Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Redskins Locker Room (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   The Redskins have twice been the most injured team in football. Is that bad luck or bad planning? (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=64379)

sevier2 05-09-2019 11:06 AM

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.

Ruhskins 05-09-2019 11:48 AM

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.

skinsnut 05-09-2019 04:53 PM

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.

skinsfan69 05-09-2019 04:59 PM

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.

skinsfan69 05-09-2019 05:07 PM

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.

Giantone 05-09-2019 05:17 PM

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?

skinsnut 05-09-2019 05:39 PM

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?

Tennskinsfan 05-09-2019 06:22 PM

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 thereís is something crazy going on we canít see). At the end of the day itís 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 didnít 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 didnít 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? Thereís comes a time when ya gotta quit chasing the river and fold. And start with a clean slate next hand.

CRedskinsRule 05-09-2019 07:08 PM

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.

Tennskinsfan 05-09-2019 07:49 PM

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 wonít throw money at the field.

Giantone 05-09-2019 08:05 PM

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 wonít throw money at the field.[/quote]

So you sacrifice your players health???

skinsfan69 05-09-2019 09:54 PM

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.

Number44 05-09-2019 10:25 PM

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.

MTK 05-10-2019 10:13 AM

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.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site has no official affiliation with the Washington Football Team or the NFL, we're just a bunch of fans talking football

Page generated in 0.05508 seconds with 9 queries