Overall: The provided source only gives one player's opinion, but the article cites a second opinion, allowing for "players". If the promoting admin feels that support for this is weak, there's the possibility of using something about the caps being required for use in practice despite third-party research not showing their efficacy. If we do a bobblehead hook, I strongly recommend using the image, as it underscores the point made by the players. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
@Soulbust and Crisco 1492: "Bobblehead" would require quotes anyway, but let's hear a 'something about the caps being required for use in practice despite third-party research not showing their efficacy' hook.--Launchballer 07:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I was thinking something like ALT1 ... that the NFL has required players in most positions to wear Guardian Caps(pictured) during training even though third-party research has questioned their effectiveness? But this is Soulbust's party, so I defer to them. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492: "Most positions" wouldn't really be appropriate. This is 7 of the 11 players on defense (cornerbacks and safeties not required based on article) and 6 of the 11 on offensive (quarterbacks, wide receivers, and running backs not required apparently). However, I recalled hearing that these were rolled out more since 2022. Based on this source, "the only positions not required to wear the caps are kickers, punters, quarterbacks, wide receivers and defensive backs." – Still not enough to say "most" in my opinion. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:13, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
"Most positions" is based on the article: four in 2022, two in 2023, and two in 2024 (eight position groups) versus three not mandated. However, I'll be the first to admit that I have very little knowledge of or interest in football, hence my deferral to Soulbust. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I would describe 'most' as 'more than half', so even six out of 11 would count. I'd include an 'as of' in the hook, but this should check out, although I'd like to hear from Soulbust before I promote this.--Launchballer 13:18, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
It just feels disingenuous to state most since at least a quarter of the players on the field at any given time wouldn't be required. The "three groups" are actually broken down as well, so it's actually four groups (safeties and cornerbacks were lumped in as defensive backs). Perhaps if there's a caveat about it being required of the players who make the most contact... but that gets too wordy. Where's the source on questioning the effectiveness? We'd want sourcing on that to consider including it given the stigma that goes along with questioning the usefulness of safety equipment in regards to the NFL. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:27, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg)
The provided source only gives one player's opinion, but the article cites a second opinion, allowing for "players". If the promoting admin feels that support for this is weak, there's the possibility of using something about the caps being required for use in practice despite third-party research not showing their efficacy. If we do a bobblehead hook, I strongly recommend using the image, as it underscores the point made by the players. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)