Perhaps you should; you appear to be drawing conclusions the article does not. Specifically, but not exclusively, this excerpt from the article may be of interest: "However, there are definitely factors that make some athletes more susceptible to non-contact injuries than others." Also the three key weaknesses identified that some in sports medicine may see as significant have not been identified, to my knowledge, in Becton. It would be interesting to see if there is any widespread acceptance of this therapist's viewpoint.
So, we now agree, being injury prone may not be just "an idea of fate and chance"? There could be other factors - specifically referenced in this study (not just one therapist), which concluded injury 12 times more likely of one player over another depending on these factors? This is in addition to non contact injuries that the therapist cited as well - not sure why you latched onto the non contact part of it as the study covered all serious injuries. Also, why do you bring up the point that to your knowledge Becton does not have these weaknesses identified? What exactly is your knowledge on this? If your knowledge on that is 0, the point is simply irrelevant. I do not know how any player scored on this. What I am saying is that based on the study that these who score low are 12 times more likely to get injured, it does help explain why some people stay healthy for a long time and some are injured often, and the preference is to have players that are not often injured. It's not just chance, there are other significant factors as well.
I think you have to sign him. Becton & Fant can't practice and practice starts tomorrow. They need bodies
As far as I can see the only name in the article is the guy who wrote it, "Doctor Bobby," there were no specifics and no citation or link to whatever study he was making claims about that you have repeated here other than the year it was published. I'd be interested in seeing what it says specifically in regards to how the figures were determined and where the fourteen point level was on the available scale and what percentage of subjects fell below that level. I had already allowed for organic differences in players in a previous post, I don't know why you're going back to that now. I'm also not sure why you have a problem with focusing on the non-contact injuries as that was the main point of the article you posted as spelled out here: "However, there are definitely factors that make some athletes more susceptible to non-contact injuries than others. This article will highlight these aspects and also detail one of the tools that professional sports teams use to assess injury risk." I'm not going to claim that Becton has none of the factors, having read much about his case online I have found nothing that says he has any of the factors mentioned, therefore I correctly qualified my statement. Do you have any knowledge that Becton does have any of the problems cited?
Great news! Obviously this is still all talk and means nothing in the grand scheme of things but it’s certainly better than all of the negative chatter we’ve heard recently. Lets hope Becton finally has that fire under his *** now and will prove all the doubters wrong this season.
Seems like the he is the type who has an entire wall dedicated to people doubting him and shit talking him lmao. Rooting hard for the guy!
Thank you for posting this. All talk indeed. How shocking to think he was put into the PUP till he passes the physical. Good CS process, that's all that is. I hope the kid turns it around this year. Training camp will tell. If you are a Jet fan you cant do anything but root for every player on this team to excell.
That definitely doesn't look like the same person we saw during Minicamp. Ups to Becton for losing it. Hope he did it the right way.
