Re: MgoResearch, re: mobile QB injurability
I didn't want to ask the MGoBoard for this until after I tried a dozen MgoBlog search entry iterations on my own. Since I've now done that and found nothing, I'll ask...
Over the course of the last twenty-four months, this blog has MgoPublished several statistical reports, the results of which highlight that (contrary to common belief and logic) mobile QBs are not more prone to injuries than "Pro-Style" QBs. I'd like to peruse those results again and cite them elsewhere. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble finding them. I remain confident that they archived here nonetheless. Can anyone with these links handy please paste them here?
Sorry for being buggersome and thank you for your help.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:04 PM ^
Here's his most recent (to my knowledge) research:
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/qb-fragility-update
Edit: Originally posted wrong link above; fixed. (thanks lfj75)
He's got plenty of good stuff, so browse around the rest of his diaries as well:
September 27th, 2010 at 4:02 PM ^
I was totally thinking that you were going to post an question as to whether mobile qb's are injured more often. I was going to try to warn you off before getting crushed by the ruthless MgoMob.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:03 PM ^
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/qb-fragility-update
Also includes some links to other diaries on the same topic.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^
Hmm, must be Italian.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:54 PM ^
It was an obscure and difficult reference, well done.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:59 PM ^
That movie is part of my Christmas tradition. +1 for any reference to it.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^
Thank you. I will make good use of the information.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:19 PM ^
I had missed both of these earlier.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:34 PM ^
Thanks for the repost on these.
September 27th, 2010 at 4:38 PM ^
...this research and many posts of similar quality are conveniently catalogued at the User-Curated MGoHallofFame for your viewing pleasure.
September 27th, 2010 at 5:43 PM ^
Is it against logic that running QBs don't get injured with more regularity.
Think how many (non-Iowa) RBs go through a full season without significant injury. Often they get banged up, miss a few plays here and there, maybe a game, but in terms of multiple-game or season ending injuries....sure they happen but it's not an epidemic.
Meanwhile, while statue-QBs don't get tackled as much, no position takes more set-up, full-on kill shots except Matt Leinart's WRs (zing!). Whereas a RB/running QB gets wrapped up and dragged down, an immobile QB has guys launching themselves at him, driving him into the turf, and hitting him from the blindside with no chance to protect himself.
So it seems quite logical to me that serious, miss-several-games type injuries would be every bit (or more) likely for non-mobile QBs as mobile.
September 27th, 2010 at 5:50 PM ^
It should be added that running QBs don't get injured as often as running backs, either. RBs have to pass protect (which can lead to some very physical collisions) and are generally expected to initiate contact with defenders. Denard is not.