Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Turf playing surfaces have a 16% higher injury rate per play, and linked to a higher rate of ankle and foot injuries


hepcat
 Share

Recommended Posts

Quote

Recently, a group of researchers reviewed studies on the topic. They looked at 53 articles published between 1972 and 2020, on injuries in professional and amateur sports, including football, soccer, rugby, field hockey and ultimate Frisbee. The authors didn’t specify whether the studies included injuries involving a direct blow from another player, or just non-contact injuries.

The studies suggest “a higher rate of foot and ankle injuries on artificial turf, both old-generation and new-generation turf, compared to natural grass,” they wrote in a paper published last year in the American Journal of Sports Medicine. Knee and hip injuries were similar on both surfaces, they wrote. The authors noted that studies reporting a higher rate of injury on grass received financial support from the artificial turf industry.

Similar findings were reported in a separate study that analyzed 4,801 NFL foot and leg injuries during 2012-2016 regular season games. That research found 16% more injuries per play on artificial turf compared to grass. The authors concluded that if all games had been played on grass during that period there would have been 319 fewer foot and leg injuries. Looking only at non-contact injuries the risk was even higher, about 20% more injuries per play.

https://apnews.com/article/nfl-aaron-rodgers-achilles-grass-artificial-turf-79212f5443cd2a0d30fe8c9d981b13c0
 

David Tepper loves data so here’s some food for thought. Maybe the team’s horrible performance and persistent injury issues with notable players will convince a potentially humbled owner to switch back to grass. 

 

  • Flames 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2023 at 6:34 AM, hepcat said:

https://apnews.com/article/nfl-aaron-rodgers-achilles-grass-artificial-turf-79212f5443cd2a0d30fe8c9d981b13c0
 

David Tepper loves data so here’s some food for thought. Maybe the team’s horrible performance and persistent injury issues with notable players will convince a potentially humbled owner to switch back to grass. 

 

B-but live music!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lmao said:

Economic value of players on the field contributing to winning resulting in ticket, concession and jersey sales vs economic value of James Taylor and Beyoncé ticket, concession sales 

There are only ~10 home games a year (pending the preseason and 17th game location). How many concerts does the stadium host per year? Tepper definitely accomplished one thing - the stadium is in use year round far more than it was under Jerry Richardson.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hepcat said:

There are only ~10 home games a year (pending the preseason and 17th game location). How many concerts does the stadium host per year? Tepper definitely accomplished one thing - the stadium is in use year round far more than it was under Jerry Richardson.

You can have grass and still have a system design to cover the turf that won't damage it. Is it likely to be a pain? Yes. But it's doable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • You may be interested to know that the average depth of separation is dependent upon the type of route run. Though go-routes are the most type of route run, they also produce the least amount of separation (and, of course, completions).   "The average pass catcher runs a go route on nearly a quarter of all routes (22.3%), the highest percentage of any route type in our data. However, those routes are targeted roughly 1 out of 10 times (10.8 percent), the lowest target rate of any route. The WR screen is the least-run route (3.4%), and it's the only route where the average target is behind the line of scrimmage. But it's also targeted at the highest rate (40.7%) and early in the play (1.6 seconds average time to throw). The most targeted routes outside of the WR Screen? The out (27.8%) and slant (25.2%) routes are the next most popular across the league."     "The most valuable routes by expected points added per target were the post (+0.48) and corner (+0.43) routes. The go route (+0.19) ranked seventh on the list of 10 route types. The go route (+0.19) ranked seventh on the list of 10 route types. One possible reason for this: It's harder to separate on go routes, which put the player on a straight path, than on posts or corners, which ask the player to make a cut. Targeted pass catchers on posts and corners average 2.4 yards and 2.3 yards of separation from the nearest defender, respectively, while pass catchers targeted on go routes average just 1.8 yards of separation."   https://www.nfl.com/news/next-gen-stats-intro-to-new-route-recognition-model#:~:text=Targeted pass catchers on posts,) and slant (+0.26).   I would expect that Thielen would have an easier time catching the ball based that he runs the routes where it's easier to get open. Tet? Yet to be seen, but we may be better served getting him on some slants and crossers also.  In general, receivers are going to average a lower completion percentage and yards of separation on certain types of routes than others, that's why we shouldn't necessarily be taking stats, even advanced ones, at face value, as there are dynamics that most aren't even thinking about.  In terms of Tet, he's bigger and somewhat slower than a smaller dude, so you'd expect him not to have as much separation on go-routes, but his catch radius is massive and his hands are awesome. Hitting him in stride will probably be killer, but of course QBs are less accurate on go-routes according to the stats. Depending upon Tet's route versatility and how he is used, we could have a unicorn though. He's relatively fast, has great hands and gets YAC (and on an off note, if X can hold on to the ball, he's dangerous as well because he already has shown some separation ability).    
    • Most elite WRs aren't necessarily burners. Not a lot of elite WRs in the modern era were 4.3 guys. If anything, sometimes it seems like the super fast guys use their speed as a crutch and it hampers their development in the intricacies of route running.
×
×
  • Create New...