October 21st, 2013 at 10:50 AM ^

I was serious, but you're probably right.  There's that whole "played less than 30% of games" rule for medical redshirts, and I'm curious as to whether that's 30% of snaps or just 30% of games, but it is probably the latter.


October 21st, 2013 at 10:53 AM ^

Right:  it's games played.  Even the 2 games where he only played on special teams (the field goal team, I think) and didn't see a regular snap count against that 30%.

The "not sure if serious" comes from the frequent discussions that pop up here regarding medical redshirts, especially the discussion around Gardner's redshirt a few years ago.


October 21st, 2013 at 12:55 PM ^

that says if you play at all in the second half of the regular season you are not eligible for a medical.

Indiana was the 7th game of the year so anyone who got hurt in that game (or anytime going forward) is not eligible for a medical regardless of how many games they play.

Section 1

October 21st, 2013 at 12:05 PM ^

I hope this isn't too dumb of a question; being at the game I didn't hear any broadcast.  I watched bits and peices of the BTN rebroadcast on Sunday.  If they explained what happened to Dileo I didn't see it.  And I didn't see anything on MGoBlog.  Even a Google search turned up nothing.

So what happened?

What I saw on Saturday was Dileo with a headset on (that was interesting, for a non-QB) standing very comfortably on the sideline.  No limp, no ice, no boot, no arm in a sling.  But also no helmet anywhere in sight.


October 21st, 2013 at 10:50 AM ^

This has got to be a record for M football. Is it time to reevaluate the strength/conditioning staff? I'm obviously no doctor but having a father being a track coach who specializes in stretching, this shouldn't be happening this severely. A couple of them? Sure it's football, but what is this, 9 in the past two years? 8? This isn't ok


October 21st, 2013 at 11:28 AM ^

I am obviously not saying I know for a fact it's the strength and condition coaches fault. What I am saying, is that to have this many non contact torn ACLs, is just strange.

And since I've been around my Dad stretching his athletes, and others who come to him for help, former or current M football players say they do not stretch. It's all strength work which will help to an extent, but you have to stretch those muscles that you're building. That's all I'm saying. I'm not blaming the strength staff, just giving my two cents.

Brick in The Wave

October 21st, 2013 at 12:54 PM ^

The research is continually showing the pre-excercise static stretching is worthless.  Great for after work but not before.  FIFA 11+ is a warm up specifically designed to prevent ACL injuries in soccer players and it doesn't include any traditional stretches.  The numbers coming back on this warm-up have been excellent.


October 21st, 2013 at 3:34 PM ^

You're not?


Joined: 12/29/2010
MGoPoints: 5631
Torn ACLs have nothing to do

Torn ACLs have nothing to do with the S&C staff

The2nd_JEH's picture
Joined: 06/11/2010
MGoPoints: 444
Yes they do.

Yes they do.



October 21st, 2013 at 12:22 PM ^

You have proof of this?  Because last time I checked, those initial ACL tears tend to occur somewhat randomly within the flow of a game or movement, not because it was "strengthened" enough.  I've met some runners who tore various ligaments doing their normal workouts, just they had a bad twist or turn on a trail.  I mean, no amount of conditioning and strengthen will protect you from an awkward fall or a huge guy rolling up on your ankle.

Fuzzy Dunlop

October 21st, 2013 at 11:00 AM ^

There is no occurrence that someone on this board will not somehow tie into a call to "reevaluate" some portion of the coaching staff.

Seven of our players were bitten on the ass by a Sumatran rat monkey and are now flesh-eating zombies!

We really need to take a hard look at Curt Mallory.  If those players had their hips on a swivel this never would have happened.

Section 1

October 21st, 2013 at 12:13 PM ^

For the black humor-impaired:

The reason to question S&C coaches for things like ACL's now, is because some people had the temerity to question Mike Barwis over the occurrence of ACL's back, uh, in the day.

It was stupid then, and of course the same complaint now is just as stupid.  The difference is that now it is funny in a vengeful sort of way.  I don't know about anybody else, but I'm not seriously blaming S&C for any game injuries.  And I am not happy about any harm to Joey Burzinski; get well soon, come back and play hard big guy.  But yeah, I don't mind at all hammering back at the anti-Barwis hysteria of a few years ago.  It happened right here on this Board.  (Credit to those here who helped shout it down.)

Fuzzy Dunlop

October 21st, 2013 at 12:56 PM ^

I'm confused.  Are you really suggesting that The2nd_JEH's intent was to parody some kind of "blame Barwis" hysteria over injuries that apparently existed four years ago (which I certainly don't recall)?  I don't see anything in any of his posts to suggest such parodic intent.  

Or are your just projecting your preoccupation with the Rich Rod battles of yesteryear onto a post that has nothing to do with Rodriguez or his coaching staff? 


Section 1

October 21st, 2013 at 1:12 PM ^

I'm confused.  Are you really suggesting that The2nd_JEH's intent was to parody some kind of "blame Barwis" hysteria over injuries that apparently existed four years ago (which I certainly don't recall)?  I don't see anything in any of his posts to suggest such parodic intent.   


Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting.  Although the more on-point reply would have been to MGoMember Trebor's post.  Which was the 10th post in this now-lengthy thread:

Bring back Barwis! 

So, yeah, at least in reply to that one, I am totally, explicitly, purposefully calling out that "parodic intent."


Fuzzy Dunlop

October 21st, 2013 at 1:37 PM ^

Then I'm not sure why you were calling me out for failing to grasp "black humor" when I was responding to The2nd_JEH, not Trebor.  In fact, I'm not sure why you were calling out anyone for failing to grasp the "inside joke," when no one responded to Trebor's post.  Doesn't seem there was a single poster who failed to grasp the joke.

Spontaneous Co…

October 21st, 2013 at 11:05 AM ^

If this were a team of geriatrics playing shuffleboard, I would agree.  These kids are extremely strong and athletic, even the offensive and defensive linemen.  Like you, I am not a doctor but having torn my ACL, my ortho told me that the best way to protect your ACL is to have extremely strong upper leg muscles (especially quads) to control the knee movement as much as possible.  While I guess it is always possible to have stronger quads, something tells me that these guys legs are pretty damn strong already.  I'd chalk it up to a run of bad luck.


October 21st, 2013 at 7:07 PM ^

Unfortunately, your Ortho is not correct on this one.  Having disproportionate quad vs hamstring strength will put you at more risk to tearing an ACL.  Quad to HS strength should be at a 3 to 2 ratio, but your HS strength is really important b/c, in regards to the shear forces at the knee, basically does the same thing as the ACL.  There are a few other things that have to do with ACL tears such as quad to HS firing pattern, hip abductor strength...etc. and these ARE most definitely things that the S & C coaches can control.  If they are just working quads, ie squats, deadlifts, power cleans and don't really do any focusing to the HS, the athletes definitely are more likely to tear their ACL.  Is it their fault, not completely but since they have been on staff there have been far too many ACL tears to call it coincidental.  


October 22nd, 2013 at 5:16 AM ^

Torso/core stability, alignment and dynamic balance (proprioception) are also important to prehab. Ireland described a “position of no return” which is considered to create high risk for non-contact ACL injury. The position involves trunk forward flexion and rotation to the opposite side, hip adduction and internal rotation, knee valgus and limited flexion, and tibial external rotation. 


October 21st, 2013 at 12:06 PM ^

What you said is true. I have also heard the new field turf is becoming a big contributing factor. Since the players are so much bigger and faster it generates a lot more force on their ligaments. The new field turf has much less give than grass (as in it stops players so suddenly) that it is compounding the effect. 


October 21st, 2013 at 3:38 PM ^

I am standing in line at Ann Arbor Pitchfork and Torch, and I'm not sure who I am supposed to blame here.  Should I put the pitchfork back on the shelves, chalking up this latest ACL to bad luck?...or am I supposed to blame our Strength and Conditioning coaches?...or do I blame Addidas for the crappy cleats and uniforms?...or the makers of the turf? 

I NEED TO KNOW exactly how many torches and how many pitchforks I should be buying, if at all, and if I should get the extended warranty.  HELP!


October 21st, 2013 at 3:45 PM ^

If that was a contributing factor, injuries should be going down, because the field turf is far more forgiving than the old astroturf was. Field turf is a lot closer to grass than astroturf was to field turf. Astroturf was basically sandpaper loosely glued on top of cement. As good as grass? No.  But I doubt it's rising in the realm of artificial surfaces.