> 1) Is the impact to the brain higher because of the protective equipment?
Yes.
> Would people tackle as ferociously without it?
No.
Back in the day, some ~100 years ago, American football wore leather "helmets", which weren't hard helmets as we think of them today.
From time to time, a player would die from a skull fracture after a rough tackle. Then they implemented hard helmets to prevent people from dying.
The unintended consequences of that was it allowed for rougher tackles and repetitive, regular brain trauma.
Same thing happened with boxing. Back in bare-knuckle days, human fists couldn't last too long against the skull. After they introduced gloves to protect hands and have the fights last longer, the weakest link became the brain.
Yes.
> Would people tackle as ferociously without it?
No.
Back in the day, some ~100 years ago, American football wore leather "helmets", which weren't hard helmets as we think of them today.
From time to time, a player would die from a skull fracture after a rough tackle. Then they implemented hard helmets to prevent people from dying.
The unintended consequences of that was it allowed for rougher tackles and repetitive, regular brain trauma.
Same thing happened with boxing. Back in bare-knuckle days, human fists couldn't last too long against the skull. After they introduced gloves to protect hands and have the fights last longer, the weakest link became the brain.