News: Cowboys Injured Reserve Players: Getting Them Healthy May Be Third Leg In Building 2016 Roster

[CCBoy]

Cowboys Injured Reserve Players: Getting Them Healthy May Be Third Leg In Building 2016 Roster
By Tom Ryle


http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2016...rlando-scandrick-terrell-mcclain-lance-dunbar




...THE BIG THREE

A well-discussed theory around here is the idea that there are five positions of great importance on any NFL team; quarterback, wide receiver, left offensive tackle, cornerback, and edge rusher. For much of the year, the Cowboys were missing three of these. Many games saw all of those three players absent.

Orlando Scandrick was lost for the entire year and was, at the time, considered the best corner on the team. With Morris Claiborne a free agent and a candidate to be lost to a better offer elsewhere, and Brandon Carr still not living up to his lofty contract, the return of Scandrick is very important for the secondary. If healthy, he will be an immediate upgrade.

Dez Bryant went down in the first game of the year, and although he returned to the field, he was never the player he was previously. When 100 per cent he is simply one of the best receivers in the league. With his new contract, the Cowboys need him return to form.

Tony Romo was, of course, the most significant loss to the team. He elevates the entire offense. His health will continue to be a concern as Father Time continues to stalk him. While the team will be seeking a more serviceable backup this year and may be able to get a future replacement with their draft position, they still have to have a capable Romo to go anywhere this coming season. Having him and Bryant both back in shape will completely change the offense.

THE UNDERVALUED LOSSES

Terrell McClain's loss was overshadowed by Romo's injury in the same game, but his absence was felt on the defensive line. His toe injury seems like one he should be able to return from, but those can be tricky. McClain was off to a solid start on the season. His return could really shore up the interior of the line, and he appears to be a very positive influence in the locker room, as opposed to another defensive lineman that comes to mind.

Lance Dunbar was the leading receiver for the team coming out of the backfield when he was hurt. Part of that may be a reflection of the number of checkdowns being thrown after Romo went out, but Dunbar was once again showing his promise when he went down. It is a familiar story for him, unfortunately. He is the one player on IR who is also a free agent, so his return is an open question. However, if the staff decides to bring him back and Dallas is not outbid for his services (there will certainly be a hard limit on how much they would pay him), he is a very good change of pace weapon out of the backfield...

 

[dallasdave]

Scandrick was a huge loss.

 

[DeaconMoss]

OScan.....This further makes my point. Not missing on High draft picks and getting a few players in rounds 4-7 makes a team. We get the top picks right for the most part, but Dallas needs to do a better job in later rounds.

 

[DogFace]

I've been assured by a poster on here that injuries played little to no part in us falling from a contender to being 4-12. He's super smart.

 

[bodi]

I waiting on seeing Ryan Russell

 

[pugilist]

i worry that Scandrick may not be the same player he was ever again after that injury

that looked HORRIBLE when it happened, like total and complete destruction of the knee... hopefully he can bounce back and be the badass he was

 

[CCBoy]

I have faith in Scandrick. He works so hard, I think he can overcome just about any injury.

 

[TX_Yid]

Until we start getting new injuries in Training Camp of course.

 

[Stash]

Several of the players on this list have a history of injury. Not just freak bad luck last season.

And I think anyone willing to count on theses players to suddenly reverse that trend is kidding themselves.

Romo is obviously coming back, but he's missed time over the past several seasons, and at age 36, that's unlikely to change. Simply hoping that he stays healthy is foolish and the team absolutely has to have a reliable plan for 2016 and the future.

Terrell McClain has missed more games than he's played. To rely on this leopard to suddenly change his spots would be another mistake. He should be lucky to be brought to training camp this year.

Lance Dunbar has gotten hurt every time the team has played him. It's obvious that he's not made to handle the rigors of the NFL game. Between injury history and his limitations as an actual running back, he's a luxury player this team can no longer afford.

I think any mindset of getting perpetually injured players back with the hopes that somehow this will be the year they stay healthy is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Doc50]

Scandrick was a huge loss.

He used to run a 4.32 40. Won't get back to that.

 

[Doc50]

Several of the players on this list have a history of injury. Not just freak bad luck last season.

And I think anyone willing to count on theses players to suddenly reverse that trend is kidding themselves.

Romo is obviously coming back, but he's missed time over the past several seasons, and at age 36, that's unlikely to change. Simply hoping that he stays healthy is foolish and the team absolutely has to have a reliable plan for 2016 and the future.

Terrell McClain has missed more games than he's played. To rely on this leopard to suddenly change his spots would be another mistake. He should be lucky to be brought to training camp this year.

Lance Dunbar has gotten hurt every time the team has played him. It's obvious that he's not made to handle the rigors of the NFL game. Between injury history and his limitations as an actual running back, he's a luxury player this team can no longer afford.

I think any mindset of getting perpetually injured players back with the hopes that somehow this will be the year they stay healthy is a recipe for disaster.

You bring up an interesting question, Stash. Is it possible that a recurrent injury scenario is predictable, related to some known variable?

While some "big-boned" athletes have seemed to be indestructible, it's obvious that some of the thinner guys will not stand as much punishment, and that is typically considered. But injury history both good and bad has seemed rather random and difficult to predict.

What I propose, is that there will be a direct correlation between NFL injuries and prior steroid use, even if it ended in high school, but especially if it continued through college. NFL testing detects most of these agents now, and current use has therefore declined. A landmark study of retired NFL players that was done in 2009 showed very positive correlation to steroid use and injuries; many of the subjects in question used PED's fairly consistently through their careers (before the advent of effective testing).

In Texas, all high school athletes are routinely tested as part of a comprehensive UIL program, but it's quite frankly a waste of time and money.
I'm aware of several HS football programs in which PED use is rampant, but testing isn't random or spontaneous enough to confirm that. The physiologic changes that occur in bones and connective tissue are well-documented, and they are likely to have more long-term effects than previously thought. The age that one starts anabolic steroids is also quite significant in predicting negative outcomes.

The problem is that there is currently no way of ascertaining the amount and duration of previous PED use. The only way to assure less injuries and more safety is to modify the UIL program, not scrap it, as some have proposed.

 

[CCBoy]

You bring up an interesting question, Stash. Is it possible that a recurrent injury scenario is predictable, related to some known variable?

While some "big-boned" athletes have seemed to be indestructible, it's obvious that some of the thinner guys will not stand as much punishment, and that is typically considered. But injury history both good and bad has seemed rather random and difficult to predict.

What I propose, is that there will be a direct correlation between NFL injuries and prior steroid use, even if it ended in high school, but especially if it continued through college. NFL testing detects most of these agents now, and current use has therefore declined. A landmark study of retired NFL players that was done in 2009 showed very positive correlation to steroid use and injuries; many of the subjects in question used PED's fairly consistently through their careers (before the advent of effective testing).

In Texas, all high school athletes are routinely tested as part of a comprehensive UIL program, but it's quite frankly a waste of time and money.
I'm aware of several HS football programs in which PED use is rampant, but testing isn't random or spontaneous enough to confirm that. The physiologic changes that occur in bones and connective tissue are well-documented, and they are likely to have more long-term effects than previously thought. The age that one starts anabolic steroids is also quite significant in predicting negative outcomes.

The problem is that there is currently no way of ascertaining the amount and duration of previous PED use. The only way to assure less injuries and more safety is to modify the UIL program, not scrap it, as some have proposed.

If it ever were as easy as pursuing a zero tolerance level, that already would have been achieved. Today, too many prominent people in High School and Collegiate programs, just really don't care...unless caught dramatically.

 

[Stash]

You bring up an interesting question, Stash. Is it possible that a recurrent injury scenario is predictable, related to some known variable?

While some "big-boned" athletes have seemed to be indestructible, it's obvious that some of the thinner guys will not stand as much punishment, and that is typically considered. But injury history both good and bad has seemed rather random and difficult to predict.

What I propose, is that there will be a direct correlation between NFL injuries and prior steroid use, even if it ended in high school, but especially if it continued through college. NFL testing detects most of these agents now, and current use has therefore declined. A landmark study of retired NFL players that was done in 2009 showed very positive correlation to steroid use and injuries; many of the subjects in question used PED's fairly consistently through their careers (before the advent of effective testing).

In Texas, all high school athletes are routinely tested as part of a comprehensive UIL program, but it's quite frankly a waste of time and money.
I'm aware of several HS football programs in which PED use is rampant, but testing isn't random or spontaneous enough to confirm that. The physiologic changes that occur in bones and connective tissue are well-documented, and they are likely to have more long-term effects than previously thought. The age that one starts anabolic steroids is also quite significant in predicting negative outcomes.

The problem is that there is currently no way of ascertaining the amount and duration of previous PED use. The only way to assure less injuries and more safety is to modify the UIL program, not scrap it, as some have proposed.

I think it's a challenge to be sure, but I wouldn't limit my research strictly to steroids. I think plenty of supplements qualify. I think guys can max out their bodies with creatine, huge amounts of protein, and tons of supplements. And while that adds muscle, I think a guy's natural genetics determine a great deal in terms of his bones, joints, and ligaments holding up.

Take a player like Sean Lee for example. I'm obviously not saying he's taking steroids, but I see him as an example of a naturally average to smaller guy who has maxed out his potential in every way he can. But underneath, he's still a 180lb guy with those genetics. And in my own opinion, that goes a long way toward his injury history.

 

[Teague31]

Chaz Green
Also anxious to see what the German LB has. His numbers are off the charts

 

[kiheikiwi]

Chaz Green
Also anxious to see what the German LB has. His numbers are off the charts[/quad in the DT Criss Whaley from Texas who has been injured for 2 years.But, that in of itself is the Dallas way. McClain coming off the toe and Whaley an UDFA. Man they better not just be "hoping" that covers it ...

 

[Cowboy4ever]

Several of the players on this list have a history of injury. Not just freak bad luck last season.

And I think anyone willing to count on theses players to suddenly reverse that trend is kidding themselves.

Romo is obviously coming back, but he's missed time over the past several seasons, and at age 36, that's unlikely to change. Simply hoping that he stays healthy is foolish and the team absolutely has to have a reliable plan for 2016 and the future.

Terrell McClain has missed more games than he's played. To rely on this leopard to suddenly change his spots would be another mistake. He should be lucky to be brought to training camp this year.

Lance Dunbar has gotten hurt every time the team has played him. It's obvious that he's not made to handle the rigors of the NFL game. Between injury history and his limitations as an actual running back, he's a luxury player this team can no longer afford.

I think any mindset of getting perpetually injured players back with the hopes that somehow this will be the year they stay healthy is a recipe for disaster.

I agree with the exception of Romo. He has missed 2 games since 2011 before this year. Not really a trend. We all know about his back, his Wednesday practices etc.. but he hasn't been missing games because of that at all. Definitely time to start thinking about and preparing for life after Romo and this would be a great time to address it with our high draft picks, but that would be the case regardless due to age. I am not concerned about his "injury history".

 

[Stash]

I agree with the exception of Romo. He has missed 2 games since 2011 before this year. Not really a trend. We all know about his back, his Wednesday practices etc.. but he hasn't been missing games because of that at all. Definitely time to start thinking about and preparing for life after Romo and this would be a great time to address it with our high draft picks, but that would be the case regardless due to age. I am not concerned about his "injury history".

Even Romo has considerable injury risk. Of the past 10 years, Romo has played a full season just half the time. And he's played only two full seasons since 2010. Given his multiple back surgeries and multiple collarbone fractures, I think he definitely qualifies as having an injury history. I'm not saying he should be replaced, only that multiple moves need to be made at the position both for now and in the future to ensure the team against a future Romo injury.

 

[CCBoy]

Even Romo has considerable injury risk. Of the past 10 years, Romo has played a full season just half the time. And he's played only two full seasons since 2010. Given his multiple back surgeries and multiple collarbone fractures, I think he definitely qualifies as having an injury history. I'm not saying he should be replaced, only that multiple moves need to be made at the position both for now and in the future to ensure the team against a future Romo injury.

That is called quality depth...that is needed also at RB, DE, DT, as well as WR. A safety wouldn't hurt.

 

[big dog cowboy]

there are five positions of great importance on any NFL team; quarterback, wide receiver, left offensive tackle, cornerback, and edge rusher.

Something to remember as we enter draft weekend.

There is a reason we won't go RB in the first round.

 

[waving monkey]

You bring up an interesting question, Stash. Is it possible that a recurrent injury scenario is predictable, related to some known variable?

While some "big-boned" athletes have seemed to be indestructible, it's obvious that some of the thinner guys will not stand as much punishment, and that is typically considered. But injury history both good and bad has seemed rather random and difficult to predict.

What I propose, is that there will be a direct correlation between NFL injuries and prior steroid use, even if it ended in high school, but especially if it continued through college. NFL testing detects most of these agents now, and current use has therefore declined. A landmark study of retired NFL players that was done in 2009 showed very positive correlation to steroid use and injuries; many of the subjects in question used PED's fairly consistently through their careers (before the advent of effective testing).

In Texas, all high school athletes are routinely tested as part of a comprehensive UIL program, but it's quite frankly a waste of time and money.
I'm aware of several HS football programs in which PED use is rampant, but testing isn't random or spontaneous enough to confirm that. The physiologic changes that occur in bones and connective tissue are well-documented, and they are likely to have more long-term effects than previously thought. The age that one starts anabolic steroids is also quite significant in predicting negative outcomes.

The problem is that there is currently no way of ascertaining the amount and duration of previous PED use. The only way to assure less injuries and more safety is to modify the UIL program, not scrap it, as some have proposed.

very interesting post