DFW: NFL team-by-team injuries: Cowboys excuse?

[perrykemp]

The Cowboys had the third most games lost to injury in the NFL, according to data compiled by Rick Gosselin. But the two most hurt teams -- Washington and Green Bay -- made the playoffs.

This chart lists the games lost by starters due to injury during the 2012 NFL season. It lists the team, the number of games lost (Games), players placed on injured reserve (IR), the number of 16-game starters (16g) plus the key injury and his games lost:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dat...-an-excuse.ece

[burmafrd]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

The Cowboys had the third most games lost to injury in the NFL, according to data compiled by Rick Gosselin. But the two most hurt teams -- Washington and Green Bay -- made the playoffs.

This chart lists the games lost by starters due to injury during the 2012 NFL season. It lists the team, the number of games lost (Games), players placed on injured reserve (IR), the number of 16-game starters (16g) plus the key injury and his games lost:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dat...-an-excuse.ece

when you claim that Church was the key injury then your whole chart becomes questionable

[187beatdown]

But 6/12 are in the top 10.

EDIT: Add in that Green Bay is probably 1st or 2nd best in the NFC anyways and their offense can score at will. For a tier 2 team I think it plays more a role in games lost than say Green Bay or New England because unless they are losing Rodgers or Brady, they will still be fine. I'm not making excuses but I don't think it's fair to say that a team that is already tops in the league and loaded that has some injuries really compares to the Cowboys who happen to actually need everyone to compete because they don't have superstars.

EDIT2: For example, a team like Detroit who is also far down that list may have had a much better season.

[NorthTexan95]

Barry Church was out "key" injury?

That list doesn't take into account the significance of the injuries. If you're losing backups or average starters then that's one thing. If you're losing stars (top players at key positions) then that's another. We were absolutely hammered on defense and especially middle linebacker and nose tackle.

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

when you claim that Church was the key injury then your whole chart becomes questionable

It's only based on number of games missed, and he missed all 16.
They aren't saying he's the best player that was injured. Lazy, I know, but that's how they are doing it.

Also, it's not a bad idea to cross check number of games missed vs that other column showing how many starters they had play all 16 games. For example, even though Washington had a bunch of games missed overall, they also had a ton of players go the whole season without injury. They had the 3rd best luck in that area. Either way though, they deserve some kudos.

Dallas looked bad on both lists--missed a bunch of players and also had few go the whole way. That requires, as we saw, and crazy amount of juggling.

Green Bay really deserve props because they had a lot of the same situation--many coming from the WR corp though, yet they managed to survive.

Of the fortunate teams that had few injuries but still didn't make the playoffs, the Gaints have the least excuse, imo. The Bear actually wetn 10-6. The Saints all of thpose other external issues early on. Miami and St Louis are just not yet playoff caliber.
Basically, all the rest made the playoffs.

[Future]

Originally Posted by NorthTexan95

Barry Church was out "key" injury?

That list doesn't take into account the significance of the injuries. If you're losing backups or average starters then that's one thing. If you're losing stars (top players at key positions) then that's another. We were absolutely hammered on defense and especially middle linebacker and nose tackle.

Exactly. The Skins and Packers had a bunch of crappy players get hurt - for the most part. The Cowboys lost starter after starter after starter to injury.

No team can successfully replace the production you get from Lee, Carter, Ratliff, and Church

[Zimmy Lives]

Originally Posted by Future

Exactly. The Skins and Packers had a bunch of crappy players get hurt - for the most part. The Cowboys lost starter after starter after starter to injury.

No team can successfully replace the production you get from Lee, Carter, Ratliff, and Church

I wouldn't necessarily call Meriweather, Orakpoo and Carriker "crappy." And lets not forget that the Skins also lost Brown and Davis on offense.

[187beatdown]

Originally Posted by Zimmy Lives

I wouldn't necessarily call Meriweather, Orakpoo and Carriker "crappy." And lets not forget that the Skins also lost Brown and Davis on offense.

I actually think of that list the Skins did quite the most fantastic job, but it shouldn't be a reason to discredit the Cowboys on losing as many starters as they did. Nor should it for any team.

The Steelers are another team that suffered pretty hard from injuries and probably cost them a couple games as well. They were fielding 5th string corners at one point.

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by 187beatdown

I actually think of that list the Skins did quite the most fantastic job, but it shouldn't be a reason to discredit the Cowboys on losing as many starters as they did. Nor should it for any team.

The Steelers are another team that suffered pretty hard from injuries and probably cost them a couple games as well. They were fielding 5th string corners at one point.

The Redskins were tied with 2nd best fortune regarding numenbr of starters to play the entire 16 game season. They do deserve a ton of credit, but the bulk of their big injury issues came early and they had a lot of continuity the rest of the way--hence the surge down the stretch.

Anyway, we actually would have finished ahead of them if we complete that drive at the end of the game when we were down 3 with 3 minutes left.
Just recall that one "major" injury for them came at RB....and all that did was upgrade their team in a big way.
Again, they do deserve kudos though.

[Future]

Originally Posted by Zimmy Lives

I wouldn't necessarily call Meriweather, Orakpoo and Carriker "crappy." And lets not forget that the Skins also lost Brown and Davis on offense.

Well, that's why I said for the most part. Though Orakpo is a great player, I don't think the Skins lost anything without Meriweather and Carriker. They might be solid, but are replaceable.

My point was more than the games lost statistic isn't always a great measurement because a scrub who gets hurt early and misses 15 games isn't nearly as important to a team as a great starter who gets hurt and misses 6.

[Zimmy Lives]

Originally Posted by Future

Well, that's why I said for the most part. Though Orakpo is a great player, I don't think the Skins lost anything without Meriweather and Carriker. They might be solid, but are replaceable.

My point was more than the games lost statistic isn't always a great measurement because a scrub who gets hurt early and misses 15 games isn't nearly as important to a team as a great starter who gets hurt and misses 6.

Point taken.

Although I tend to agree with most that RR was handicapped by injuries, I also think he could have done a better job of making sure his players were in the right position to make plays and finished with sound tackling.

[perrykemp]

Originally Posted by Future

Exactly. The Skins and Packers had a bunch of crappy players get hurt - for the most part. The Cowboys lost starter after starter after starter to injury.

No team can successfully replace the production you get from Lee, Carter, Ratliff, and Church

For reference, the Packers starters lost to injury:

WR #1 - Jennings - Missed 8 Games
WR #2 - Nelson - Missed 4 Games
RB #1 - Benson - Missed 11 Games - Out for the Year.
LT #1 - Sherrod - Missed 16 Games (Their 2011 #1st Round Pick - projected starter in 2012)
RT #1 - Bulaga - Missed 7 Games - Out for the year
SS #1 - Woodson - Missed 9 Games
ROLB #1 - Clay Matthews - Missed 4 Games
LILB #1 - Bishop - Missed 16 Games - Out for the Year
LCB #1 Shields - Missed 6 Games
LOLB #1 - Nick Perry - Missed 10 Games - Out for the Year

I think the the most notable is both of their Offensive Tackles were lost for the season which probably explains much of the reason why Rodgers was sacked 51 times this season.

[DFWJC]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

For reference, the Packers starters lost to injury:

WR #1 - Jennings - Missed 8 Games
WR #2 - Nelson - Missed 4 Games
RB #1 - Benson - Missed 11 Games - Out for the Year.
LT #1 - Sherrod - Missed 16 Games (Their 2011 #1st Round Pick - projected starter in 2012)
RT #1 - Bulaga - Missed 7 Games - Out for the year
SS #1 - Woodson - Missed 9 Games
ROLB #1 - Clay Matthews - Missed 4 Games
LILB #1 - Bishop - Missed 16 Games - Out for the Year
LCB #1 Shields - Missed 6 Games
LOLB #1 - Nick Perry - Missed 10 Games - Out for the Year

I think the the most notable is both of their Offensive Tackles were lost for the season which probably explains much of the reason why Rodgers was sacked 51 times this season.

Have to be impressed with those guys.
When you combine most starter games missed with least players to play all 16 games, they were the opnly team in the league worse off than Dallas.
They adapted. recall that they had a very rough start.

Also, I think we have a very good QB in Romo, but he is not Rodgers.

Rodgers will take a sack almost every time if he can't throw the ball away, so his sacks are almost always high but his ints are preposterously low. He's that extremely rare non-bus driver QB that has a very high number of TDs to go with low picks. 39 Ts and 8 ints ...whoa.

[jzcowboy]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

I think the the most notable is both of their Offensive Tackles were lost for the season which probably explains much of the reason why Rodgers was sacked 51 times this season.

He was sacked 51 times this season because he would rather take a sack.

[Future]

Originally Posted by Zimmy Lives

Point taken.

Although I tend to agree with most that RR was handicapped by injuries, I also think he could have done a better job of making sure his players were in the right position to make plays and finished with sound tackling.

Completely agree about RR. Great coordinators find a way to get the most out of players and use their strengths. He, and JG for that matter, does not. I think Jerry recognized this, and that's why he is gone.

Originally Posted by perrykemp

For reference, the Packers starters lost to injury:

WR #1 - Jennings - Missed 8 Games
WR #2 - Nelson - Missed 4 Games
RB #1 - Benson - Missed 11 Games - Out for the Year.
LT #1 - Sherrod - Missed 16 Games (Their 2011 #1st Round Pick - projected starter in 2012)
RT #1 - Bulaga - Missed 7 Games - Out for the year
SS #1 - Woodson - Missed 9 Games
ROLB #1 - Clay Matthews - Missed 4 Games
LILB #1 - Bishop - Missed 16 Games - Out for the Year
LCB #1 Shields - Missed 6 Games
LOLB #1 - Nick Perry - Missed 10 Games - Out for the Year

I think the the most notable is both of their Offensive Tackles were lost for the season which probably explains much of the reason why Rodgers was sacked 51 times this season.

Other than Matthews, none of those guys are as important to that team as Lee and Carter. Losing both tackles does suck, but neither one of those guys is irreplaceable, and they have a quarterback that helps them out. In a 34, its really difficult to help out MLBs and DTs.