This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

Yes by HTownND

Because it wasn't sticking to the new helmet materials.

I used to think it was BS, much like our "turf", and the failure of paint to stick was just an excuse to gussy things up.

But it turns out a friend of ours works for Riddell, and we talked through helmet changes "since I wore one" and specifically about the trouble ND was having with the paint (it wasn't just Riddell, Schutt and everyone else were having the same problem with our helmets and paint).

Now, could they have gone with less "sparkle" or something else? Sure, but I'm glad they did something because the other ones were shit. You may not think they are the right ones, but I still contend it's better than it was.