A theory about teams that have bad injuries during TC

[tr1]

I think it makes them a much better team by years end. Why? Well, there's likely a struggle for wins early in the year, because so many young players are thrown into the mix.

But what happens is that the younger players gain experience and the team wins a few games it wasn't expected to win...and then, the injured players start coming back in week 9, 10, 11.

The NFL season is a marathon. Though the Eagles look in real bad shape now, I wouldn't be surprised if they make a push at the end of the season...especially if McNabb and WB stay relatively healthy.

If either of those two go down, I think they're destined for the bottom...unless another team suffers the same fate to its skilled positions.

I can produce some anecdotal 'proof', if you'd like, but I thinkwe all have an idea about what I'm saying.

[OWUeagleMD]

I think it makes them a much better team by years end. Why? Well, there's likely a struggle for wins early in the year, because so many young players are thrown into the mix.

But what happens is that the younger players gain experience and the team wins a few games it wasn't expected to win...and then, the injured players start coming back in week 9, 10, 11.

The NFL season is a marathon. Though the Eagles look in real bad shape now, I wouldn't be surprised if they make a push at the end of the season...especially if McNabb and WB stay relatively healthy.

If either of those two go down, I think they're destined for the bottom...unless another team suffers the same fate to its skilled positions.

I can produce some anecdotal 'proof', if you'd like, but I thinkwe all have an idea about what I'm saying.

I know Andy Reid agrees with you. He's said as much in response to critics who say his teams start slow because they're so beat up after his notoriously brutal training camps.

I'm kind of on the fence about it. It certainly makes sense, in theory, but it's hard for me, as a fan, to look at losing a guy like Stewart Bradley as a potentially positive development.

But certainly, if my guys are going to suffer season-ending injuries, I'd rather they happen in camp than in the season. There's more time for the replacement to learn his position, more time for the team to acquire a new piece if they think it's necessary, and the player is more likely to be healthy the following season.

[IbleedBnG83]

I guess there is somewhat of an argument, but if you are losing your division games, than the team has A LOT more catching up to do than just winning some games down the stretch.

Once the starters are healthy, its not as if they are going to come in in ideal shape. They need to get use to playing again...everything that goes into it, not just being healthy

[sideshow24]

I guess there is somewhat of an argument, but if you are losing your division games, than the team has A LOT more catching up to do than just winning some games down the stretch.

Once the starters are healthy, its not as if they are going to come in in ideal shape. They need to get use to playing again...everything that goes into it, not just being healthy

Looks like they don't get a division game til the Skins in week 7. I'm sure they are going to love playing all three division opponents in a row!

[tr1]

I guess there is somewhat of an argument, but if you are losing your division games, than the team has A LOT more catching up to do than just winning some games down the stretch.



I absolutely agree.

The schedule can be a killer, but a lot of inter-division games happen to be played towards the end of the season.

I'm a proponent of letting young guys play as soon as possible. Bobby Beathard was always pushing Gibbs to get the young guys in. And, a lot of times, it was injuries that gave a lot of good players the chance to shine early in their careers.

Unless the Eagles start out 2-5, I won't count them out late in the season.

[Digger]

To be honest I really like this thread;very original. However, I tend to disagree. I think that TC injuries tend to linger. Players come back too soon and tend to yo-yo in and out of the line-up. Cohesion tends to break down. But, I do agree with you if you extend the positive to the following season. The younger guys do get a taste of game speed and the level of competition. They are much better prepared to take their places on the field down the road.

[Roger.Staubach]

I'm a proponent of letting young guys play as soon as possible. Bobby Beathard was always pushing Gibbs to get the young guys in. And, a lot of times, it was injuries that gave a lot of good players the chance to shine early in their careers.



outside of the QB position, I absolutely agree with you that young players need reps early on...

[Rskins91]

I think you have a fair point Tr1, but there are rules to this theory, IMO.

Injuries that last 4-6 weeks are ideal in this theory, as the player is out for a sustained amount of time, the player comes back, and is able to get back into playing shape and be effective. Meanwhile his backup got great experience in game time situations, and can now contribute more than he would have been had there been no injury at all.

However, season ending injuries, such as what happened to Ingram and Bradley, hurt the team more than it helps them, at least for that year. The original starter won't come back and the backup makes his share of mistakes, costing the team in some manner. In the Eagles instance, losing Bradley might make their run D weaker. That said, if their replacement is young and developing, the next year they'll have a good player back AND competent, experienced depth who can play when needed.

Another necessity is having young backups as opposed to veterans. You always know what you're going to get out of a veteran player who's been in the league 8-9 years. He has no ceiling to grow. While the dropoff from starter to backup should be marginalized, their will be no development and no gain for the future. Younger players need to be backups then in order for this theory to have merit as it ensures future growth and depth.

I agree with this theory for the most part, but unless the circumstances above fit, I believe injuries being more dentrimental than helpful in building a contending team.

[tr1]

In the Eagles instance, losing Bradley might make their run D weaker. That said, if their replacement is young and developing, the next year they'll have a good player back AND competent, experienced depth who can play when needed.

I've gotta tell ya, how many times have we heard about a guy who is a WONDER in practice, but doesn't show up at game time.

I think there are a lot of guys, who given the chance, may not stand out in practice, but be 'gamers.'

I really enjoy the individual stories from guys who go on to be successful because they had an unexpected chance to start.

[twist]

I think it makes them a much better team by years end. Why? Well, there's likely a struggle for wins early in the year, because so many young players are thrown into the mix.

But what happens is that the younger players gain experience and the team wins a few games it wasn't expected to win...and then, the injured players start coming back in week 9, 10, 11.

The NFL season is a marathon. Though the Eagles look in real bad shape now, I wouldn't be surprised if they make a push at the end of the season...especially if McNabb and WB stay relatively healthy.

If either of those two go down, I think they're destined for the bottom...unless another team suffers the same fate to its skilled positions.

I can produce some anecdotal 'proof', if you'd like, but I thinkwe all have an idea about what I'm saying.

If the team has good depth then yes they aren't in bad shape, otherwise early injuries make teams that have decent starting talent fade rather quickly.

[dockeryfan]

I've gotta tell ya, how many times have we heard about a guy who is a WONDER in practice, but doesn't show up at game time.

I think there are a lot of guys, who given the chance, may not stand out in practice, but be 'gamers.'



I always thought that about Darnarien McCants

[Rskins91]

I've gotta tell ya, how many times have we heard about a guy who is a WONDER in practice, but doesn't show up at game time.

I think there are a lot of guys, who given the chance, may not stand out in practice, but be 'gamers.'

I really enjoy the individual stories from guys who go on to be successful because they had an unexpected chance to start.

Taylor Jacobs comes to mind. But I really don't think the inverse is true. That is, people who practice poorly are amazing at game time. There are players who are average in practice but can flip a switch when the lights come on, but I don't think a player can be "bad" in practice and become suddenly amazing during a game.

[tr1]

Taylor Jacobs comes to mind. But I really don't think the inverse is true. That is, people who practice poorly are amazing at game time. There are players who are average in practice but can flip a switch when the lights come on, but I don't think a player can be "bad" in practice and become suddenly amazing during a game.

I think it's natural for coaches to deny practice liabilities any time in games...no argument there.

But, as Dock said, McCants grated on folks, had poor practice habits, but was big in games.

Football teams suffer from office politics just like any other workplace. And with so many egos, it's easy to see some talent never make the field.

[GhostofSparta]

It's good in theory, but some of this would depend on how scared a vet is of losing his job to a rookie/young player. If it's a season-ender like Bradley, then he can't rush back and re-injure himself, but if somebody like Santana finds himself on the bubble in a couple years (whether declining skill such as speed, or a cap casualty) and he pulls a hammy in camp.....yeah, it gives the young guys a shot, but if Moss is afraid for his job, he may make a minor injury worse by pushing too hard to get back out there and re-injure himself.

On the other end is a guy like Donnie Avery, a young guy who's only out a month or so but needs this time to improve and adjust.

Like I said, I agree with this premise in theory, but the NFL is too cut-throat (for good or ill) for this situation to work too often.