See your point, but believe it is misguided.
If we eliminate full coverage motorcycle helmets, would facial damage incidents drop?
Much of the equipment, if not all, has been designed to reduce the incidence most common in football: smacking into the ground or other players (inadvertently), with head, shoulder, whatever.
The player to player impact has indeed amplifies the protection they wear, and treated as armor. But you cannot deprive the player of protection from violent collisions with the ground, or other players in secondary impacts.
Don't take that to mean I advocate a return to 1920's style equipment.
If we eliminate full coverage motorcycle helmets, would facial damage incidents drop?
No because in a crash, the rider doesn't deliberately lead with his head.
However, in football, the facemask does allow the player to lead with his head. At the end of a game, look at how scarred up the helmets of linemen and linebackers are. The energy transmitted through the helmets into the head is probably not a lot different from what a boxer receives in the ring.
No one is surprised at the 35 year old punch drunk fighter but over the course of a 10 year NFL career, 4 year NCAA, 3 high school and several years in Pop Warner, a lot of blows have been received to the head in practice and games. I'm not sure one can safely say there is no adverse accumulative effect over the long term from these blows.
Much of the equipment, if not all, has been designed to reduce the incidence most common in football: smacking into the ground or other players (inadvertently), with head, shoulder, whatever.
That's true. Take the equipment all away and the players will begin evolving toward the physiques of rugby and flag football players. I only played high school football and only on grass. At the time, we always thought artificial turf was a superior surface -- until I first stepped onto an artificial field and my initial though was how hard it felt under my foot. As I bend down to feel it, I can still remember thinking I would not want to play on such a hard surface. I'd have no problam with a ban on artificial turf regardless of how much stadium owners complain about the cost of maintaining a natural surface.
The player to player impact has indeed amplifies the protection they wear, and treated as armor. But you cannot deprive the player of protection from violent collisions with the ground, or other players in secondary impacts.
I really don't advocate equipment changes unless something really good comes along that protects knees and ankles.
My advise to any football player would be to give it their very best but to hang up the cleats following a serious repeat injury. If the player is already in the NFL, I might tell them to do what they have to do to make it to retirement age but once they've made it to retirement age, two incidents of post season surgery, or medication would signal that it's time to give serious consideration to hanging up the cleats.
My perception is that the NFL players who ultimately end up complete physical wrecks are those who had 10+ year careers.