- Joined
- Jun 20, 2010
- Messages
- 35,623
- Name
- The Dude
Seemed like an interesting discussion before you people turned into bitches on me. Let's see if we can actually talk about it and see if there's any merit to the whole, "this regime is going to take a different approach to conditioning and game prep to minimize injuries" notion. I call it a notion because I, in particular, find it to be a fallacy.
Here's why.
1. Fisher can't prevent injuries.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=P1 ... 32,2980319
2. Backing players off doesn't prevent injuries.: It's been hinted that Fisher knows how to back players and practices off and not overwork them. Well, no he doesn't. He runs the same type of disciplined schedule to which all head coaches adhere. Because they're mandated. Every once in a while a coach will skip a practice after a win, or take a day off of camp to do an organized team activity, but there's no real pronounced deviation from the schedule from Fisher or any coach.
3. Overworking players causes injuries. No they don't. Think back to Vermeil's two-a-days that were the focus of much angst among the players. The 1999 Rams didn't lose too many players, and they were working their collective asses off in camp. To the point of near revolt. Vermeil actually had to scale back his regimen because of those player-only meetings and protests.
3. The injuries the Rams dealt with last year were the result of many things - none of which were the result of the Head Coach. Let's not forget that there was no camp, and subsequently, there was a league-wide drop-off in conditioning. It wasn't just the Rams.
4. There's no such thing as bad luck. Horse shit. Yes there is. Jason Smith making a tackle and jacking his neck up is bad luck. Mark Clayton getting kicked in the patella while trailing a cornerback is bad luck. Saffold tearing his pec while lifting (with the same trainers they have now) is bad luck. Bartell landing on his leg the wrong way and getting it stuck in the turf is bad luck. Amendola getting up off the ground and twisting his arm 180 degrees is bad luck. Feeley banging his hand on the top of a helmet (very common injury) is bad luck.
5. It was inevitable signing guys with an injury history. Yeah, probably. Cadillac (who, ironically, didn't get injured), Norwood, Alexander, Harris, etc. Off the top of your head though, can someone quickly name 10 players who have never been injured while playing in the NFL?
Here's what I think. 2011 was ridiculous for a lot of teams, but the Rams were hit hard on the side of the ball that mattered most. Offense. New system, no camp, new players, and nothing came naturally. Injuries can *maybe* be minimized if players are running around and not thinking about what they're supposed to do in favor of doing what comes naturally, but even then ... it's negligible. The Steelers, Packers, Patriots, etc., they all wind up with injuries that can only be attributed to shitty luck. And I'm not talking about voodoo or some mystical magic 8-ball type of luck. Just the definition of same. Specifically....
Luck (noun): Success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions.
Here's why.
1. Fisher can't prevent injuries.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=P1 ... 32,2980319
2. Backing players off doesn't prevent injuries.: It's been hinted that Fisher knows how to back players and practices off and not overwork them. Well, no he doesn't. He runs the same type of disciplined schedule to which all head coaches adhere. Because they're mandated. Every once in a while a coach will skip a practice after a win, or take a day off of camp to do an organized team activity, but there's no real pronounced deviation from the schedule from Fisher or any coach.
3. Overworking players causes injuries. No they don't. Think back to Vermeil's two-a-days that were the focus of much angst among the players. The 1999 Rams didn't lose too many players, and they were working their collective asses off in camp. To the point of near revolt. Vermeil actually had to scale back his regimen because of those player-only meetings and protests.
3. The injuries the Rams dealt with last year were the result of many things - none of which were the result of the Head Coach. Let's not forget that there was no camp, and subsequently, there was a league-wide drop-off in conditioning. It wasn't just the Rams.
4. There's no such thing as bad luck. Horse shit. Yes there is. Jason Smith making a tackle and jacking his neck up is bad luck. Mark Clayton getting kicked in the patella while trailing a cornerback is bad luck. Saffold tearing his pec while lifting (with the same trainers they have now) is bad luck. Bartell landing on his leg the wrong way and getting it stuck in the turf is bad luck. Amendola getting up off the ground and twisting his arm 180 degrees is bad luck. Feeley banging his hand on the top of a helmet (very common injury) is bad luck.
5. It was inevitable signing guys with an injury history. Yeah, probably. Cadillac (who, ironically, didn't get injured), Norwood, Alexander, Harris, etc. Off the top of your head though, can someone quickly name 10 players who have never been injured while playing in the NFL?
Here's what I think. 2011 was ridiculous for a lot of teams, but the Rams were hit hard on the side of the ball that mattered most. Offense. New system, no camp, new players, and nothing came naturally. Injuries can *maybe* be minimized if players are running around and not thinking about what they're supposed to do in favor of doing what comes naturally, but even then ... it's negligible. The Steelers, Packers, Patriots, etc., they all wind up with injuries that can only be attributed to shitty luck. And I'm not talking about voodoo or some mystical magic 8-ball type of luck. Just the definition of same. Specifically....
Luck (noun): Success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions.
