PUNT750 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Is this all a bit absurd?? Installing the same field turf used for the past 8 seasons with a very low safety rating and then building a state of the art training center for conditioning and to rehabilitate injured players! “A-Turf will be completing the turf playing surface replacement at New Era Field just in time for the 2019 NFL season. In the meantime, Terry & Kim Pegula (team owners) and Bills players are celebrating the opening of a brand-new, world-class, 41,000 s.f. Sports Performance Center. It seamlessly links the club’s athletic training, strength and conditioning, and sports science departments. A-Turf installed a turf area for warm-up, post-workout, and flexibility work.” ____________________________________________________________________________________ AS PER THE FIVE YEAR STUDY BELOW - - The injury rates below are given per 1,000 athlete-exposures (AEs). One AE is defined as one player participating in one practice or game. Previous studies have shown that more than 80 percent of NFL injuries occur in games. Overall Injury Rates by Turf Type - - Five (5) Year Study by Football Outsiders - - [Injury rates with 95 percent confidence by turf type] The overall injury rates for grass and artificial turf are 16.9 and 17.2 per 1,000 AEs, respectively -- a modest difference. Matrix Turf has the best overall injury rate (14.2 per 1,000 AEs), while A-Turf's Titan product brings up the rear at 18.8. Any conclusions we can draw about Matrix and A-Turf are tempered by the fact that they're only installed at one stadium each -- Dallas and Buffalo, respectively. We may just be seeing the effects of healthy or unhealthy rosters, injury reporting habits, or good and bad training staffs. One way to control for that is to just look at the visiting teams who play on this turf. Here Matrix still leads the way at 15.6 (injury rates are generally higher for away teams than home teams) Maybe Dallas's roster or trainers were having a positive impact. A-Turf looks worse than it did before for visiting teams (21.0 per 1,000 AEs), suggesting Buffalo's training staff also isn't to blame. It’s no wonder the Bills can’t be respected in the NFL. It’s a half-ass operation with Erie County buying dirt cheap field turf from a local supplier while the Pegula’s spend $18mil on equipment & a training center to repair players from that turf. This is Twilight Zone stuff! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) The title rubbed me the wrong way, but the post seems legit. Good point. I'd still like to see the study. Could be related to climate, sample size (the Bills are the only team using the stuff), etc. Edited April 22, 2019 by Paulus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Seems like the very definition of insanity to me. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUNT750 Posted April 22, 2019 Author Share Posted April 22, 2019 20 minutes ago, Paulus said: The title rubbed me the wrong way, but the post seems legit. Good point. I'd still like to see the study. Could be related to climate, sample size (the Bills are the only team using the stuff), etc. Thank you for the comment. It rubs me the wrong way too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Junction Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) Who else is using turf in an outdoor stadium with a northern climate? Comparing injury rates from a controlled environment and an uncontrolled environment is a bit misleading. How do the numbers change if they just used September games at New Era? Additionally, are these injuries lower body injuries, or does this include all injuries that occurred during a game on the surface like helmet to helmet concussions? Edited April 22, 2019 by Buffalo Junction extra question 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haplo848 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 11 minutes ago, Buffalo Junction said: Who else is using turf in an outdoor stadium with a northern climate? Comparing injury rates from a controlled environment and an uncontrolled environment is a bit misleading. How do the numbers change if they just used September games at New Era? Additionally, are these injuries lower body injuries, or does this include all injuries that occurred during a game on the surface like helmet to helmet concussions? This exactly. Your numbers have a range of 4.6 per 1000, without factoring in random chance or any other contributions to injury rates. What exactly do they say constitutes an injury? If a guy has a head-to-head collision and gets a concussion, is that included in the number of injuries? Despite the fact that it had no relation to the turf? Have they compared injury rates among different teams with the same turf to see if there are other factors, like climate, or style of play? Do cold weather teams get more injuries? The Bills and Cowboys have both been big running teams, there's going to be more collisions per play, more chances to hurt yourself than with an aerial attack. There is SO much more to injuries in general than what type of turf you play on. To be quite honest, it really just sounds like you want any excuse to s*** on the Bills, whether it makes sense or not. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUNT750 Posted April 22, 2019 Author Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Buffalo Junction said: Who else is using turf in an outdoor stadium with a northern climate? Comparing injury rates from a controlled environment and an uncontrolled environment is a bit misleading. How do the numbers change if they just used September games at New Era? Additionally, are these injuries lower body injuries, or does this include all injuries that occurred during a game on the surface like helmet to helmet concussions? Both NY teams, Bengals, Patriots and Seattle which is kind of a Northern climate! The facts don't lie! A-Turf is bad - worse than other surfaces. AND - I love the BILLS! Spending $18 mil on training facilities is wonderful. I just don't get letting Erie County buy our field turf with a national bad reputation for injuries through a local vendor who has donated money to the County Executive over the years. Get it!!! Edited April 22, 2019 by PUNT750 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Junction Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, PUNT750 said: Both NY teams, Bengals, Patriots and Seattle which is kind of a Northern climate! The facts don't lie! A-Turf is bad - worse than other surfaces. Okay. But what are the injury rates for Metlife and Paul Brown Stadium? How do they compare to Buffalo's A-Turf by the numbers? I'm also keeping in mind that the only teams with truly comparable conditions use natural grass. Is Dallas a massive outlier, or is Buffalo? Edited April 22, 2019 by Buffalo Junction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUNT750 Posted April 22, 2019 Author Share Posted April 22, 2019 15 minutes ago, Buffalo Junction said: Okay. But what are the injury rates for Metlife and Paul Brown Stadium? How do they compare to Buffalo's A-Turf by the numbers? I'm also keeping in mind that the only teams with truly comparable conditions use natural grass. Is Dallas a massive outlier, or is Buffalo? The study is simple. They are just comparing the NFL fields that use artificial turf and the injuries ratios. NO factors like wind, rain, cold etc. Of those teams Buffalo with A-Turf is rated the worst. What can I say!!! Cincinnati uses Shaw Sports Momentum Pro turf and obviously it falls between Dallas and Buffalo!!! New England uses Field Turf and the same is true for them!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haplo848 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 17 minutes ago, Haplo848 said: This exactly. Your numbers have a range of 4.6 per 1000, without factoring in random chance or any other contributions to injury rates. What exactly do they say constitutes an injury? If a guy has a head-to-head collision and gets a concussion, is that included in the number of injuries? Despite the fact that it had no relation to the turf? Have they compared injury rates among different teams with the same turf to see if there are other factors, like climate, or style of play? Do cold weather teams get more injuries? The Bills and Cowboys have both been big running teams, there's going to be more collisions per play, more chances to hurt yourself than with an aerial attack. There is SO much more to injuries in general than what type of turf you play on. To be quite honest, it really just sounds like you want any excuse to s*** on the Bills, whether it makes sense or not. Ok, I just thought about it some more, and your study is even more ridiculous than I thought. It claims 18.8 AEs for the turf the Bills play on. Based on the OP's definition of an AE up there, that means there are ~100 AEs/game of football played. Which means in 10 weeks, you've got one set of ~1000 AEs. In a 10 week period, it attributes 18.8 injuries purely to the turf alone, or nearly 2 injuries per game, or 1 injury that is directly attributable to the turf that football is played on per game per team. That's utterly ridiculous. There are injuries in football. You get something like 5 injuries of varying degree (out for more than a few plays) per game per team. You're saying that a full 20% of those injuries are purely the cause of the turf that the game is being played on? That sounds like B.S. to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Junction Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 6 minutes ago, PUNT750 said: The study is simple. They are just comparing the NFL fields that use artificial turf and the injuries ratios. NO factors like wind, rain, cold etc. Of those teams Buffalo with A-Turf is rated the worst. What can I say!!! Cincinnati uses Shaw Sports Momentum Pro turf and obviously it falls between Dallas and Buffalo!!! New England uses Field Turf and the same is true for them!! Well, LINK TO THE STUDY? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUNT750 Posted April 22, 2019 Author Share Posted April 22, 2019 11 minutes ago, Haplo848 said: Ok, I just thought about it some more, and your study is even more ridiculous than I thought. It claims 18.8 AEs for the turf the Bills play on. Based on the OP's definition of an AE up there, that means there are ~100 AEs/game of football played. Which means in 10 weeks, you've got one set of ~1000 AEs. In a 10 week period, it attributes 18.8 injuries purely to the turf alone, or nearly 2 injuries per game, or 1 injury that is directly attributable to the turf that football is played on per game per team. That's utterly ridiculous. There are injuries in football. You get something like 5 injuries of varying degree (out for more than a few plays) per game per team. You're saying that a full 20% of those injuries are purely the cause of the turf that the game is being played on? That sounds like B.S. to me. visitors to the only field with A-Turf -- New Era Field in Buffalo -- suffer a high overall injury rate. At 23.0, they are effectively tied for the worst overall rate. This would translate to roughly seven or eight more injuries over the course of a full home slate for a team playing in Buffalo instead of a league-average stadium like New Orleans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Junction Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 29. Buffalo Bills: Ralph Wilson Stadium, Orchard Park, N.Y. The only field using the A-Turf Titan infill artificial system hasn’t gotten a good rap around the league. It is tough to tell if the cold weather in Buffalo has put a difficult spin on the Ralph Wilson Stadium turf or if this style of artificial turf just doesn’t have the same comfort level as the rest of the league. Link: https://www.si.com/nfl/2015/10/01/nfl-stadium-turf-grass-rankings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) You didn't link!!!! Wonder why? So, since you didn't link, all I can do is guess that it's the post that ends like this: "Conclusions "Unfortunately, our confidence intervals are too wide to draw many firm conclusions, but it may be worth trying out Matrix Turf at a couple more stadiums to see if its low overall injury rate is sustainable in a larger sample. Even when we zero in on lower leg injuries, it doesn't look meaningfully worse than grass. A-Turf, Momentum Turf, and FieldTurf raise eyebrows, but these differences could be due to chance or improper maintenance rather than issues with the product itself." https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2017/turf-type-and-nfl-injuries-part-i Is that the one you mean? The one that also says this: "We're looking at these stadium rates through turf-colored glasses, but the rate in any given stadium is a factor of many things. For example, the home team's baseline health and training staff skill could play a role. We have attempted to control for this by only looking at visiting teams. Climate is another possible factor, but it's beyond the scope of this post. A third possible factor is that some teams are more likely than others to injure their opponents. For example, if we had split the NYC stadium between the Giants and Jets, the Giants would have the fifth-lowest overall injury rate, while the Jets would have been in the top half. To investigate this we could control for the injury rate for Team A's opponents when Team A is on the road. However, that is also beyond the scope of this post." Edited April 22, 2019 by Thurman#1 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 My main concern would be trying to reduce number of ACL injuries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOUSE Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) I played on Gravel with no shoes .. Edited April 22, 2019 by HOUSE 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 I think the new training facilities will do more towards preventing injuries than replacing the turf would. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 What is the rate of injury for other stadiums around the Buffalo area, not using A-turf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmur66 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Yea but who else can brush the snow off the field and make a pile of rubber pellets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Duffy Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 1 hour ago, HOUSE said: I played on Gravel with no shoes .. I played naked in a field of fire. My fish is bigger than yours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Buffalo Junction said: Who else is using turf in an outdoor stadium with a northern climate? Comparing injury rates from a controlled environment and an uncontrolled environment is a bit misleading. How do the numbers change if they just used September games at New Era? Additionally, are these injuries lower body injuries, or does this include all injuries that occurred during a game on the surface like helmet to helmet concussions? Michigan Stadium’s field is below the water table, it got soggy, so it uses turf Edited April 22, 2019 by row_33 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 1 hour ago, ALF said: My main concern would be trying to reduce number of ACL injuries Ankle and toe injuries may cause more time lost, though not as drastic as ACLs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 There is not enough info to make a determination regarding weather, and so on. The title is terrible and misleading. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 10 minutes ago, machine gun kelly said: There is not enough info to make a determination regarding weather, and so on. The title is terrible and misleading. Yup. Another click-bait troll job from this user. Can't wait for the pre-season purge. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWins Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 How many ACL injuries have the Bills had at New Era Field? I don't seem to recall many at all. And I have to doubt that the Pegula's would let Erie County install what they could regard as a "dangerous" playing field, if they truly felt that this was going to be the cause of serious injuries to their players. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptnCoke11 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Pegulas must be cheap right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 5 hours ago, Paulus said: The title rubbed me the wrong way, but the post seems legit. Good point. I'd still like to see the study. Could be related to climate, sample size (the Bills are the only team using the stuff), etc. Yes it is clear this is a LAMP post by title since it has very little to do with post. Post should be punted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 And the turf is old and being replaced. Could age be part of the problem? Numbers in first couple years need to be looked at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewaycynic2013 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Stefan Mychajliw = PUNT750?!? ? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigK14094 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Do the analysis, they do need to correct the data for the temperature of the air.......more injuries in cold weather. Most climates are warmer, on average, than Buffalo. How do the injury rates vary with temperature.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 1 hour ago, DefenseWins said: How many ACL injuries have the Bills had at New Era Field? I don't seem to recall many at all. And I have to doubt that the Pegula's would let Erie County install what they could regard as a "dangerous" playing field, if they truly felt that this was going to be the cause of serious injuries to their players. i can rhyme off a few disasters, not sure if they were precisely ACL.... 1 hour ago, DefenseWins said: How many ACL injuries have the Bills had at New Era Field? I don't seem to recall many at all. And I have to doubt that the Pegula's would let Erie County install what they could regard as a "dangerous" playing field, if they truly felt that this was going to be the cause of serious injuries to their players. turf was viewed as a money-saver from day one less expensive than grass, players get hurt so you cut down on Free Agency expenses in the future.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george c Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Begging for attention by a provocative title? Post title is enough for me to ignore the OP forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 What I’ve noticed is that a lot more players were slipping on the previous field than on other artificial surfaces. Not being a doctor I’m not sure if slipping leads to more injuries or if it actually prevents them as players cleats don’t grab and stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobills1212 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Tipster, is that you??? But seriously, this would have been an EXCELLENT entry in the threat TALKING ABOUT THE NEW TURF - or- maybe even the new training facility thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 19 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: What I’ve noticed is that a lot more players were slipping on the previous field than on other artificial surfaces. Not being a doctor I’m not sure if slipping leads to more injuries or if it actually prevents them as players cleats don’t grab and stick. you trust the doctors hired by the Bills to tell you if the team has more injuries during their gig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkreed Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 This feels like it has the beginnings of a hit piece on the county executive. However, they are using the turf because it has a direct financial impact in the area. Maybe the study has some merit. It really means an injury, no clue on extent, per game. I don't think that the Bills will stop using a local source any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YodaMan79 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 When your not a premier destination in the NFL you have to do the little things right. When you lose the battle of location, location, location, you'd think they'd want to do anything they could to show themselves being committed to doing the very best they can for their players. That includes sports science, amenities and staff. This all is very important to organizational philosophy and culture. Why would the Bills not add funds to what Erie County is spending and not purchase peer reviewed high quality surface? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 17 minutes ago, row_33 said: you trust the doctors hired by the Bills to tell you if the team has more injuries during their gig? Well the Bills used to have lowest injury rate in NFL when Rusty Jones was in charge of the training and physical therapy part of team until he was "promoted" to front office and then left for Bears. Bears then had their injury rate go down. This tells you it is not all the turf (Bills did not have grass from trays like Cardinals have and LV will) but multiple factors but go ahead and pretend it is just one thing and "Bills are bad". Their doctors also developed techniques used by entire NFL now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Creek Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 5 hours ago, PUNT750 said: Both NY teams, Bengals, Patriots and Seattle which is kind of a Northern climate! The facts don't lie! A-Turf is bad - worse than other surfaces. AND - I love the BILLS! Spending $18 mil on training facilities is wonderful. I just don't get letting Erie County buy our field turf with a national bad reputation for injuries through a local vendor who has donated money to the County Executive over the years. Get it!!! Ahhhh, so you have an agenda. At least it didn’t come out in your first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 15 minutes ago, Limeaid said: Well the Bills used to have lowest injury rate in NFL when Rusty Jones was in charge of the training and physical therapy part of team until he was "promoted" to front office and then left for Bears. Bears then had their injury rate go down. This tells you it is not all the turf (Bills did not have grass from trays like Cardinals have and LV will) but multiple factors but go ahead and pretend it is just one thing and "Bills are bad". Their doctors also developed techniques used by entire NFL now. again, you trust the Bills doctors when they say they had the lowest injury rates? it's been a horrible history of pretending injuries didn't exist, or weren't all that severe hopefully it's a bit more enlightened now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts