PDA

View Full Version : are injuries on the rise or is information just more available?


killxswitch
09-02-2010, 01:07 PM
My impression is that injuries to stars and important role players is on the rise in the NFL. It is hard to think of a significant player who hasn't battled a multi-game injury in the last 5 years.

However, it is easy to tunnel-vision issues like this since, for example, the Colts have been regularly hit hard by injuries to key players several years in a row.

Is the combination of faster, bigger athletes and the strenuous 16+ game making everyone more injury prone? I almost don't care when reading a scouting report when I see "injury concerns", because in all likelihood the player will get hurt if he achieves some level of success.

As an example we can look at some of today's starting QBs:

T Brady - missed '08 season with knee injury
D Brees - shoulder injury ended his time in SD
B Favre - rare ironman but he's had his share of injuries he's played through
P Rivers - solid 16/16 in starts the last 4 years, left a playoff game in 2007 and eventually had knee ligament surgery in the offseason
M Schaub - played in only 11 games in 07 and 08
B Roethlisburger - plenty of missed games unrelated to Georgia or Lake Tahoe
T Romo - relatively new starter, missed 3 games last season
D McNabb - missed 17 games since 05
C Palmer - played 4 games in 08
M Hasslebeck - missed 15 games since 05, has been hobbled in other games
J Delhomme - has missed 21 games since 05

Beyond missed time, it seems like most of the team is on the injury report at some point throughout the season. It's football so of course most players are going to get dinged up here and there.

I didn't care about football at all until '95 and didn't really start watching closely around 2000 so I am not terribly familiar with 60's - 90's football. Was missed time due to injury as prevalent back then as it is now? If not, did those guys just play through pain, or was the shorter schedule helpful, or was the game just not as rough? If anything my impression is the game was rougher back then.

bigbluedefense
09-02-2010, 01:19 PM
Na, its just access to information makes these injuries more available to the public.

In the 80s, it was uncommon for your qb to play the entire season. In 86, the Giants defense had a streak where no qb finished the game.


In today's world, that's unheard of.

yourfavestoner
09-02-2010, 01:34 PM
The injuries that occur today seem to be far more of a product of either over-training or PED use: most notably muscle and ligaments tears. Everyone thinks that "bigger/faster/stronger" in today's NFL shows how much we've "evolved" from the 70s (lol, dumbest theory in history). I'm of the opinion that we've mastered the science of growing people to be bigger and stronger than their bodies are able to handle.

Also, there's the fact that since players command such a greater monetary investment than they did in the past, that teams are far more cautious with guys. The "rub some dirt on it" days are pretty much over except for what seems like linemen and linebackers.

Shiver
09-02-2010, 02:05 PM
Darwin's theory was a little too conservative if our O-Lineman have naturally evolved to fifty pounds of extra muscle, with speed, in thirty years.

Bengalsrocket
09-02-2010, 05:50 PM
Darwin's theory was a little too conservative if our O-Lineman have naturally evolved to fifty pounds of extra muscle, with speed, in thirty years.

Well the evolution here is mental, economical & maybe even social, not physical. I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark and assume that not every athlete from today who happens to outclass athletes from 30 years ago is on steroids.

yourfavestoner
09-02-2010, 05:59 PM
Well the evolution here is mental, economical & maybe even social, not physical. I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark and assume that not every athlete from today who happens to outclass athletes from 30 years ago is on steroids.

Nobody ever said that. I really don't think you can argue about the scientific advances we've made in nutrition, supplements, and how to lift to increase mass. It's not even debatable. Not to mention that they train year-round. In the 70s, guys didn't see their coaches until they went to training camp.

bored of education
09-02-2010, 06:25 PM
I have this problem when I start stalking a girl with a Red 2002 Maxima..then a week later it seems everyone has one..i see them every where now!

Bengalsrocket
09-02-2010, 08:09 PM
Nobody ever said that. I really don't think you can argue about the scientific advances we've made in nutrition, supplements, and how to lift to increase mass. It's not even debatable. Not to mention that they train year-round. In the 70s, guys didn't see their coaches until they went to training camp.

... that is my argument. All of those things seem natural.

killxswitch
09-02-2010, 10:10 PM
I have this problem when I start stalking a girl with a Red 2002 Maxima..then a week later it seems everyone has one..i see them every where now!

Wrong thread?