Doogie: Bad news: told that RB Jason Williamson tore his right ACL

[Gophers_4life]

There are certainly ways to get it to work as evidenced by other Power 5 schools in cooler climates.

Fleck would still have a turf field for practicing, to prepare his players for games on that type of surface.

Can't get away from it. So it makes your entire argument moot.


And both Iowa and Wisconsin, which have relied on power running backs for decades, have had turf in their stadiums for decades. You literally have no leg to stand on.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Fleck would still have a turf field for practicing, to prepare his players for games on that type of surface.

Can't get away from it. So it makes your entire argument moot.


And both Iowa and Wisconsin, which have relied on power running backs for decades, have had turf in their stadiums for decades. You literally have no leg to stand on.

We’ll be here all week folks.

No need to get upset about it. I’ve always said, Wisconsin is the best, let’s do what they do.

 

[bottlebass]

Well, that’s not really true. The largest studies with the largest cohorts support a higher acl injury rate on artificial turf. I don’t think you’ll find a lot of disagreement on this in the scientific community. Fair to ask for more data and question if the rate difference is significant. Football is dangerous, after all.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25164575

A total of 10 studies with 963 ACL injuries met criteria for inclusion, all of which reported on soccer and football cohorts. Among these, 4 studies (753 ACL injuries) found an increased risk of ACL injury on artificial playing surfaces. All 4 of these articles were conducted using American football cohorts, and they included both earlier-generation surfaces (AstroTurf) and modern, 3rd-generation surfaces. Only 1 study in football players found a reduced risk of ACL injury on synthetic playing surfaces. No soccer cohort found an increased risk of ACL injury on synthetic surfaces.

I don't think you read the conclusion of your study...

And again these studies included earlier generation surfaces not just the new ones. A more relevant study to this subject would be the study of NFL players that was done from 2010-2013. 219 NFL players tore their ACLs in those 4 seasons: "When looking at the playing surface, artificial turf fields like FieldTurf had a rate of 0.053 injuries per team games, compared to 0.050 injuires per team game on natural grass. Those Inuury rates were not statistically significant."

 

[Ski U Mah 55]

Well, what the band wants, the band gets.

Hardly.

After decades of marching on hard asphalt and concrete lots painted with football yard lines I'm sure they are very happy to be a real football field for rehearsals. The band was a huge side beneficiary of the new stadium, but given the time and effort they put in to support the football team they were decades past due for some decent facilities.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I don't think you read the conclusion of your study...

And again these studies included earlier generation surfaces not just the new ones. A more relevant study to this subject would be the study of NFL players that was done from 2010-2013. 219 NFL players tore their ACLs in those 4 seasons: "When looking at the playing surface, artificial turf fields like FieldTurf had a rate of 0.053 injuries per team games, compared to 0.050 injuires per team game on natural grass. Those Inuury rates were not statistically significant."

What am I missing? Larger cohort numbers separate out the noise and generate more statistical validity. It seems pretty solidly evident there is a statistically significant difference. Did you look at the studies they included in their analysis? Sure, more numbers are always welcome.

 

[bottlebass]

What am I missing? Larger cohort numbers separate out the noise and generate more statistical validity. It seems pretty solidly evident there is a statistically significant difference. Did you look at the studies they included in their analysis? Sure, more numbers are always welcome.

Again including studies that used older generation turfs. And the study you posted said there was an increased rate in football but not soccer with further studying needed. Not real concrete.

 

[Word]

Again including studies that used older generation turfs. And the study you posted said there was an increased rate in football but not soccer with further studying needed. Not real concrete.

The football vs soccer discrepancy is interesting. Could be because football players are generally bigger, due to impact with knee while planted in the ground, or a combination of both.

 

[Gophers_4life]

Larger cohort numbers separate out the noise and generate more statistical validity.

*IF* the conditions were the same for all those data points, which they clearly weren’t.

 

[Gophers_4life]

The football vs soccer discrepancy is interesting. Could be because football players are generally bigger, due to impact with knee while planted in the ground, or a combination of both.

Well the injury that started the thread was a non-contact injury. Although a freshman, I’m guessing Williamson is heavier than the average soccer player.

Did the studies look at females though? Girls soccer players tear ACL all the time. I would think that would be a good comparison.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

The football vs soccer discrepancy is interesting. Could be because football players are generally bigger, due to impact with knee while planted in the ground, or a combination of both.

It doesn’t take much of a torque difference to go from intact ACL to snapped ACL. Football players particularly backs are built for strength and burst and I’d guess generate higher moments.

 

[Gophers_4life]

It doesn’t take much of a torque difference to go from intact ACL to snapped ACL. Football players particularly backs are built for strength and burst and I’d guess generate higher moments.

There is no established minimum threshold torque for tearing an ACL. As has already been mentioned, it comes down to genetics and also luck. I guarantee Williamson has made that same cut many thousands of times before without a tear. He just happened to step just the perfect way this one time that caused it.

 

[happygophersgolucky]

Not you guys ... there are really only a few (mainly one person) advocating that TCF (and I assume the practice facility as well ... though obviously would be impossible to have it in the indoor practice facility ... even with some jerry-rigged grow light situation, because it just has too much going on there during the year) should have a natural grass surface.

Yet another wrinkle: what if coach Fleck wants to at least have one turf field for practicing on, so that the players can get used to that surface for an away game that would be played on turf? And then the injury occurs on that surface during that week of prep? You can't get away from it entirely. Will never happen. Too many stadiums and teams use it.


I know the hearts are in the right place, but it's not on the table, and isn't going to be. U athletic dept and facilities maintenance folks would never sign off.

Dear Gophers_4life, really sucks to be the only person advocating unpopular positions, doesn't it!

Actually my suggestions are rather reasonable. First, consider some cheap, doable changes such as RB shoes and cleats. Second, a relatively quick review of U records on football ACL injuries to determine the size and timing of any possible problems. Then discuss longer term solutions.

Seems like you are the one making decisions and assumptions without sufficient facts.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Again including studies that used older generation turfs. And the study you posted said there was an increased rate in football but not soccer with further studying needed. Not real concrete.

Do you know what changed between second and third generation plastics? I tend to think it was more UV wear related after all the lawsuits.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

There is no established minimum threshold torque for tearing an ACL. As has already been mentioned, it comes down to genetics and also luck. I guarantee Williamson has made that same cut many thousands of times before without a tear. He just happened to step just the perfect way this one time that caused it.

It is individual dependent but there is certainly a threshold like there is for anything else. You’re zooming off again.

 

[bottlebass]

Do you know what changed between second and third generation plastics? I tend to think it was more UV wear related after all the lawsuits.

Nope and don't care. I don't see the relevancy of any study that includes inferior athletes on inferior surfaces. That's why I showed the results of the NFL study.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

Dear Gophers_4life, really sucks to be the only person advocating unpopular positions, doesn't it!

Actually my suggestions are rather reasonable. First, consider some cheap, doable changes such as RB shoes and cleats. Second, a relatively quick review of U records on football ACL injuries to determine the size and timing of any possible problems. Then discuss longer term solutions.

Seems like you are the one making decisions and assumptions without sufficient facts.

Not sure just the Gopher's history would make for a good set of stats to make a conclusion. Just wouldn't be that much data.

 

[Word]

Nope and don't care. I don't see the relevancy of any study that includes inferior athletes on inferior surfaces. That's why I showed the results of the NFL study.

The best comparison would be of college athletes, not NFL.

 

[bottlebass]

The best comparison would be of college athletes, not NFL.

Fair enough.

 

[happygophersgolucky]

Not sure just the Gopher's history would make for a good set of stats to make a conclusion. Just wouldn't be that much data.

My suggestion was to look at 10 yrs of data from the U football program. That should be enough to establish long term average ACL injury rates. Then we would be able to determine if 4 RB ACL injuries in 2018-9 represents a change or just very bad luck. Many of the review studies published on the subject cover 10 yrs of data.

In deciding on doing such a relatively quick and inexpensive study, consider the downside of not doing it. Recruits and their families may well be concerned especially if competitive schools use it to scare them out of interest in the U. The U admin and AD may need cover if there are lawsuits. It's the age we live in.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

My suggestion was to look at 10 yrs of data from the U football program. That should be enough to establish long term average ACL injury rates. Then we would be able to determine if 4 RB ACL injuries in 2018-9 represents a change or just very bad luck. Many of the review studies published on the subject cover 10 yrs of data.

In deciding on doing such a relatively quick and inexpensive study, consider the downside of not doing it. Recruits and their families may well be concerned especially if competitive schools use it to scare them out of interest in the U. The U admin and AD may need cover if there are lawsuits. It's the age we live in.

I feel like 4 is too low a sample to compare against.

 

[Spoofin]

If PJ actually cared about the kids he would get real grass in here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lakeville Goldy]

The one I have found gives ACL injuries expressed per 10,000 "athlete-exposures". An athlete-exposure is a student athlete participating in a game or practice. Hence a D-I FB player would probably have about 115 (without bowl games) annual official exposures. Two a day Fall practices add ?? Unofficial workouts add ?? Players not used in games or not practicing subtracts?? Using 9 Gopher RB's (Smith, Brooks, Mo, Williams, Green, Edmonds, Femi-Cole, London, Williamson) would give an estimated 1035 RB athlete-exposures last yr. At 4 ACL injuries per 1035 exposures our program experienced more than 31 times the expected 1.24 per 10,000 on natural grass or 27 times the 1.42 per 10,000 on artificial turf.

https://www.healio.com/orthopedics/...rs-higher-on-third-generation-artificial-turf

A simpler and more reliable answer to the question would be as follows:
1. After Spring Game, the AD or HC assigns a Quality Control associate to work with athletic trainers and facilities managers to gather ACL injury rates for Gopher RB's over say the last 10 yrs on grass practice fields, grass playing fields, dirt (old field house) practice fields, Larson Performance Center, artificial turf outside practice fields, Metrodome, TCF, opponents synthetic turf, etc. Consider the exact nature of each surface and number of exposures.
2. Plot the resultant annual RB ACL tear and strain injuries on both a per team (all surfaces) and per 10,000 athlete-exposure basis by surfaces.
3. The average annual number of ACL tears prior to any event (Larson PC, etc) can be used to determine the probability that the 4 observed over the last 12-13 months is expected or unusual.
4. A good answer should be doable in a couple of weeks with 3 to 5 current staff members who should already be interested in the nature of any possible problem. Da U is filled with statisticians, orthopaedics, etc. to help as needed. Or a sports medicine grad student looking for a thesis subject could be assigned at free-labor rates.

Your comparison implies that RB's get ACL tears at the same rate as other positions such as kickers, punters, defensive linemen and bench warmers, because you're comparing an aggregate stat with one specific position. If you compared the U's punters and kickers to that you'd find that they are much lower than average. It's not a valid comparison.

RB is always going to be the highest rate of ACL. The combination of strength, speed, cutting, impact, etc. is much more difficult on the knee than any other position.

 

[happygophersgolucky]

Your comparison implies that RB's get ACL tears at the same rate as other positions such as kickers, punters, defensive linemen and bench warmers, because you're comparing an aggregate stat with one specific position. If you compared the U's punters and kickers to that you'd find that they are much lower than average. It's not a valid comparison.

RB is always going to be the highest rate of ACL. The combination of strength, speed, cutting, impact, etc. is much more difficult on the knee than any other position.

The reason for the emphasis on RB ACL injury rates is that the 4 ACL injuries in 2018-9 being discussed were all in RB's. Have to compare apples with apples to see if there have been any significant changes.

The first study I cited concluded:
Of the injuries that occurred on artificial turf surfaces, special teams players, linebackers, wide receivers, running backs and quarterbacks were most frequently injured. Of the injuries that occurred on natural grass surfaces, running backs, linebackers, wide receivers, special teams players and cornerbacks were most frequently injured.

RB rates were highest on grass but not artificial surface.

Dragoo et al, 2013, https://www.healio.com/orthopedics/...rs-higher-on-third-generation-artificial-turf

There do appear to be differences in rates by position and surface. Overall team rates may not resolve the issue.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

If PJ actually cared about the kids he would get real grass in here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You win with a big old guffaw.

 

[Gophers_4life]

It is individual dependent but there is certainly a threshold like there is for anything else.

There might be, but it’s not established, as I said.

What do you propose to do with such a number anyway?? How are you going to guarantee our RB’s knees don’t exceed that threshold? The fact that ACL’s get torn in grass already proves that grass alone can’t guarantee it. So you’re just whistling Dixie.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

There isn’t a huge difference in incidence, unless it happens to you. Players generally prefer nice grass, it evens out talent and speed differences to some degree particularly in inclement conditions, and it is likely cheaper in total cost over time (YMMV).

Not the end of the world, but given a choice I, PE, would choose grass.

 

[GSUsTALON]

I know that linemen where knee braces.

Question - For running backs that have to defeat Defensive linemen and linebackers and can get tangled up, and rolled on by 1 or more defensive players or plant their feet for a hard cut - do you think knee braises are an option for them. I rarely see running backs wearing them unless they are recovering from an extension or sprain. Do braces really hinder their quickness or top speed to the point that they shouldn't where them?

 

[Gophers_4life]

There isn’t a huge difference in incidence, unless it happens to you. Players generally prefer nice grass, it evens out talent and speed differences to some degree particularly in inclement conditions, and it is likely cheaper in total cost over time (YMMV).

Not the end of the world, but given a choice I, PE, would choose grass.

You can choose anything for any reason, but you have never established that players prefer it, that it evens out talent, or that it’s cheaper over time. Bet you’re wrong on all three.

Then you’ll come back and say “no I mean perfect grass”. Maybe, but such a thing doesn’t exist with any use. Certainly not for the use needed at TCF and for our weather. Not without blowing the budget, which was one of your pillars anyway.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

You can choose anything for any reason, but you have never established that players prefer it, that it evens out talent, or that it’s cheaper over time. Bet you’re wrong on all three.

Then you’ll come back and say “no I mean perfect grass”. Maybe, but such a thing doesn’t exist with any use. Certainly not for the use needed at TCF and for our weather. Not without blowing the budget, which was one of your pillars anyway.

Again, you’re worried about money and budgets all of a sudden?

Ok, I’ll bet ya.

Ever been on a plastic/rubber surface on a warm, sunny day?

 

[Gophers_4life]

Ever been on a plastic/rubber surface on a warm, sunny day?

Yep.

Ever been on mud in cold, rainy weather?

Clear which “pick your poison” players prefer. A consistent, safe surface in any weather, after any amount of use.