1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Cole Madison

Discussion in 'Green Bay Packers Fan Forum' started by Lawdog, Jun 14, 2019.

  1. Lawdog

    Lawdog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    11
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    Any updates on Madison from camp? Have not heard much is he participating? I'm definitely rooting for the young man.
     
  2. Poppa San

    Poppa San Levelheaded Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    8,838
    Likes Received:
    881
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Location:
    Brown County Wisconsin
    Packer Fan Since:
    1919
    He was back at OTAs and is in the mix for backup interior OL IIRC.
     
  3. Dantés

    Dantés Gute Loot

    Messages:
    6,234
    Likes Received:
    754
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2017
    Packer Fan Since:
    2017
    I think I recall hearing that he has taken snaps at guard and center.

    Really hard for OL to show anything, good or bad, that outsiders can see and understand until the pads come on in camp.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Half Empty

    Half Empty Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,449
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1958
    And, given the CBA and how our millionaires can't be asked to work hard, even training camp is no longer a good chance to evaluate.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    With the CBA, it takes two to tango.

    I see the limited amount of contact practice, soup to nuts, from camp through the end of the season, as embraced if not advanced at the league and team executive level. All of the rule changes in recent years have been directed toward injury reduction. Some coaches may not like it, but their bosses (1) want star players on the field and not on the injured and inactive lists, (2) worry about the accumulated long term medical liabilities, and (3) worry about the impact of Shazier-type incidents on viewership the worst case being a player dying on the football field.

    This is all kind of obvious. NFL executives want their millionaires on the field doing what they are being paid to do and they would prefer to avoid more $1 billion class action settlements.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Curly Calhoun

    Curly Calhoun Cheesehead

    Messages:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    129
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2015
    Packer Fan Since:
    1963
    Perspective: This guy was a fifth-round pick who missed an entire season. He is by no means a lock to end up on the final 53. If he does make it, he's likely a back of the roster guy who is not active on gameday.

    I wish him well, but I don't expect him to be a major contributor in 2019-2020.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  7. Half Empty

    Half Empty Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,449
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1958
    If there was a direct correlation between lack of intensity in practice and reduction in injuries, I'd be less POed about the walk-throughs. However, when something that significantly reduces the quality of the product doesn't make for a safer environment...
     
  8. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    I don't know how you come to that conclusion. In fact, there is no way of knowing the counter-factual outcome.
     
  9. gbgary

    gbgary Cheesehead

    Messages:
    2,272
    Likes Received:
    122
    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Location:
    juuust outside dallas
    Packer Fan Since:
    1964
    yup. the lack of contact has to make it harder to evaluate talent and correct bad technique. you end up with coaches guessing and hoping guys will work out. maybe even having guys on the team who shouldn't be there at all. it makes having quality depth hard to attain. you'd think having substandard depth could/would lead to more injuries...to those guys and others who are forced to depend on them. i'll bet the next cba corrects some of this. the players will want something in another area and will give a bit on this.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2019
  10. Half Empty

    Half Empty Cheesehead

    Messages:
    3,449
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1958
    OK, if you think there are less injuries now than when they practiced under more game-like conditions, my argument falls.
     
  11. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    801
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1980
    I have no real data, but to me it seems a lot of major injuries seem to have shifted from training camp to the first 3rd of the season instead the stars falling in training camp. and for any drop in numbers I'd attribute that more towards less contact overall in games. Guys used to get laid out ever other play. Now when we see the 2-3 that might happen in a game we look for the flags. Those plays used to be relatively normal.
     
  12. Carsener

    Carsener Cheesehead

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2019
  13. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    The NFL claims sharp reductions in concussions from 2017 to 2018:

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ficant-drop-in-concussions-during-2018-season

    Now, this covers preseason and regular season, not practices. The numbers are too large to chalk up to random variations from season to season. We must attribute these reductions largely to the rule changes. It should then stand to reason that the fewer full contact practices the fewer concussions will be incurred.

    Reducing concussions is the A1 NFL priorty in injury reduction while protecting QBs from all manner of mayhem is A1A. Whether that leads to a total net reduction in injuries is questionable. If defenders are targeting helmets less often, and players on both sides of the ball are leading less often with the helmet, and defenders are more often wrapping up and driving to the ground (but not the QB!) or targeting low from the knees down to the feet, is the result more shoulder, knee and ankle injuries? Possibly. Too soon to tell, and so far as I can tell the NFL does not release full injury stats, only concussion stats, so we may never know.

    One thing is clear. The NFL is way more concerned with getting to the start of the season with as many marquee players possible, and then once the games start reduce concussions. Dislocated shoulders, torn ACLs and high ankle sprains don't draw $1 billion class action settlements. Injuries can't be eliminated, but if they are the inevitable cost of doing business then the NFL says let them not be concussions, and especially not spinal cord injuries. Future retiree medical liabilities for a knee replacement is far less costly than treatment for a protracted case of dementia or a lifelong quadriplegic.

    That's the NFL approach to injuries today. It's actually pretty obvious. The merits can be debated but it ain't gonna change. I don't see fans taking to the streets and picketing stadiums and the league office with placards saying, "More Violence!" or "Free Vontaze Burfict!"

    I do have to say, though, data aside, that the idea that more contact practices get guys in better "contact condition" thereby eliminating some early season injuries might have some validity. But that applies only to the guys that would make it to week 1. It stands to reason there would be some kind of offset for the increased number of guys who wouldn't make that first game as as a result of those practicies.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2019
  14. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    22,298
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    I highly doubt the next CBA will allow teams to practice more often.

    According to Football Outsiders injuries were at an all-time high last season.

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2019/2018-adjusted-games-lost-part-i
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    That doesn't surprise me. It would stand to reason getting defenders to lower their tackling targets would just transfer injury incidence from concussions to the lower body parts. It's also instructive to remember that the lowering of the helmet rule also applies to offensive players. The NFL backed off on that rule in the box, but it applies at the second level and beyond. The rules induce ball carriers and receivers to stay high with impending contact in space instead of lowing the helmet while the defenders are targetting lower. And I do think lack of "contact conditioning" might be a factor once the money games begin.

    In the context of the discussion of whether fewer contact practices (camp and regular season), fewer preseason games, and fewer starter snaps in preseason reduce injuries, a year-over-year comparison is not helpful. You'd have compare to prior to the 2010 CBA when contract restrictions were introduced. Even then there have been so many intervening changes as to make a meaningful assessement of what causes what nearly impossible. Still and all, common sense would indicate less contact prior to Game 1, Snap 1, would result in fewer injuries up to that point.

    On its own merits, the Football Outsiders data provides an incomplete picture. First, it appears to exclude missed games as a result of PUP or IR, even IR games arising from injuries during the season, focusing exclusively on the weekly injury report. Further, it does not address attrition through injury prior to Game 1, Snap 1, whether resulting from PUP or IR or the many guys on the bubble where the difference between making the roster and getting cut might hinge on a minor injury incurred in camp or preseason.

    Of the many, many players with borderline talent who anonymously filter in and out the bottom of rosters and the league every year, who never sniff vested status, a meaningful percentage of those can attribute their lack of survival to injuries, both minor and major, at the 53 man roster cut down. The compensations through talent and experience is simply not there for even minor injuries. Of course, the league cares little about these players unless the injury presents a potential meaningful future liability (concussion, spinal cord). And if we are honest with ourselves, neither do we except in rare moments of reflection such as this.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2019
  16. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    801
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1980
    more injuries wouldn't surprise me either, as that brings me back to something i've said in the past about athletes overworking. Little things become big things because they're pounded on daily year round. and it doesn't start when they're 24 and in the NFL, it starts at 10 these days. We haven't even gotten to the worst of it. They think concussions are going to ruin the NFL? HA! youth sports are going to kill professional sports. Just wait.

    Half the kids are shunned before they even start in a lot of places. haven't hit puberty yet and already on the outside because they weren't good enough to be included at 9, though they could dominate at 15. But they never had the interest or the opportunity. The other half are going to be dealing with major league injuries by the time they're 15, they probably won't make it out of college. Under developed and over competing. It's a problem today but that's another story. Then you have the ones that were great at 12 because they practiced every day since they were 4 and have a mustache, but find out other kids catch up when they're 17 and they arne't that great relatively speaking anymore and they burn out or quit.

    Back to the NFL. we haven't really hit that wave of kids yet, but there are a lot now starting to come into the league where 1 sport started to dominate early and be played year round, but now just in the league they train hard year round. Leads to bigger faster stronger. Also leads to more injuries. that little inversion sprain that never healed can become an ACL or meniscus later when you pound on it long enough.
     
  17. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    You make interesting points about youth football and youth sports in general.

    60 Minutes did a report recently on youth sports in tiny Norway and how that might relate to their unprecedented dominance at the 2018 Winter Olympics.

    In Norway, everybody plays, scores are not kept until around age 12, no travelling teams, costs are kept to a minimum to maximize participation among the willing. I didn't hear anything about participation trophies either. Youth sports are "play", not competition, and there's no special status for participating. Play if you want, don't if you don't, either way is fine. The Norwegians find it ridculous to sort out talent at an early age, dumping performance pressure on mere children, or closing off opportunities for the late bloomers. Moving up in the age groups, competition for scholarships is foreign. If nothing else it is a system allowing children to find their love for the game of their choice if they are so inclined.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. gbgary

    gbgary Cheesehead

    Messages:
    2,272
    Likes Received:
    122
    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Location:
    juuust outside dallas
    Packer Fan Since:
    1964
    negotiations are give-and-take situations. how do you think the practice situation got where it is today. the league wanted something and the players said fine if you restrict practices in some way. it's not unrealistic to think they'd give in on more padded practices if the league gives in on an issue in their favor.

    btw...we need get a drinking game going for every time you say "i highly doubt..." lol
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    801
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1980
    Traveling teams are kind of dumb. It's a money maker that's for sure. Towns and cities love it because it keeps their hotels booked etc. My 9 year old niece was out of state twice a month playing basketball for 3 months in a row LOL she's never going to be above 5'1" and likely never play thru high school even. There are literally 3K girls at her skill level within a 30 minute drive that are playing basketball. But they have to travel to MN to play in a tournament and then Rockford IL in 2 weeks for the next LOL

    People are too busy kidding themselves to raise kids anymore.
     
  20. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    22,298
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    I'm quite sure Football Outsiders include players missing games because of either being on PUP or IR in their metric.

    With player safety being extremely important to the league they won't be in favor of increasing the number of padded practices.

    I highly doubt that would be a smart idea ;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
  21. Mondio

    Mondio Cheesehead

    Messages:
    8,938
    Likes Received:
    801
    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1980
    20 years ago I would have gladly accepted that challenge :) I'd like to think I'd pass on it today because I'm older and wiser, but it's probably more so because I just get tired too easily and would fall asleep in a chair.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  22. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    22,298
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    I would be fine doing it on a Friday night as that would leave me with two days to recover before Monday. No chance it would work during a Packers game on Sunday though.
     
  23. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    The piece discusses the weekly injury report only.

    For example, the Ravens started the season with 4 guys on IR and 3 on PUP. Those players are not mentioned among the "specific Ravens who battled injuries".

    https://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/ravens-release-10-players-send-four-to-injured-reserve

    I'm not going to do a deep dive on those IR/PUP players. However, the first one in the list, DeShone Elliott, went to IR with a fractured forearm. He missed at least 8 games with that injury, maybe the whole season since he did not log a game played.
     
  24. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    22,298
    Likes Received:
    1,122
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    Take a look at this article, it mentions several players that ended up on injured reserve. Therefore I'm quite sure the AGL metric includes players that have been either put on PUP or IR.

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2019/2018-adjusted-games-lost-part-ii
     
  25. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Messages:
    12,495
    Likes Received:
    869
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    Based on this part II piece I have to partially agree. I find it strange that in part I there was no mention of PUP or IR, only weekly injury reports. Regardless, there is still a problem.

    To take one example, they mention Ross Cockrell in Part II figuring into the Panthers AGL data. He started the season on IR after a serious training camp injury. Other players who went on IR after the season started are also mentioned in Part II. So far so good.

    However, as I noted earlier, they did not count some or all of the 7 Ravens players who started the season on PUP and IR otherwise the team AGL would be higher. As noted, DeShon Elliott, a safety, spent the season on IR yet FO shows only 8.5 AGL for Raven's DBs.

    Part II suggests they count starters and "situational players" only, and you have to get well into Part II get a hint of that. They changed their definition of "situational player" but so what it was or what it is. FO has a habit of producing a barrage of data without being clear about what they are actually measuring and how they do it. Did they assume Elliott would not be a situational player, and on what basis? How relevant is a stat that counts 15 O-Linemen on one team as "starters"?
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019

Share This Page

-->