Injury Reports - Why are they done and what do they mean?

Submitted by mGrowOld on November 26th, 2010 at 9:14 AM

I have a question and I'm hoping the board can help me out.  I went back and looked at Michigan's injury reports for the year and noticed that while there didn't seem to be a direct correlation between the percentage indicating the probability they would play and what actually happened.  I then went to the official NCAA website and looked for the rule mandating any sort of injury reporting or what guidelines the coaches should follow and found none (doesn't mean they're not there - I just couldn't find them).  So I started asking myself why in the hell do we publish one at all?

The NFL, because of betting mostly, requires teams to publish injury reports weekly.   Some coaches uses it to mislead other teams into thinking certain players won't play. We all remember Tom Brady famously showing up on the New England injury report for years and never missing a game.  And some coaches leave players off the list or downplay the severity in an effort to get other teams to game plan for players most likely not going to play but either way it's a game.  But its a league-mandated game.

But is this reporting required in college?  And if not, what possible gain does any team have by telling their opposition who is likely to go and who is not?   And if injury reports are required but there are no rules governing the accuracy of the reports should we even pay any attention at all to who's on it and who is not?  It would seem to me that a smart coach (and I think RR is a very smart coach) would fill the report with misinformation to try and gain any edge he can on Saturday.

Can anyone shed some light on this one for me?



November 26th, 2010 at 10:36 AM ^

Well then you didn't read either of those threads then because if you had you'd have seen I DID post that question, in both of them, and didn't get a response from anyone.

Still a dick.


November 26th, 2010 at 3:31 PM ^

I can't believe the immaturity on here. That would be like a movie critic talking about a movie he has not seen.  You would think one would READ the post before being a smart-ass.  It is amazing to think you are just posting something to get some information and it is like someone has to make their presence known by being an ass.


November 26th, 2010 at 11:48 AM ^

"Not to be a dick..."

Then why be one?  We have more than enough post crossing guards here as it is.  Besides, the OP is different from either of the threads you reference, and actually raises a pretty worthy question.


November 26th, 2010 at 9:28 AM ^

Unlike Fort Schembechler RR has invited the reporting community into his camp in an effort to be more inviting.  In turn the various media outlets have remained consistent in actilng like the pariah and hyena they are.


November 26th, 2010 at 9:50 AM ^

It doesn't give you any competitive advantage; if anything, the opposite. It's not required. And it's usually not accurate (how many "probable" guys have actually played?). The only purposes it serves seems to be to save questions about injured players every week; "wait for the injury report". But seemingly with all the other questions that annoy him, you'd think he'd want to spend less time talking about other stuff. I guess it also serves to disappoint fans every week when guys probable to play are more injured than reported and never see the field, though that's not intended.


November 26th, 2010 at 10:23 AM ^

God in heaven.  So our "renegade, rule-breaking" coach, out of the spirit of sportsmanship alone, publishes an injury report hoping it will inspire other coaches to do the same?  Now I totally understand why the game doesnt seem to match up to what he reports - until others join him no reason to be accurate and might as well use it to our gain.

So based on that new revelation I would assume that Lewan is out, the Haggerup rumor is true, Martin is out, Stonem is out and Hemmingway is fine.  I think we need to start reading these reports upside down if we really want to know what's going on.

Thank you Board.  Now I understand why they aren't accurate and why we don't get one from the opposing team.  But I still don't get why Rich does one at all yet.


November 26th, 2010 at 11:33 AM ^

If I'm not mistaken, I think I read somewhere that RR also does this to keep parents informed.  That is, he doesn't want parents to turn on the tv or show up the game wondering why their son isn't dressed or in the game.


November 26th, 2010 at 11:43 AM ^

I coached football for several years at the high school level and wondered if that was the reason too.  But I kinda discarded it because I figured the kids themselves would tell their parents if they would be playing or not.  Not saying it's not one of the reasons though.

Thank you.


November 26th, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^

I'd be surprised if there is any real advantage other than getting any questions out of the way.  I do hope that it encourages more coaches to release information just so that the last-minute games of "will he/won't he" are eliminated.