The proposal to reel in free-flowing hair was tabled at league meetings in March.  Now, as owners prepare to meet in Atlanta on Tuesday, the issue is back on the table, according to Mike Reiss of the Boston Globe.

It’s now clear that the rule doesn’t require players to cut their hair.  Instead, they’d merely be required to tuck it inside their helmets. 

But such a measure raises questions regarding safety.  Does the tucking of a big chunk of hair into a helmet create issues with the fit and/or performance of the device?

“I think the thing that would concern us the most would be the safety issue, to try to confine and put that much hair under the helmet, because as we know, we have concussions, which is a big issue with the players,” NFLPA president Kevin Mawae told Reiss.

“A lot of that is determined by the type of helmet and making sure the helmets are properly fitted.  The concern was that if players had to bind their hair, or tuck it in, how would that affect the safety worthiness of the helmets?”

Even if the safety issue can be resolved, we’re still not sure that the tucking of hair into a helmet solves the problem.  What if the player refuses?  Article VII of the CBA plainly states that “no player will be disciplined because of hair length.”  If the player won’t tuck the hair, and if he then gets in trouble for it, isn’t he being disciplined for hair length?

In our view, it’s a matter better left for negotiations with the union.  But since the league would then have to make a concession in order to get a revision to the rule, the league would surely prefer to find a way to impose a rule unilaterally.