The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

At this year's NFL owners meetings, one session was devoted to health and safety, which included a presentation of injury data from teams.


[URL="https://www.richmond.com/sports/redskins/the-redskins-have-twice-been-the-most-injured-team-in/article_65b425b8-63e8-5ad0-867c-103e15270c93.html"]The most injured team in 2018? The same as the year before: The Washington Redskins.[/URL]

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

its not a fluke...and according to Pro Football reference, the injury stats for the team are terrible and go back several more years with us ranking near the top as most injured.

Its clearly poor management, poor conditioning, and poor injury management.

And the fact the front office continues to add players with a poor injury history....welcome to the team Bryce Love. Guice and Quinn couldn't stay on the field last year. Shawn Dion Hamilton , Paul Richardson add last year with injury histories. We continue to keep Reed and Luavao on the roster who are constantly on the sideline

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

From the article:


So after another injury plagued campaign, Redskins team president Bruce Allen brought in outside consultants who are experts in the field, and asked them to take a look at everything related to the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of injuries.


Allen said the Redskins wanted to leave the slate as blank as possible.


"We have all the data on the injuries, and we gave them all of it," he said. "We asked them to see if there was a rhyme or reason.


"We didn't want any preconceived answers."


And?


"Ironically, they're so unrelated it's almost impossible."

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

As for the drafting players with injury history thing, all players coming in have some sort of injury history. It's impossible to get to the pros with a clean bill of health.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

It's poor management , there is no way one team should have this many injuries year after year.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Yeah I heard Michael Phillips give interviews last week about this article (kudos to Phillips, guy is seriously underrated Skins beat)...Bruce gave the consultants complete unlimited access to everything, which is great...im hoping for changes, cause you need some.

When it comes to drafting injuries...sure folks will have some bumps in bruising, but there are relevant serious injuries that can affect the player especially depending on position. Knee and foot is relevant for Bryce Love at RB. This is why these players fall...Also there is relevance to scouting which says "the player's body may not hold up at this level at this position" That's why a Trey Quinn almost goes undrafted...that's why RG3 style of play couldn't last.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Bad luck, shit happens.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

I think it's important to take the statistic Games Missed Due to Injury with a grain of salt. Cam Sims was put on IR after an injury in week 1. But he was healed up and ready to go by week 5. He was put on IR because the Skins needed to fill the roster spot, and they deemed having Cam Sims unavailable for the second half of the season as less important than having somebody else active during weeks 1-4.

Instead I just look at who got hurt, how important are they to the team, and how did they get hurt. Alex Smith as our starting QB was obviously incredibly important to us, and nobody could call that broken leg as anything other than unfortunate luck. Scherff is critical to our team - and the torn pec was tough luck on a borderline dirty play. I don't see what the team could have done about those.

Guice looked like we would build the offense around him and he blows his knee out. Did that happen because he had existing damage in there? If so, you could put that on the team for drafting him, even though his potential is so high that over the long term it will prove worthwhile, and they made up for it by signing Peterson. Richardson had an injury history, so the shoulder was no surprise, the team should have understood he would miss some games. And with Reed, at some point you have to wonder how much sense it makes to design an offense around a player who's always hurt.

So it's a mix. I don't care about Cam Sims's games missed, that's meaningless to me. I look at what happened to the impact players. Smith and Scherff, terrible luck. At the same time, you can fairly question whether Gruden is in his right mind for designing an offense around Reed. At some point, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results starts to sound a little crazy.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=MTK;1223527]As for the drafting players with injury history thing, all players coming in have some sort of injury history. It's impossible to get to the pros with a clean bill of health.[/quote]

Bringing in guys like Richardson is on the FO. He has a injury history and they choose to ignore it. Plus he's 150 lbs. What about Lauvao? That's another one that makes no sense. Why bring that guy back knowing he's going to last a couple weeks max.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=MTK;1223527]As for the drafting players with injury history thing, all players coming in have some sort of injury history. It's impossible to get to the pros with a clean bill of health.[/quote]

Sorry, I disagree. Not all injuries are created equal. Some are bad luck, others are reoccurring.
In an old post I listed the high number of concussions Reed had in college. Before he got here. Yet he is still here ready to collect a huge pay check this year. He will get hurt in training camp like does EVERY YEAR. Snyder, Allen and Gruden made that decision to keep him here. They could paid me to tell them why we lead theeague in injuries. They will play Reed sparringly at first to protect him, then they will play him and he will get hurt. Does anyone want to bet on this?
Jordan Reed will count $9.7m on our cap this year. We could have gotten a Free Safety or blocking TE for that.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[QUOTE=Defensewins;1223534]Sorry, I disagree. Not all injuries are created equal. Some are bad luck, others are reoccurring.

In an old post I listed the high number of concussions Reed had in college. Before he got here. Yet he is still here ready to collect a huge pay check this year. He will get hurt in training camp like does EVERY YEAR. Snyder, Allen and Gruden made that decision to keep him here. They could paid me to tell them why we lead theeague in injuries. They will play Reed sparringly at first to protect him, then they will play him and he will get hurt. Does anyone want to bet on this?

Jordan Reed will count $9.7m on our cap this year. We could have gotten a Free Safety or blocking TE for that.[/QUOTE]



Of course but Reed’s situation doesn’t apply to everyone. The injuries are a mixed bag and it’s impossible to boil them all down to one cause.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=MTK;1223535]Of course but Reed’s situation doesn’t apply to everyone. The injuries are a mixed bag and it’s impossible to boil them all down to one cause.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

I Never said it applied to everyone. I said not all injuries are created equal. Some are bad luck (meaning not reoccurring) and others are reoccurring. It is the players with multiple reoccurring injuries are the ones we need to unload. Reed is not the only one. Richardson is another that has multiple ac joint shoulder injuries and knee injuries. He is also collecting a big salary has a vast history of injuries. It is a choice to sign or draft players like Reed.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

To me this is a mixed bag. It goes without saying that something had to give to fix this problem. I’m all for trying almost anything at this point. But I’m sorry what In the ever loving world is an ice machine to make ice out of Gatorade going to do. But I digress

Injuries to Alex Smith and Colt McCoy and even the nerve problem of Dunbar can not be helped. Those I consider flukes. If Dunbar’s nerve issue continues to be an issue it won’t be a fluke anymore.

I’m not even going to touch on Reed, we all know that story.

But the issues with the line year after year. I know it’s a grueling position, but at this point you cannot call it a fluke. Something has to be addressed.

As for Love and Guice. I think we may have reached a little bit in Love and got him earlier than was required. (But hey that’s why I don’t make the big bucks. They may have known something I didn’t). Anyways. With AP on the team again this year. Hopefully we don’t rush Guice back into the spotlight and have an RG3 disaster again. But having AP to work with those guys and our training staff on those type of injuries will hopefully be extremely helpful. That’s not to say that either one of them are the next AP but he came back a year after the injury and put up 2000 yards. And has been able to keep his legs fairly healthy.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Ok so let's say we dump Reed, Richardson, and Lauvao. That's a very small portion of the injuries we've had the past 2 years. It doesn't even begin to answer the question of why we've been hit so hard with injuries.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

If there was "one answer" for this teams recent history tons of injuries, we would have fixed it already. There are likely some reasonable things the skins can do to improve with player health/safety, but a lot of it is likely just bad luck and losing when gambling on drafting/signing injury-prone players.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=MTK;1223538]Ok so let's say we dump Reed, Richardson, and Lauvao. That's a very small portion of the injuries we've had the past 2 years. It doesn't even begin to answer the question of why we've been hit so hard with injuries.[/quote]

I think Defensewins is saying that these types of injuries only add to our total every year. It doesn't necessarily explain it entirely.

Most injuries are bad luck and can't be planned for. But SOME of those injuries we had expected because of the players history.

If we stop signing players with an established history of injuries, our yearly total [I]could [/I]be lowered, theoretically.

Personally, I think if the talent is there it's worth taking a chance on, especially draft choices on rookie contracts. But I agree that when you bring in players like P. Richardson and J. Reed you're putting your roster in a vulnerable position, leaving yourself in a fingers-crossed-I-hope-this-works-out type of situation. More so than normally.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Just listened to Michael Phillips on the Redskins Talk Podcast. The consensus from them was that is equals part bad luck and bad decisions.

I do feel that the fluke injuries this year (Alex, Schreff) were bigger and more impactful than the injuries due to bad decisions. If Alex and Schreff do not get injured (as bad as they did), I think things would have turned out differently IMO.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Here's a scenario for you.
You have 2 top running backs on the squad....yes ...they run....so what sort of injuries are a problem? wrist? neck? head?....NO!...knees (duh) Cant run without em'

So...Both top RB's have MAJOR knee damage....so what does a team do that has a chronic injury management issue?....I know...lets draft a THIRD RB with MAJOR knee damage!

This is really a stupid question.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

But again, not that Alex Smith has some kind of bad injury history, he doesn't. But you signed an older QB when you already had a younger one who was durable. You kept Colt around which is fine, but if he has to play for a long period of time when has he showed he can stay healthy? Knowing that it's probably a good idea to keep 3 QB's. Always keep QB's cause it's the most important position on your team. Probably should have kept Sudfeld or at least drafted someone instead of signing scrubs like Sanchez, Johnson and the guy from Stanford.

Hopefully these guys have learned from their mistakes. Look in the mirror and use common sense, instead of hiring "consultants." lol.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=skinsnut;1223560]Here's a scenario for you.
You have 2 top running backs on the squad....yes ...they run....so what sort of injuries are a problem? wrist? neck? head?....NO!...knees (duh) Cant run without em'

So...Both top RB's have MAJOR knee damage....so what does a team do that has a chronic injury management issue?....I know...lets draft a THIRD RB with MAJOR knee damage!

This is really a stupid question.[/quote]

Looking at the Love pick, you bring up a good point there. You're also leaving out CT who never stays healthy. I was fine with the Love pick cause of the upside as well as he's a 4th rounder. Had they taken him earlier that would have been stupid.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Just an idea but what about replacing the field (playing surface) at FedEx Field,would that help?

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1223563]Looking at the Love pick, you bring up a good point there. You're also leaving out CT who never stays healthy. I was fine with the Love pick cause of the upside as well as he's a 4th rounder. Had they taken him earlier that would have been stupid.[/quote]

The took Love, a 3rd RB with a bad knee over a solid guard....you know what guards do?
They block the guys that take out the knees of running backs and legs of QB's....sound familiar?

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

All I know is I would hate to be in Jays shoes this year. The Injury plague looming over his head all the while knowing his job is on the line this year. Last preseason I remember reading about everybody complaining that he babies them to much in camp. After the injuries of the 17 season I woulda done the same. And the injured still mounted. There is no one size fits all answer here (unless there’s is something crazy going on we can’t see). At the end of the day it’s a dangerous game. Your going to get hurt in some way shape form or fashion. The question is how badly. The last 2 years we took a beating. Last year we have nearly 52 million in salary cap run through the IR, but we didn’t have the most money sitting there. We had a lot of bad breaks (no pun intended) that hit us in some key spots. And when you are playing musical chairs with your offensive live as bad as we had to the last couple years. The guys lining up behind them are bound to take more hits.

Time will tell this year if the organization made the right adjustments for this year. And I really hope they did. But the one thing that I would push this off-season would be changing the way they deal with the line. Is the work load to heavy? Are they not eating right? That is the weakest link injury wise IMO. Injuries didn’t kill our record last year it brought us back down to earth, and in an ugly fashion.

If we somehow wind up being in the top 3 again this year of injuries. At that point you have to can the whole medical team and start fresh right? There’s comes a time when ya gotta quit chasing the river and fold. And start with a clean slate next hand.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

I will not stop believing that putting a better field on FedEx would go a long way to helping our players with the lower body type injuries.

You hope the consultants look through all the possible threads that could create and sustain an injury plagued process.

I think it has to include things like how often do the Skins take a player in the draft who dropped and in those cases how often does the injury that caused the drop contribute to future injuries. Or the condition of the field, and whether there is a tendency to be over aggressive in returning injured players, or like in TW and MM cases to let the players push for their early return.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1223567][B]I will not stop believing that putting a better field on FedEx would go a long way to helping our players with the lower body type injuries.[/B]

You hope the consultants look through all the possible threads that could create and sustain an injury plagued process.

I think it has to include things like how often do the Skins take a player in the draft who dropped and in those cases how often does the injury that caused the drop contribute to future injuries. Or the condition of the field, and whether there is a tendency to be over aggressive in returning injured players, or like in TW and MM cases to let the players push for their early return.[/quote]

Snyder want a new stadium he won’t throw money at the field.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=Tennskinsfan;1223568]Snyder want a new stadium he won’t throw money at the field.[/quote]

So you sacrifice your players health???

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=skinsnut;1223565]The took Love, a 3rd RB with a bad knee over a solid guard....you know what guards do?
They block the guys that take out the knees of running backs and legs of QB's....sound familiar?[/quote]

But we did get 2 potential guards that can step in and possibly start right away. The Love pick I believe is for the future. Thompson's deal is up after this year I believe.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=skinsnut;1223565]The took Love, a 3rd RB with a bad knee over a solid guard....you know what guards do?
They block the guys that take out the knees of running backs and legs of QB's....sound familiar?[/quote]

Love was taken in the 4th round.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=Giantone;1223564]Just an idea but what about replacing the field (playing surface) at FedEx Field,would that help?[/quote]

Of all the things that could be the problem I don't think that is one of them. Opponents play on the same field, but limp off at 1/2 or less the rate of Redskins.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

The field would be an easy fix to identify so if that was a significant issue I'm sure it would be addressed.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[url]https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/redskins-depth-chart-injuries-continue-plague-elite-talent-offensive-line-will-it-stop[/url]

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Redskins players are getting injured because they aren't prepared for hitting.

They've had the most injuries over the last 2 seasons and I'm willing to bet they've done the least amount of hitting in practice.

Gruden babies players when they get a minor injury. By the time they are healed, they haven't hit anyone in weeks and get tossed out into a game without being ready.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

People just need to accept that a lot of this is bad luck and move on.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=jamf;1223583]Redskins players are getting injured because they aren't prepared for hitting.

They've had the most injuries over the last 2 seasons and I'm willing to bet they've done the least amount of hitting in practice.

Gruden babies players when they get a minor injury. By the time they are healed, they haven't hit anyone in weeks and get tossed out into a game without being ready.[/quote]

Thing is with the latest CBA nobody hits like they used to in practice. They simply can't do it anymore.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

I wonder if part of it is not being properly stretched and warmed up before practice and games. Back in my day the big guys seemed to not be overly fond of stretching and if coaches weren't watching them would make half ass efforts if that.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=Buffalo Bob;1223573]Of all the things that could be the problem I don't think that is one of them. Opponents play on the same field, but limp off at 1/2 or less the rate of Redskins.[/quote]

Opponents play one game a year at most at Fedex. If it is a bad field, and we know it is, our guys play on it 8 games and parts of 2 preseason games.

It's the season long grind on the field that is the concern, not one week's 60 minutes.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1223561]But again, not that Alex Smith has some kind of bad injury history, he doesn't. But you signed an older QB when you already had a younger one who was durable. You kept Colt around which is fine, but if he has to play for a long period of time when has he showed he can stay healthy? Knowing that it's probably a good idea to keep 3 QB's. Always keep QB's cause it's the most important position on your team. Probably should have kept Sudfeld or at least drafted someone instead of signing scrubs like Sanchez, Johnson and the guy from Stanford.

Hopefully these guys have learned from their mistakes. [B]Look in the mirror and use common sense, instead of hiring "consultants." lol[/B].[/quote]

After 2 years of this I'm glad they're turning over every stone possible looking for solutions.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

[url]https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2019/2018-adjusted-games-lost-part-i[/url]

Overall we were less injured than Philly, Indy, and the chargers.

According to the third chart our injuries were extremely one sided.

We were the most injured team on offense, obviously at the most important position.

On the flip side, we were the least injured team on defense.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

Yes the injury bug has haunted us recently but if you are prepared as a franchise you overcome. Depth, depth n more depth. Next man up mentality. Look at the Yankees this year. Craziest injuries ive ever seen. Literally almost their entire lineup and best reliever, couple starters. Yet they got a bunch of guys stepping up and taking advantage of the opportunities.

Re: The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning?
 

I've said it to some of my friends. Certain jerseys make you step up even play better we use to have that years ago we need to bring it back.