OT: D. Henry

[flippy]

I like that Najee does yoga to avoid weird injuries.

[NorthCoast]

seems counterintuitive but makes the case that holding back on carries doesn't matter...

For running back purposes, high work volumes (300+ carries) do NOT lead to more injuries in but we cannot answer why this is the case.The only conclusions we can draw are that players with 300+ carries actually missed less games than players who had around 150-250 carries in a season. There was no relevant difference in size, or age between these two groups. The conclusion we can draw is to not automatically assume that workload, age, or size are independent predictors of injury. Context matters and there’s no way to tease those variables apart from each other.

High Work Volumes Don’t Necessarily Lead to More Injuries in NFL Running Backs

You might have been vibin’ with me up until this last point, but I promise I’m not crazy. Hear me out, as the numbers don’t lie. Our first study set out with the primary goal of determining whether heavy workloads (300+ carries) lead to more injuries and more missed time compared to moderate workloads (150-250 carries). What they discovered was not expected. Group A missed at least one game during the second season they were tracked about 66% of the time. This is in contrast to only 49% for group B. The researchers also pointed out that age/height/weight/BMI did not significantly impact the difference in missed time between the groups. They were all very comparable. To clarify even further, the players all fell within the following biometric ranges and differences between them were negligible.

22-28 years old
5’8″- 6’1″
207lbs- 243 lbs
BMI between 29kg/m^2- 32kg/m^2

[Captain Lemming]

I like that Najee does weird yoga to avoid injuries.

Or

I like that weird Najee does yoga to avoid injuries.

Fixed that for you Flippy with 2 more correct options.

[feltdizz]

seems counterintuitive but makes the case that holding back on carries doesn't matter...

Thanks.. I never understood how people could think less touches means less chance of injury.

You could sit Najee for 3 quarters and if someone rolled his ankle on his first carry there is nothing we can do to protect him from it.

So use him until he asked for a breather or until we feel like he needs a tbreather.. and then pit him back out there.

[Northern_Blitz]

seems counterintuitive but makes the case that holding back on carries doesn't matter...

I think that's pretty surprising.

I wonder what it would look like if they tried to correlate number of games missed to carries.

"Missed at least 1 game" seems like kind of a low bar to me. I wonder if the data looks different if they look at number of games missed.

Maybe all RBs just get injured at about the same rate and we pay more attention to the better ones that get lots of carries / touches?

[Eich]

Thanks.. I never understood how people could think less touches means less chance of injury.

So, you think driving in a car 1,500 hours per year has the same chance for injury as driving in a car 50 huors per year? I mean, you could drive one time for 5 minutes and get injured in a crash. So, by your logic, the chances must be the same for 5 mintues, 50 minutes, or 1,500 minutes, right?

Regardless of how it actually plays out in a given year, there's more opportunity for injury the more times you're out there.

The question is more about wear and tear. Does the body taking signficantly more punishment make it more susceptible to injury. You would think yes. And again, it could play out differently. Doesn't mean you're not increasing the chances by playing more with more punishment.

[Oviedo]

Thanks.. I never understood how people could think less touches means less chance of injury.

You could sit Najee for 3 quarters and if someone rolled his ankle on his first carry there is nothing we can do to protect him from it.

So use him until he asked for a breather or until we feel like he needs a tbreather.. and then pit him back out there.

Its a backhanded way to criticize the perceived view that Tomlin overworks his RBs. There has never been evidence that this leads to injuries. I grant maybe shorter careers but not injuries.

Seems the data backs that up

[Oviedo]

So, you think driving in a car 1,500 hours per year has the same chance for injury as driving in a car 50 huors per year? I mean, you could drive one time for 5 minutes and get injured in a crash. So, by your logic, the chances must be the same for 5 mintues, 50 minutes, or 1,500 minutes, right?

Regardless of how it actually plays out in a given year, there's more opportunity for injury the more times you're out there.

The question is more about wear and tear. Does the body taking signficantly more punishment make it more susceptible to injury. You would think yes. And again, it could play out differently. Doesn't mean you're not increasing the chances by playing more with more punishment.

Not necessarily true because the variables are completely independent. That's is why you can buy a hundred lottery tickets and lose and someone can buy one and win

There are too many independent variables from how a plyers runs, his body composition, the force of hits, etc. These variables are all independent which makes trying to link cause and effect an inaccurate science

One could contend that since the latest CBA reduced the number of off season workouts and contact in practice, we have actually seen more soft tissue injuries, pulls, strains, etc. That wouldn't seem to make sense but I think that is what the data shows.

[feltdizz]

So, you think driving in a car 1,500 hours per year has the same chance for injury as driving in a car 50 huors per year? I mean, you could drive one time for 5 minutes and get injured in a crash. So, by your logic, the chances must be the same for 5 mintues, 50 minutes, or 1,500 minutes, right?

Regardless of how it actually plays out in a given year, there's more opportunity for injury the more times you're out there.

The question is more about wear and tear. Does the body taking signficantly more punishment make it more susceptible to injury. You would think yes. And again, it could play out differently. Doesn't mean you're not increasing the chances by playing more with more punishment.

I have driven for 20+ years and never had an accident.

There are people who have driven for 20 minutes today who were injured in car accidents.

so no, I don’t think the amount of time you drive increases your chance of an accident.

Its mostly luck… unless if you are a horrible driver causing the accidents.

I just don’t see how a defender tackling a RB and twisting his knee in the process is due to too many touches.

[hawaiiansteel]

I have driven for 20+ years and never had an accident.

There are people who have driven for 20 minutes today who were injured in car accidents.

so no, I don’t think the amount of time you drive increases your chance of an accident.

Its mostly luck… unless if you are a horrible driver causing the accidents.

speaking of, did you hear the terrible news of Henry Ruggs killing someone in a DUI accident?

his NFL career is over and he's going to do some prison time.

[NorthCoast]

I have driven for 20+ years and never had an accident.

There are people who have driven for 20 minutes today who were injured in car accidents.

so no, I don’t think the amount of time you drive increases your chance of an accident.

Its mostly luck… unless if you are a horrible driver causing the accidents.

I just don’t see how a defender tackling a RB and twisting his knee in the process is due to too many touches.

Pretty sure smart people at insurance companies would disagree. There is reason why drivers who drive less than some amount of miles a year get a big discount.

[BURGH86STEEL]

Pretty sure smart people at insurance companies would disagree. There is reason why drivers who drive less than some amount of miles a year get a big discount.

I don't think the discount is that big for people who drive less or X amount of miles. "Discounts" or should I say paying less based on age is another story. Where one lives is probably a bigger factor than miles driven per year.

Maybe I am wrong?

[feltdizz]

Pretty sure smart people at insurance companies would disagree. There is reason why drivers who drive less than some amount of miles a year get a big discount.

insurance companies? lmao

yeah.. okay.

there is a reason younger drivers who drive less have higher rates than older people who drive more.