Until very recently, the NFL spent years dismissing the idea that concussions had long-term consequences, pointing to their internal research as justification. Now, the New York Times has discovered that the same research was fundamentally flawed, leaving the NFL with no leg to stand on.

According to the report, the NFL study was based on faulty and incomplete data, with several high-profile players’ and some entire teams’ concussions being omitted altogether. As a result, the study’s deductions were skewed.

From 1996 until 2001, the NFL collected what was supposed to be all the concussions diagnosed by team physicians in the league. However, apparently the teams were not actually required to submit their concussions, and that led to the omission of 10 percent of the concussions during that period.

Though Dr. Joseph Waeckerle, who served on the committee, told the NYT that he didn’t know about the omitted data, he correctly added that the committee “screwed up.” Whether they were deliberate or accidental, the errors invalidate the study and its conclusions.

This news is less momentous after the NFL’s public acknowledgement of the link between football and CTE, so some of the wind was taken out of the NYT’s sails. But now the data that the NFL cited for years to justify ignoring concussions can be put to bed once and for all.

*Scientists have no conclusive evidence as to whether or how the reduction of g-forces during impacts reduces the number or degree of concussions and head injuries. GelDefender products provide supplemental padding as well as cooling and comfort benefits when used with helmets and caps. Participants in activities in which head impacts can occur should always use tested and approved helmets for protection. However, no helmet or supplemental padding can protect the user from all serious head or neck injuries that can result from impacts.