from doing something to help my family. I'd be the one breaking rules that I knew were in place when I agreed to work for them.
Click to expand...

Could you wear a Pepsi hat without being fined?
 
Cobrabit said:
Could you wear a Pepsi hat without being fined?
Click to expand...
If Coca-Cola was there at that time, and saw the theater advertising Pepsi (which would be the case if it's a theater employee), probably. Otherwise, it would probably be up to the discretion of the manager.
 
gobucks0409 said:
If Coca-Cola was there at that time, and saw the theater advertising Pepsi (which would be the case if it's a theater employee), probably. Otherwise, it would probably be up to the discretion of the manager.
Click to expand...
Coke isn't going to sign you without knowing that your theater is a Pepsi theater though.
 
I don't fault any current side from doing what is currently best for themselves. However, should the status quo remain is the question. If I weren't a starting QB, RB, or WR, with access to the east money within the current system, then I'd be looking at other options. Does the players union make deals that offset this bias to my benefit? If not, then I'd work to equalize the situation, knowing that the "stars" have more weight.
 
gobucks0409 said:
The majority of the players probably get more money by splitting exclusive right money than they would for wearing an Under Armour glove
Click to expand...
Prove it.
 
ill said:
Coke isn't going to sign you without knowing that your theater is a Pepsi theater though.
Click to expand...
No, Coke just doesn’t care enough about movie theater employee. If it were a pro athlete then yeah. All leagues have exclusive rights but players get paid to wear the competitions gear like cleats, gloves, sunglasses/shields etc.
 
You could have em wear a kitchen pot for a helmet. I don’t care.

Just make em sign a waiver and call less gay penalties.
 
1. If the helmet is superior, which would have to be independently verified, then the NFL wouldn't have a choice but to approve it or open themselves up to liability. Anything that makes the game safer I don't see the NFL not getting on board as endorsement money is a drop in the bucket to potential liability.

2. Just because a company makes claims doesn't make it true so there will have to be an evaluation period because you can't just make a decision like a helmet change based on a company's PR release.

3. It would be nuts for the NFL to allow individual players to sport their own endorsements on the field as that would weaken their own market availability and cut the value of exclusive deals substantially.
 
Wild Turkey said:
1. If the helmet is superior, which would have to be independently verified, then the NFL wouldn't have a choice but to approve it or open themselves up to liability. Anything that makes the game safer I don't see the NFL not getting on board as endorsement money is a drop in the bucket to potential liability.

2. Just because a company makes claims doesn't make it true so there will have to be an evaluation period because you can't just make a decision like a helmet change based on a company's PR release.

3. It would be nuts for the NFL to allow individual players to sport their own endorsements on the field as that would weaken their own market availability and cut the value of exclusive deals substantially.
Click to expand...
the helmet was tested at the Virginia Tech lab and is considered a 5 star safety rating.
 
ill said:
the helmet was tested at the Virginia Tech lab and is considered a 5 star safety rating.
Click to expand...
What is the NFL protocol for approving helmets? Was that sufficient?
 
Wild Turkey said:
What is the NFL protocol for approving helmets? Was that sufficient?
Click to expand...
uni-watch.com

Behold: The First Position-Specific Football Helmet

The football helmet brand Vicis, back from the dead, has come up with the sport’s first helmet designed specifically for linemen.
uni-watch.com uni-watch.com

I think it will come down to the individual players deciding if they want to wear it. Currently, helmet choice is mainly up to the player...but I think they need to approve use...or they just disprove usage.
 
Why not just have everyone where Aaron Rodgers "Gazoo Helmets "

1613759899574.png
 
Cobrabit said:
Could you wear a Pepsi hat without being fined?
Click to expand...
If your on company time or representing the company you need to obide by company policy. Now if you are selling pepsi before you're on the clock by all means you're allowed to do so. What you can't do is sell that pepsi while in you coke contracted theater uniform.

Nationwide sponsors the NFL, Rodgers and Mahomes both have contracts with StateFarm, if you pay attention they are never in NFL gear while shooting those commercials.
 
Last edited:
Pretty cool. I have a football obsessed son. Currently playing flag but wants to play tackle. Hoping helmets take sole revolutionary gains in the near future.
 
I think when it comes to any form of equipment. All should be allowed as long as it surpasses whatever perimeters for safety.
Helmets (obviously), Shoulder pads flak jackets, thigh pads whatever. Also since dealing with a players feet. I would add Shoes to the equipment list.

As far as the uniform. To me meaning Jersey & Pants & I guess team socks. That should all be made from the same people. last thing we need is one jersey being slipperier or easier to tear to break a tackle or some shit. That all should be the same.

However as far as undergarments goes. That should be player preference. if you want to wear Nike or Under Armor undergarments. An Aaron Rodgers Jockstrap. That should be the players (& Guns) right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top