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!

     

The odds of Beason coming back like he was, are not that good


panthers55

Recommended Posts

I was doing some research on another thread about the need for a inebacker in the draft and I came upon this article. It is about DeMeco Ryans but it mentions a 2009 study of NFL football players. The synopsis for those who hate to read is that roughly 66% of NFL athletes who have Achilles surgery return. But when they compare the 3 year pre-surgery stats with the 3 year post surgery stats there was a 50% rduction in power ratings which for linebackers was measured as interceptions and tackles. Even more problematic was that linebackers showed the biggest reduction of all groups on both the offense and defense.

So is it going for Ryans? In 2007-2009 he averaged 121 tackles a year. Last year it dropped to 64.

http://blog.chron.com/texanschick/2011/08/a-medical-view-of-demeco-ryans-recovery-from-injury/

Historically linebackers have a 95% reduction in their power rating for the 3 years after surgery.

Anyone still not worried at all???

Ryan's also went from being a 4-3 mike to being a 3-4 ILB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The odds that anyone here has done Achilles heel surgery on someone and knows what their talking about is slim a best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but I've read that study as well and most of it was taken from like 2007. Arthroscopic surgery is literally the fastest progressing field of science in the world. Just think about ACL surgeries in the last 5 years.

I hope this is true. But the reality is that arthroscopic surgery is really just an advancement in how the surgery is done and the amount of invasiveness regarding the post operative recovery. The bigger question is functionality and the ability to recover use of it. I am no surgeon but the question remains are we doing something radically different that increases the patient's eventual use of the tendon or improving the surgical recovery only. In other words they may return to athletics in 7 months instead of 12, but if they are still only 50% of what they were, has anything changed???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryan's also went from being a 4-3 mike to being a 3-4 ILB.

And guess which positions are most interchangeable??? Yeah that would be going from a 4-3 Mike to an ILB in a 3-4. Before you use that argument see if every other linebacker on the squad reduced their performance by 50% making the shift. When you find out that isn't true, how about giving up that red herring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how people on this board feel about this, as I have never seen anyone mention it, but here it goes.

Do you guys think that HGH should be allowed in the NFL on a limited basis to players that are on IR for a serious injury?

These players will not be back for the season, and it won't be used for the normal reason it is banned, to bulk up. There are many doctor's who believe it significantly aides in the recovery from a major surgery/injury. Even to go as far as to prevent muscles from atrophy when you are immobilized after surgery. If it truly does help players heal more completely, would that not fall under the umbrella of player safety, so the injury heals more thoroughly?

As someone who has used both steroids and gH, I would say yes. gH is amazing for ligaments and tendons. I once read somewhere that most people that use steroids or hgh started it to recover from an injury in the first place, which I don't think is far fetched. It would never happen though because then you'd have guys that aren't even hurt claiming they are so they can use it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope this is true. But the reality is that arthroscopic surgery is really just an advancement in how the surgery is done and the amount of invasiveness regarding the post operative recovery. The bigger question is functionality and the ability to recover use of it. I am no surgeon but the question remains are we doing something radically different that increases the patient's eventual use of the tendon or improving the surgical recovery only. In other words they may return to athletics in 7 months instead of 12, but if they are still only 50% of what they were, has anything changed???

Beason should just get HGH injections regularly and take the 4 game suspension if he gets caught. It would be worth the risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said as much. Read the article yourself. It says that his Achilles is intact. It's just the wound (or, as I said, surgical incision) is infected, and they're not sure what's going on. That has nothing to do with the Achilles, and sounds like a problem with the medical treatment he is receiving.

Because the achilles is intact doesn't mean he will gain full function. You can sew a penis back on after you cut it off and it is intact. Problem is it doesn't work as well. Unfortunately in most cases Achilles heels don't either. Most guys take years to recover fully if ever. I hope beason is every bit as good as he was, but I do find the blind optimism a little unsettling. My point in bringing up this thread was to point out that the majority of folks are just blindly believing everything will be great despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Listen to what Ryans said himself when he came back. He admitted that it felt different and he couldn't do everything he could before hand. That is a player talking about how it was for him post surgery. That should at least raise some eyebrows and make people see linebacker as a bigger need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The entire OP is about the play calling and results and only mentioned T-Mac one time, in the sense of our offensive struggles only made me more frustrated about our #1 WR only getting a single 2nd half target in a game we were behind for the majority of it. How is that showing my true colors? It's way more of other people reading too much into it and thinking this is all and only about T-Mac for me, but it's not.  He just happens to be the player that I specifically was upset by his 2nd half usage, but it had nothing to do with my personal feelings towards him, but that he's our only legitimate WR and he had a single target in the 2nd half after going for 73 yards in the first. To me, that is a very legitimate play calling gripe, the win or particular player aside.
    • Dowdle looked great. Watching him made this game alot of fun.  
    • We’re stuck with Bryce for now.  He led TWO drives where we came from behind to take the lead. One of them was the winning drive and he threw the winning TD. Taken as a whole…he played at expectation after the 1st quarter. That’s not so bad under the circumstances.  We got the win. Maybe they’ll struggle to build on it but a win is a win. He drove the offense down and took the lead when it was needed. You can’t take that away from him.    We’re not changing QBs anytime soon.  Or owners.  So…when they win, we should take it at face value and give credit where it’s due.  Bryce came up big in clutch moments. You can’t take that away from him.
×
×
  • Create New...