GatorEye Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 I know that RG3 is required to keep the brace on (at least this year), but I'm assuming that next year he won't be required to wear it. But I have to wonder if it doesn't limit his mobility that much, should he just wear it for the rest of his career? A bigger question...with players seemingly blowing out their knees left and right (and the focus on avoiding the head hits forcing players to go for the knees), do you think there will be a point X years down the road that teams will just require all their players except for the kickers to wear them all the time? Even if it limits your players to say 90%, would 90% be better than losing him altogether and getting 0% out of him? I realize that the current braces probably don't prevent an injury, just lessens the occurrence. But I wonder if in say 10 years we see braces advance to point where they are stronger and less restrictive that the benefit of always wearing them outweighs the risk of not wearing them. It just seems that at some point knees are going to be the focus like the head is now. Someone is going to have to invent something to help stabilize the knee that isn't so intrusive. Is a 90% RG3 with a brace worth it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeedKi11s Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Whatever he is comfortable with after this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirt Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Well, I'm no doctor, but I don't think knee braces are going to advance so much. It's a pretty simple, physics thing, you can't armor the player's knee with helmet-proof titanium or anything lol. The point is stability, and with RG3, a quarterback, it's far more important for his knee to feel/act close to as usual as possible when going through his dropbacks and throwing. It's important that we don't fall too much in love with that play vs Minnesota last year. A 90%, whatever % RG3; the one we see now, can still dart for a first down, explode to it. A track meet, where that extra .3 speed gets you barely past the last guy, like a punt return...again, with your QB.... is a very rare thing. So no, it's not worth taking the brace off in hopes that he can run a little faster and easier. Any QB should be able to execute the drop backs, throwing motion, and even creative stepping around/into the pocket, while wearing a knee brace. Right now, it's a necessary precaution. Next year? I think this was discussed before, and I don't remember details, but I don't think anyone's going to come out and say whether or not he'll wear it next year. Although I feel like I heard that he could just wear it forever, I dunno, the point is, we shouldn't worry about it. He should be able to do everything necessary while wearing the brace. Perhaps he's learning how to do so right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longball Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 One year is protocol, he tore his other acl in college---wore it for a year and removed it. Players can re-tear an acl after reconstruction, it is physics and duress that the ligament comes under from an abnormal movement. Typically there is a disruptive movement and the natural anatomy(intercondylar notch) cause strain on the ligament during displaced movement forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 If I'm not mistaken, he suffered his current injury while wearing the brace. It's not a protect-all. If the knee is structurally sound, he should be able to take it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 I wouldn't be surprised if as the game evolves the knee brace becomes mandatory equipment for all, just as helmets replaced leatherheads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BraunMan92 Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 No. We need him to get the 4.3 speed back and be able to take it to the house when he has to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins Wingman Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 i think he needs to focus on building leg muscle. i'd rather have him 4.5 because his legs are bigger than 4.5 because of a brace. i'm not sure if having bigger, stronger legs reduces your chances of knee injury, but it sounds good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbws Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 If I'm not mistaken, he suffered his current injury while wearing the brace. It's not a protect-all. If the knee is structurally sound, he should be able to take it off. mbws EDIT: for some reason my response appeared in the box of the Voice of Reason's orifginal post... Isn't his current injury to the other knee, which was not wearing a brace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BraunMan92 Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 i think he needs to focus on building leg muscle. i'd rather have him 4.5 because his legs are bigger than 4.5 because of a brace. i'm not sure if having bigger, stronger legs reduces your chances of knee injury, but it sounds good. Calvin Johnson has 4.3 speed and is 230 lbs. Its all in the training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkskin Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 Griffin himself said the other day that he is actually faster now than he was before the injury due to all the training he's done. Obviously dont know if that is the case, but thats what he said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerryMason Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 I think he should take the brace off...not for the sake of being faster (although that could possibly help)....but for the sake of removing it as a mental thing. Sometimes having a brace can make you worry more about sustaining an injury because its a constant reminder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 If I'm not mistaken, he suffered his current injury while wearing the brace. It's not a protect-all. If the knee is structurally sound, he should be able to take it off. mbws EDIT: for some reason my response appeared in the box of the Voice of Reason's orifginal post... Isn't his current injury to the other knee, which was not wearing a brace? I was referring to the knee injury he suffered in the Seattle game. He was wearing a brace, and still tore the knee up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenDavis Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 One year is protocol, he tore his other acl in college---wore it for a year and removed it. Players can re-tear an acl after reconstruction, it is physics and duress that the ligament comes under from an abnormal movement. Typically there is a disruptive movement and the natural anatomy(intercondylar notch) cause strain on the ligament during displaced movement forward. He tore the same ACL in college. Both injuries were on the right knee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usafskins Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 The knee is structurally sound or James Andrews wouldn't have cleared him. What is not 100% is his proprioception, hence the brace. In short his brain and knee muscles aren't in sync yet. So the brace is used to limit his range of motion until his brain and muscles are on the same page so to speak. The brace won't affect him it looks like a Don Joy brace and prob weighs 2 lbs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TysonM Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 He seemed like a better passer without the brace, so I've been wondering if his passing will look better next year when he takes it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emor09 Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 I hope he wears it forever. He's still faster than 28 starting NFL QBs, the added protection is worth more than a rare spectacular play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 He seemed like a better passer without the brace, so I've been wondering if his passing will look better next year when he takes it off. I'd say his passing will look better next year due to an entire offseason and preseason of practice and play, but who knows. The brace could be part of it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 It's completely up to him and his comfort. If he doesn't want to wear the brace then I won't fault him for not wearing it. I don't think it will prevent injury on a perfectly functioning knee. I'm no doctor though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.