In the Training Room: How the Colts’ Injuries Compare to the Packers’
- In the Training Room: Colts Kick Returner Devin Moore
- In the Training Room: Concussions
- In the Training Room: Colts Tight End Dallas Clark UPDATE
- In the Training Room: Colts Running Back Joseph Addai
- In the Training Room: Colts Safety Bob Sanders
- Health Screen: Colts Safety Chip Vaughn
- UPDATE: Colts WR Anthony Gonzalez to be Out for ‘Several Weeks’
- In the Training Room: Colts’ WR Austin Collie Suffers Another Concussion
- UPDATE In the Training Room: Jerraud Powers Injured
- In the Training Room: How Much Better Could the Colts Be… and When?
- In the Training Room: Colts LB Clint Session
- In the Training Room: How the Colts’ Injuries Compare to the Packers’
- In the Training Room: Impact of a Lockout on Rehab
- In the Training Room: Colts’ TE Dallas Clark on the Mend
Tomorrow, the Green Bay Packers will be in Chicago to take on the Bears in the NFC Championship Game. The media have highlighted the Packers’ long injury list (15 players on IR), and earlier this week Football Outsiders published a games-lost-by-starters statistic showing that the Pack lost a total of 83 starter-games in 2010. The statistic also estimates that the Colts lost 89 starter-games – a significant number to be sure, but not significantly more than the Packers. It’s fair to wonder why the Packers have been able to recover enough from injuries to make it to the NFCCG, while the Colts are watching the rest of the playoffs on TV. This post offers a perspective.
I had originally wanted to compare an average depth chart estimate for each team (i.e., Colts on IR were on average at #2.5 on the depth chart versus the Packers were on average #2.8). Unfortunately, it is difficult to know where everyone would be on the depth chart when healthy. And while I was fairly confident in my estimates for the Colts (thanks to Greg Cowan, aka SpazMo, for his help there!), I could not get a similarly confident estimate for the Packers.
Instead, I took the more traditional route of looking at the starters, and focused on those who landed on IR. Note that this does not take into consideration those players who sat out a significant number of games (Addai, Brackett). I estimate that the Colts eventually lost 8 starters to IR, while the Packers have lost 7… again, not a significant difference. But then I looked closely at where those starters were lost.
The Colts lost 4 starters from the secondary (Sanders, Hayden, Powers, Bullitt), 3 skill players on offense (Clark, Collie, Gonzalez), and 1 LB (Session). By contrast, the Packers’ losses were not so concentrated – they lost 2 linebackers (Barnett, Jones), 2 offensive skill players (Finley, Grant), 1 OL (Tauscher), 1 DL (Neal) and 1 SS (Morgan). With the concentration of players lost to two key positions in the Colts’ schemes (WR/TE on offense, and the secondary in a base Cover-2 alignment), it’s no wonder that in the end they did not have the parts to plug in and keep playing.
This is not to denigrate the Packers’ accomplishments. The loss of key players like TE Jermichael Finley and RT Mark Tauscher have certainly impacted the offense; and in a 3-4 defense they definitely miss DE Mike Neal and LB Nick Barnett. The difference is the number of injuries to a given position and its impact on a team’s ability to develop consistency and open up the play book. Jake Crocker wrote a fantastic analysis highlighting the relationship between injuries and consistent formations, and there’s no doubt that both the Colts and Packers have had to overcome multiple change-ups throughout the season. However, had the Colts’ injuries been a little more distributed across the positions (as they were last year), it’s possible that they could still be playing this weekend.
Print article | This entry was posted by Laura Calaway on January 22, 2011 at 3:01 pm, and is filed under 2010 Regular Season, In the Training Room. Follow any responses to this post through . You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |
Very interesting idea with this article. I believe the Packers are the team most similar to the Colts: elite QB, shaky running game, pass rushers we claim are held on every play, terrible ST, head coaches under constant fire for their game decisions. I think you have a valid point when you say that the Packers' injuries were spread out a bit more, but I don't know that they dealt with them significantly better than we did. We did a pretty decent job too, being just a play away from beating the Jets
I posted this same point after the super bowl, but noted the key to Packers success was QB aaron Rodgers who played lights out down the stretch, something Peyton did not. Manning is very one dimensional (tho that single dimension is elite), but has zero ability to move with his feet and create/extend plays as well as be a running threat. i believe Rodgers was the leading rusher on the team the l/7 gms of the regular season and scored ket TDs with his feet. This also allows 3rd lvl WRs to get a 2nd chance to get open , while the Colts rely on a 3.5sec pass count, throw to a spot regardless, which created numerous INTs and/or Peyton falling down to avoid a hit for a sack