Welcome to PatsFans.com

Reiss's column on injuries---Blows away the owners faux study

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Pats726, Jun 1, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

  2. MetalBleachers

    MetalBleachers Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,280
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Thanks for posting. I missed it the first time around.
    It reminds me of the "closer by committee" attempt by the Sox a few years ago, based on the idea that pitching the fifth inning is the same as pitching the ninth. You can't take one particular scenario from Week Ten (players out with injury) and make it fit the same scenario for Week Seventeen. Football players tend to play when it counts. That's why we love football, and that's why they get hurt all the time and would get injured more with two more games added.

    Not sure how that's complicated, except to say that the owners are being willfully ignorant for the bucks. :nosmile:
  3. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I agree..it's a no brainer...but when the Commish makes a point that the football season is two months shorter than other sports with the implications of a longer season..I have to worry that he's out of touch with the sport he is leading...and knows zilch.
  4. spacecrime

    spacecrime Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    8,329
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    Good article by Reiss.

    He and Goodell aren't talking the exact same thing when they say injuries, and that is part of the disconnect.

    One is talking about injuires forcing a player to miss a game, and the other is referring to the wear-and-tear cummulative toll on players.

    Goodell is saying that there is no evidence that players suffer more season-ending injuries at the end of the season than the beginning, and Reiss says the trainers room is full of players getting treatment.

    In fact, both are right.

    That is the disconnect.

    Players give it all and end up completelly drained at the end of the season. Those who go to the playoffs do so on mental toughness more than physical.

    Compounding the issue are the owners not upfront about their reason: money, and the players diluting their real concerns by spouting off on how two more games will hurt the product.

    According the Chad Brown, the way it is now, every game is important. With two more games, the players will be tired and this will

    While he correctly hits on his real objection: "If you add two more regular-season, full-speed games, it's going to take a toll on guys," he wanders off when he says, "In football, every week counts, and if you start adding weeks on it, you don't have the same live-and-die-for-this-week from a fan or team perspective. I think you're diluting the product. It doesn't have the same strength."

    News flash, Chad: Every week will count, whether you are tired or not. Stick to your concerns (your health) and don't try to say your being tired and beat-up will make the games less important.

    In fact, most of the players concerns relate to THEIR careers, not to the quality of the game. Chad brown said the human body only has so many football games or plays in it. If you add two more regular-season, full-speed games, it's going to take a toll on guys."

    And Kyle Brady said he doesn't believe he would have lasted 13 seasons had they been 18-game campaigns. He played in 197 regular-season games, often feeling his worst at the end of each season.

    Yes, he felt worse. Whether that is being injured depends on whether you are talking to the NFL or the players.

    Players are rightly concerned about their own health. They are mistaken if they think that their playing fewer years will have a negative impact on the game unless they are Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or a similar media magnet.

    There is a simple compromise that will immediately satisfy the owners and the players, but I will post it in a thread of its own, so as not to highjack discussion of Reiss's column.





    readiness Chad Brown is off the mark, though,
  5. sieglo

    sieglo Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,243
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Why not extend the season by a couple game, but eliminate a preseason game and add two extra bye weeks to compensate?
  6. upstater1

    upstater1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    13,027
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +43 / 4 / -3

    That's Goodell's plan in a nutshell. Why don't you do it? Because the players are already telling you they are spent.

    The Super Bowl will be held right before March Madness at this rate. The NFL draft is then held a few weeks after march madness, and then OTAs start immediately.

    Careers will be shortened, players will be dragging their butts all over the place, and that means play on the field is going to drop.
  7. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0


    Because you don't recover from the cumulative physical or mental fatigue and nagging injuries compiled over the course of an NFL season in a week, that's more like prolonging the agony...and shortening the real recovery time in the offseason. How Patsfans could not appreciate that is beyond me...

    Most veterans don't play more than a couple of series in weeks 1 and 4 now, and many are limited in TC. There is a reason for that. Cut a game in preseason and you will end up with most veterans not playing more than a couple of series in weeks 1 and 3, and playing a half or more in week 2. The pre season helps players gradually get into football shape and then get their timing refined at game speed. Scrimmages can't replicate that.

    This is really an unholy alliance between a collection of selfish, greedy individuals. Owners want more money. Some % of players eventually will as well. Fans want more product. As do the networks. Gamblers want more opportunities to wager. And season ticket holders want to pay less or get more. Since the only thing standing between them an their convergent goals is common sense and some abstract concern about long term player health, they will probably ultimately achieve them.

    I'd love to have real games to selfishly sit back and watch year round. But I understand that it's not just about me and someone else would have to physically pay a tremendous price in order for me to...often the kind that all the money in the world can't compensate you for after the fact. And the reality of NFL football is the vast majority of guys who play it never make a seven figure salary and are in the game just long enough to cement their place as a pending disability statistic.

    BTW the new NFLPA President just got through telling current NFL retirees, the vast majority of whom live out their post NFL lives grappling with some level of disability, often after playing as few as 3-5 seasons as is, that if there is a work stoppage their benefits will be cut by 80%...in an effort to get more $$ for guys who will now be playing the same # of games they did only over an even shorter career.
  8. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,725
    Likes Received:
    73
    Ratings:
    +154 / 7 / -13

    Reg season games are far worse on the body than a preseason game. If a team went to the SB they could play up to 22 games, insane.
  9. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    I guess you are missing the point ..but that is OK..Why not keep it like it is...IT WORKS has worked..good enough for me...and I am sure the majority of fans.
  10. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    Great piece by Reiss, I hope he stays on this issue and continues to give the players a voice in this, especially the retired/disabled ones. According to Bruce Laird it took the retirees two years before they were finally granted an audience:rolleyes: with Goodell btw. Just as Kraft says, those guys are the reason he and many others became fans.

    It's interesting that Goodell and the alums are discussing retirees' intellectual property rights especially in light of Goodell's desire to globalize the NFL. IF he accomplishes that I can see the veterans coming into play in some capacity;mentors,maybe even even coaches, to fledgling teams and players across the globe.

    Again, great piece by Mike, I hope we see more on this.
  11. moosekill

    moosekill Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    895
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +41 / 2 / -2

    Hey how bout every time this comes up we can have the same arguments over and over again. Gonna be a long negotiation.
  12. BruschiOnTap

    BruschiOnTap Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I'm really glad to see Reiss take a stance against owners and the league for once.

    It's obvious to anyone who pays attention to the game that 16 games is pretty much the limit. The professional level, where players are older, bigger and faster (ie, it's more dangerous) already far exceeds the scheduling standards of other levels of the game and comes with a grueling travel arrangement, to boot. The league needs to remember that its product is a group of human beings, not football-playing robots.

    Maybe it's me, I don't think Tagliabue would endorse such a move and the NFLPA should fight it hard (but they won't, ownership pwns them)
  13. tanked_as_usual

    tanked_as_usual Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    4,981
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    there would also have to be larger rosters for any extension of the regular season.........the players are pretty beat up by the end as it is
  14. Pats726

    Pats726 Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,800
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    It's a BIG one for him as he usually doesn't take on a team or a league...but he is quite correct in what he is saying. And I am surprised others, nationally, have not done this. You are correct that it SEEMS obvious and yet Goodell has even made teh point that the season is two months shorter...and implcitly SHOULD be quite longer. That is sad that HE teh Commish of the league does not understand. SO SO true...the product IS humann beings...and they MUST remember.
    I also would agree that Tags would not endorse such a thing. I am all for exploration of new markets...and there ARE WAYS to do that without mucking up the season...For example, Pat Kirwin's GREAT idea of barnstorming teams just for that purpose!!! THAT would give about 200 players or so (given 4 teams not 2) work for half the year and a chance to catch on with other teams later in the season. What a novel way to approach a problem without tampering with GOOD product here...Hmmmm.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>