Observations from the Saints' Loss to the Ravens

leilung · 11-09-2022, 03:11 PM

My Ravens Game Post Mortem

The Uppers

- Defense had good pressure and containment on Jackson. (I just don’t see how you tackle a guy who can fumble the ball on the run, pick it up under pressure, and then hawk it 40+ yards downfield.)

- Good effort from all of the receivers who really did all that they could to keep the game interesting.

- Special Teams looked good with Shaheed handling the run backs.

The Downers (There’s a bunch so I’ll just hit a few.)

- Coaches are back to HIGHLY predictable offensive play calling and zero creativity with respect to Red Zone scoring efficiency. What happened in a week?

- If Dalton is struggling, why NOT use Hill more often under center...and not just so he can keep it to run for 4 yards.

- Not sure if it was because of shadowing Jackson, but Drake looked like Emmit Smith for no good reason.

- Roquan Smith wrecked shop. I got nothing.

- Dalton. How do you just go back to holding the ball (again) after doing such a great job of getting rid of the ball quickly the previous week? Also, missing a wide open Callaway? What in the the Blue Hell was THAT ish? Just when it looks like things are starting to click… we get a Red Ryder BB Gun instead of the fabled Red Rifle!

Mixed Bag
- Gilliken. Is this the same dude who got drug tested after booting the ball 80 yards?

- Has anyone done analysis on our injuries on Turf vs. Grass? Does the Dome need to be resurfaced to get our guys out of the blue tent?

AsylumGuido · 11-09-2022, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by leilung

- Has anyone done analysis on our injuries on Turf vs. Grass? Does the Dome need to be resurfaced to get our guys out of the blue tent?

Apparently a recent study shows there isn't much of a difference.

That said, I do know that a greater number of turf toe injuries have been tied to the ultra lightweight shoes that many players started wearing recently. There is virtually no support and it is becoming more and more common to hyperextend the toes even while wearing the shoes.

leilung likes this.

rezburna · 11-09-2022, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

Apparently a recent study shows there isn't much of a difference.

https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/stat...57655922049024

That said, I do know that a greater number of turf toe injuries have been tied to the ultra lightweight shoes that many players started wearing recently. There is virtually no support and it is becoming more and more common to hyperextend the toes even while wearing the shoes.

I preferred the turf myself.

BakoSaint · 11-09-2022, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

Apparently a recent study shows there isn't much of a difference.

https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/stat...57655922049024

That said, I do know that a greater number of turf toe injuries have been tied to the ultra lightweight shoes that many players started wearing recently. There is virtually no support and it is becoming more and more common to hyperextend the toes even while wearing the shoes.

I question these stats. Just looking at the graph, the injuries on natural grass are lower all four years from 2018-2021, ranging from 25% lower in 2019 to 2.5% lower in 2021. It looks like they were about 15% lower in 2018 and 2020 so that would be above the average. Also notice that the graph tracks a very specific subset of injuries: non contact injuries to the knee, ankle, and foot. It also has a very specific metric of missed time and we have no idea how they count that with free agents, retirements, suspensions, etc. I am always suspicious when I see something like that because if you have a lot of knobs you can turn playing with statistics you can often get the result you want, and specifying non contact vs contact injuries and three specific body parts seems like a lot of filtering to get the results they want. I would like to see a lot more graphs of different injury types and ways of measuring impact. Perhaps if they had looked at contact injuries to the toe, hips, and shin and measured by the number of surgical procedures or retirements not theoretical games missed, the injuries would have been double on artificial turf.

The NFL does not want to be liable for injuries or upset its owners big investments so I don't trust them to throw out one graph of their choosing that shows 15% less injuries on natural grass and even believe that graph is representative, much less that 15% means zero difference. I take take 15% to be the minimum difference.

11-09-2022, 03:11 PM	#1
leilung Booty Bandit Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: The Wastelands that are NJ Posts: 1,422	Re: Observations from the Saints' Loss to the Ravens My Ravens Game Post Mortem The Uppers - Defense had good pressure and containment on Jackson. (I just don’t see how you tackle a guy who can fumble the ball on the run, pick it up under pressure, and then hawk it 40+ yards downfield.) - Good effort from all of the receivers who really did all that they could to keep the game interesting. - Special Teams looked good with Shaheed handling the run backs. The Downers (There’s a bunch so I’ll just hit a few.) - Coaches are back to HIGHLY predictable offensive play calling and zero creativity with respect to Red Zone scoring efficiency. What happened in a week? - If Dalton is struggling, why NOT use Hill more often under center...and not just so he can keep it to run for 4 yards. - Not sure if it was because of shadowing Jackson, but Drake looked like Emmit Smith for no good reason. - Roquan Smith wrecked shop. I got nothing. - Dalton. How do you just go back to holding the ball (again) after doing such a great job of getting rid of the ball quickly the previous week? Also, missing a wide open Callaway? What in the the Blue Hell was THAT ish? Just when it looks like things are starting to click… we get a Red Ryder BB Gun instead of the fabled Red Rifle! Mixed Bag - Gilliken. Is this the same dude who got drug tested after booting the ball 80 yards? - Has anyone done analysis on our injuries on Turf vs. Grass? Does the Dome need to be resurfaced to get our guys out of the blue tent?
	A wise man once said, "Poo-poo smells just as bad as s#!%. One just SOUNDS cuter!"

11-09-2022, 03:41 PM	#2
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,574	Re: Observations from the Saints' Loss to the Ravens Originally Posted by leilung - Has anyone done analysis on our injuries on Turf vs. Grass? Does the Dome need to be resurfaced to get our guys out of the blue tent? Apparently a recent study shows there isn't much of a difference. Twitter That said, I do know that a greater number of turf toe injuries have been tied to the ultra lightweight shoes that many players started wearing recently. There is virtually no support and it is becoming more and more common to hyperextend the toes even while wearing the shoes. leilung likes this.

11-09-2022, 08:34 PM	#3
rezburna 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Kenner, LA Posts: 8,022	Re: Observations from the Saints' Loss to the Ravens Originally Posted by AsylumGuido Apparently a recent study shows there isn't much of a difference. https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/stat...57655922049024 That said, I do know that a greater number of turf toe injuries have been tied to the ultra lightweight shoes that many players started wearing recently. There is virtually no support and it is becoming more and more common to hyperextend the toes even while wearing the shoes. I preferred the turf myself.

11-09-2022, 09:36 PM	#4
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,347	Re: Observations from the Saints' Loss to the Ravens Originally Posted by AsylumGuido Apparently a recent study shows there isn't much of a difference. https://twitter.com/SeifertESPN/stat...57655922049024 That said, I do know that a greater number of turf toe injuries have been tied to the ultra lightweight shoes that many players started wearing recently. There is virtually no support and it is becoming more and more common to hyperextend the toes even while wearing the shoes. I question these stats. Just looking at the graph, the injuries on natural grass are lower all four years from 2018-2021, ranging from 25% lower in 2019 to 2.5% lower in 2021. It looks like they were about 15% lower in 2018 and 2020 so that would be above the average. Also notice that the graph tracks a very specific subset of injuries: non contact injuries to the knee, ankle, and foot. It also has a very specific metric of missed time and we have no idea how they count that with free agents, retirements, suspensions, etc. I am always suspicious when I see something like that because if you have a lot of knobs you can turn playing with statistics you can often get the result you want, and specifying non contact vs contact injuries and three specific body parts seems like a lot of filtering to get the results they want. I would like to see a lot more graphs of different injury types and ways of measuring impact. Perhaps if they had looked at contact injuries to the toe, hips, and shin and measured by the number of surgical procedures or retirements not theoretical games missed, the injuries would have been double on artificial turf. The NFL does not want to be liable for injuries or upset its owners big investments so I don't trust them to throw out one graph of their choosing that shows 15% less injuries on natural grass and even believe that graph is representative, much less that 15% means zero difference. I take take 15% to be the minimum difference.
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,347