- Joined
- Jul 21, 2007
- Messages
- 28,161
- Reaction score
- 7,435
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Ok, tough guy. It's like you want the Patriots to lose all the time. You revel whenever Talib or Brady makes a bad play
I'm all in favor of guys being very careful about their heads, and also more careful than is currently usual about necks, spines and so on.
But extremities? The last convincing story I've heard about somebody playing on an injured foot, leg or knee that shouldn't have was Kevin McHale in 1987-8.
As Bill Parcells said, football season is when football players play football.
Logan Mankins played the 2010 Super Bowl on a torn ACL.
Talib was limping off the field and in the tunnel to the locker room; it reminded me his injury from last year at first, so clearly there was something wrong with him.
Speed and quickness are his "weakest" traits, an injury to his knee would've hampered him even more in that regard; I think it was more a coach decision to go with the healthiest guys available. An injured Talib wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game, imho.
There are three kinds of leg/knee/foot/whatever injury, and we don't know which kind he had from among:
1. Pain only
2. #1, plus losing reliability in his sensations about his footing.
3. Actual diminution of function -- speed, strength, quickness, whatever.
Good point, I agree on #2 & #3, but I'm not so sure #1 exists: I believe pain always comes with some kind of reduced performance/mobility/sensations on footing/etc.. I might concede, that pain can be ignored over a short period of time with all the adrenaline flowing in your body in those situations, but sooner or late theoretically your performance should start to decline.