Gillette one of the top injurious stadiums?

[QuantumMechanic]

Found this one interesting:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Turf Type and NFL Injuries: Part II

(Note that the graphs are of visiting team injuries, not all injuries.)

 

[Joker]

Found this one interesting:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | Turf Type and NFL Injuries: Part II

(Note that the graphs are of visiting team injuries, not all injuries.)

propaganda...how the hell do you only include "visiting teams" in your use of "innovative statistics"? Someone over there needs a swift kick in the azz

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I disagree. I think it's a reasonable thing to do. That way you're comparing apples with apples. All the teams in the comparison played in a given stadium once per year. Comparing a team playing in a stadium once in a year with a team that played in it 8 times in a year seems skewed. Especially since one would expect that the home team would be more familiar with the quirks of the stadium (where the bad seams in the turf are and the like) that could skew things even more.

 

[BabeParilli]

Interesting, but it seems other variables are not accounted for.

 

[Joker]

I disagree. I think it's a reasonable thing to do. That way you're comparing apples with apples. All the teams in the comparison played in a given stadium once per year. Comparing a team playing in a stadium once in a year with a team that played in it 8 times in a year seems skewed. Especially since one would expect that the home team would be more familiar with the quirks of the stadium (where the bad seams in the turf are and the like) that could skew things even more.

c'mon...the reason they don't show the EIGHT games played by the Pats at home is because the results they expected were NOT the results they got. To fit their narrative they only used visiting teams. Why? Why the **** did the NFL spend 20 million dollars and repeated visits the Federal court to establish the power of article 46...thought it was about scumbag Mort's "2 pounds under!!!!" idiocy? Oh wait...it was about the narrative of H-A-T-E scope locked on the Patriots organization since 2006. The clown that wrote this crap at F.O. squats when he pees...please

 

[DarrylS]

Instead of comparing injuries by visiting teams in each stadium, they should have compared it by rates of injury by field surface for both and visiting teams.

They should also have used better colors, as the charts are difficult to differentiate..

They listed the Houston Surface as grass, but they replaced that with a synthetic surface in 2016...

Football outsiders used to be great resource for info, but they have made things too complicated for most fans..

 

[maineman209]

Instead of comparing injuries by visiting teams in each stadium, they should have compared it by rates of injury by field surface for both and visiting teams.

They should also have used better colors, as the charts are difficult to differentiate..

They listed the Houston Surface as grass, but they replaced that with a synthetic surface in 2016...

Football outsiders used to be great resource for info, but they have made things too complicated for most fans..

The opening paragraph clearly states that this study covers only the period 2012 through 2015. It also explains what fields were excluded from the dataset and why.

Also, note that this is "Part II" of their injury rate/turf type study. In Part I, which includes both home and visiting teams, there is further discussion of what was excluded from the dataset.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/turf-type-and-nfl-injuries-part-I

 

[luuked]

What a bunch of crap.

This is as useful as "analyzing" how many injuries happen before/after a change to daylight savings time instead of acknowledging the insane number of independent variables in a single football game that sometimes line up to result in an injury.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

I was going to say some of those teams with more injuries listed were known to also be good/hard hitting defenses. But, that wouldn't explain Indy being in there.

Be interesting to also see the number of games missed as a result of injuries. Could make the stats look different too. Seems Field Turf might need to be reengineered.

 

[BTTA]

propaganda...

For what purpose?

 

[Froob]

There’s always something happening at that stadium...clearly they designed the turf for injuries.

 

[Rusty Coupe]

Comparing the NJ teams opponents from the same stadium

For example, if we had split the NYC stadium between the Giants and Jets, the Giants would have the fifth-lowest overall injury rate, while the Jets would have been in the top half. To investigate this we could control for the injury rate for Team A's opponents when Team A is on the road. However, that is also beyond the scope of this post.

Not knowing the stats, does this account for the number of pass vs. run plays? Are lineman more likely to get rollled up from behind by another player landing on the back of their legs pass protecting vs. run blocking?

Seems like their are a lot of variables at work more than just turf.

 

[borg]

c'mon...the reason they don't show the EIGHT games played by the Pats at home is because the results they expected were NOT the results they got. To fit their narrative they only used visiting teams.

I'm confused. This study looked at data of 31 stadiums in order to slant their results against NE specifically?

I believe a black helicopter is hovering over your home measuring dotardity

 

[TeamFirst]

 

[fgssand]

Was this request after they inspected the newly installed surface or was it the driver for replacement of the old turf?

 

[maineman209]

I was going to say some of those teams with more injuries listed were known to also be good/hard hitting defenses. But, that wouldn't explain Indy being in there.

Be interesting to also see the number of games missed as a result of injuries. Could make the stats look different too. Seems Field Turf might need to be reengineered.

This is where this analysis might have drilled a bit deeper. From what I understand, there may be at least a couple of different turf types available under the "Field Turf" brand.

 

[jah]

c'mon...the reason they don't show the EIGHT games played by the Pats at home is because the results they expected were NOT the results they got. To fit their narrative they only used visiting teams. Why? Why the **** did the NFL spend 20 million dollars and repeated visits the Federal court to establish the power of article 46...thought it was about scumbag Mort's "2 pounds under!!!!" idiocy? Oh wait...it was about the narrative of H-A-T-E scope locked on the Patriots organization since 2006. The clown that wrote this crap at F.O. squats when he pees...please

I'd pay money to see inside your brain.

 

[Gator Mike]

FWIW, I was at the Revolution game last night, and got to talk to a couple of players about the new surface. The reviews were not positive. The surface is much harder, but they used words like "terrible", "awful", and "joke".

The Revs also thought the old surface was too soft, so they were on board with having it replaced. But they're at least not happy with the new surface, either.

 

[maineman209]

Was this request after they inspected the newly installed surface or was it the driver for replacement of the old turf?

Since the new turf has been down only about a week, I'd guess that the NFLPA request was made before the change.

I'd also guess that the request may have been a factor, but probably not the only factor.

OTOH, since the lead time for the replacement project may have been a couple three weeks, we'd need the actual date of the NFLPA request to know the timeline for certain.

 

[Gator Mike]

Schefter's article makes it pretty clear that the issue is with the new surface.