What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Official 2016 Uniform Thread

Started with the Flying Tigers:

FLYING%20TIGERS%201.jpg
Hmm. But they weren't Air Force. They were Army Air Corps. They were actually (thanks Wiki) volunteer contractors hired by the Chinese.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. But they weren't Air Force. They were Army Air Corps. They were actually (thanks Wiki) volunteer contractors hired by the Chinese.

Not sure what relevance that distinction without a difference makes in a discussion about the origin of that particlular paint scheme on US aircraft ... but I'm pretty sure those in the Air Force and at the Academy consider the Flying Tigers legitimate precursors to the Air Force as it exists today ... same with the members of the Lafayette Escadrille in WWI.
 
Not sure what relevance that distinction without a difference makes in a discussion about the origin of that particlular paint scheme on US aircraft ... but I'm pretty sure those in the Air Force and at the Academy consider the Flying Tigers legitimate precursors to the Air Force as it exists today ... same with the members of the Lafayette Escadrille in WWI.
I just wouldn't think the Air Force would pay homage to the Army! Haha.
 
I just wouldn't think the Air Force would pay homage to the Army! Haha.

You mean ... like adopting the Army Air Corps' anthem and making it their own after the AAC was incorporated into the newly formed USAF after WWII? :p
 
UW and Oregon have switched to a new helmet this year designed by a Seattle company called Vicis which are supposed to reduce the risk of head injuries. The problem is that the helmets are $1500 per instead of $200 and so UW will only have one design this year - the "classic" UW gold helmet. Players don't like giving up the swag.
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ope-to-stay-healthier-with-new-vicis-helmets/

No word yet on whether or not Uncle Phil will spring for multiple helmets for the Ducks.

So, would you give up all of the cool new combinations (stormtrooper) if it meant better player safety?
 
UW and Oregon have switched to a new helmet this year designed by a Seattle company called Vicis which are supposed to reduce the risk of head injuries. The problem is that the helmets are $1500 per instead of $200 and so UW will only have one design this year - the "classic" UW gold helmet. Players don't like giving up the swag.
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ope-to-stay-healthier-with-new-vicis-helmets/

No word yet on whether or not Uncle Phil will spring for multiple helmets for the Ducks.

So, would you give up all of the cool new combinations (stormtrooper) if it meant better player safety?

Yep. In a heartbeat. If that helmet actually does help reduce head trauma, then I would be just fine with only the gold for a year or two.
 
You mean ... like adopting the Army Air Corps' anthem and making it their own after the AAC was incorporated into the newly formed USAF after WWII? :p
You mean to tell me the Air Force is the bastard stepchild of the Army?
 
UW and Oregon have switched to a new helmet this year designed by a Seattle company called Vicis which are supposed to reduce the risk of head injuries. The problem is that the helmets are $1500 per instead of $200 and so UW will only have one design this year - the "classic" UW gold helmet. Players don't like giving up the swag.
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ope-to-stay-healthier-with-new-vicis-helmets/

No word yet on whether or not Uncle Phil will spring for multiple helmets for the Ducks.

So, would you give up all of the cool new combinations (stormtrooper) if it meant better player safety?

No helmet can protect against the head injuries the NFL and NCAA are concerned about; concussions. They are caused by the whiplash motion of the head after hits and a helmet can't stop that. Sounds like Vicis is going to make some nice bank off these schools with this marketing scam though.
 
No helmet can protect against the head injuries the NFL and NCAA are concerned about; concussions. They are caused by the whiplash motion of the head after hits and a helmet can't stop that. Sounds like Vicis is going to make some nice bank off these schools with this marketing scam though.

Probably doesn't help any with the first impact of the brain against the skull at contact, but I could see it potentially reducing the aftershocks, for lack of a better term.
 
UW and Oregon have switched to a new helmet this year designed by a Seattle company called Vicis which are supposed to reduce the risk of head injuries. The problem is that the helmets are $1500 per instead of $200 and so UW will only have one design this year - the "classic" UW gold helmet. Players don't like giving up the swag.
http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ope-to-stay-healthier-with-new-vicis-helmets/

No word yet on whether or not Uncle Phil will spring for multiple helmets for the Ducks.

So, would you give up all of the cool new combinations (stormtrooper) if it meant better player safety?
As S2S said, I would gladly give up multiple helmet options for a few years (until necessary funds can be raised to slowly purchase more). However, quick math shows that an entire set of these would "only" be $180k (assuming 120 helmets). So for the entire set of 4 that CU currently enjoys, it'd be roughly $750k. Obviously, that's a huge increase from the roughly $100k spent on the set currently, but not something that would take years of fundraising to acquire.
 
No helmet can protect against the head injuries the NFL and NCAA are concerned about; concussions. They are caused by the whiplash motion of the head after hits and a helmet can't stop that. Sounds like Vicis is going to make some nice bank off these schools with this marketing scam though.
No helmet can completely eliminate concussions from the game, but technology advances can certainly help reduce incidents.
 
No helmet can completely eliminate concussions from the game, but technology advances can certainly help reduce incidents.

There's no evidence yet that supports that any of these new helmets reduce the number of concussions among football players. It's all marketing.
 
There's no evidence yet that supports that any of these new helmets reduce the number of concussions among football players. It's all marketing.
I have not looked into the company or their data yet but I suspect they have crash and impact results with real data. Does that mean that it will translate onto the field? Not sure but saying that there is no technology that can reduce the number or severity of concussions is a bit of a broad brush.

The company certainly isn't going to cash in if they only convince two schools to buy their product.
 
CqFAgPIXgAAghCW.jpg:large


Rams on the hip pad is not my favorite. Shoulder horns look like UA just kinda stuck something there because it was too plain. Number font reads well on the jerseys, Colorado State bold across the chest, is awfully reminiscent of someone else's look... I expected them to go with the bone horns on the helmet when it got redone, which I personally like a lot better.
 
There's no evidence yet that supports that any of these new helmets reduce the number of concussions among football players. It's all marketing.
I would agree that up to this point, most of the new age helmet designs do little to curb concussion incidents and could be chalked up to marketing and money grabs, but with the NFL concussion "crisis", there is some serious money being thrown at helmet research and design. Most modern day helmets are designed to sustain blunt force trauma and prevent the skull from cracking, but do very little to actually absorb the impact and dissipate the energy (the brain does this instead). Basically, most helmet designs have ignored the physics of what actually causes a concussion, and while there isn't much live field research on these prototype helmets yet, I believe there will be big $$$$ invested in this going forward.
 
Not sure but saying that there is no technology that can reduce the number or severity of concussions is a bit of a broad brush.

As of now, there isn't. Short of football players wearing the NASCAR HANS device, no helmet will stop the whiplash motion that causes concussions. It's great marketing to say that every new tweaked helmet will lessen concussions, in number and severity, but there simply isn't any evidence to show that that is the case.
 
I have not looked into the company or their data yet but I suspect they have crash and impact results with real data. Does that mean that it will translate onto the field? Not sure but saying that there is no technology that can reduce the number or severity of concussions is a bit of a broad brush.

The company certainly isn't going to cash in if they only convince two schools to buy their product.
Exactly. This company isn't some scam looking to make a quick buck. They are a research start up that has won grants from the NFL, UA and GE. There are multiple Universities doing similar research, btw.
 
Back
Top