Injury report questionable

If they believe that, they haven't walked in one of their own locker rooms in late December.

Owners should forget the flawed study they've been presented by the NFL regarding injury information, and simply talk to players - past and present. Or they should just come clean by saying: We're playing 18 games, we understand players are more at risk to injuries, yet it's a decision we're making based on finances.

As momentum builds toward an 18-game season - a plan the owners are trying to frame as a restructuring rather than an expansion - anything less is borderline disingenuous.

The players' voices should be heard loud and clear, especially those who are no longer in the game, because they won't be affected by such a change.

"From a player's perspective, I would just say that at the end of the 16-game season, you're just done," said linebacker Chad Brown, a 15-year veteran who retired in 2007. "Even if you do make it to the playoffs, you're just charging through based on your passion and love for the game, because your body has given up on you at that point. Now to add two more games to that?

"It's difficult to even explain but now that I'm out of the game, and I watch, I find it hard for me to believe I used to do that for 15 seasons.

"People compare the collisions to car crashes, but I don't think that even explains it because of the repetitive nature of them - from practices, games, training camps. The human body only has so many football games or plays in it. If you add two more regular-season, full-speed games, it's going to take a toll on guys."

Tight end Kyle Brady, whose last season was with the Patriots in 2007, said he doesn't believe he would have lasted 13 seasons had they been 18-game campaigns. He played in 197 regular-season games, often feeling his worst at the end of each season.

"Especially when you get to the latter points of your career, there are some weeks when you play on a Sunday, and even by the next Friday, your body really doesn't feel right and you're not sure you'll be ready to play," he said.

"From individual experience, I find it hard to believe that two more games wouldn't increase the risk of injury. I think there would be more injuries, because there is such a wear and tear and compounding effect throughout the season. That's how some of the most serious injuries occur."

One of the troubling aspects about the owners' charge toward an 18-game season is that some seem to be focusing on twisted facts.

Judy Battista of The New York Times reported last week that the NFL presented a study to owners, using injury reports and information from team trainers (between 2003-07) to form a line graph showing whether more players missed games as the season wore on.

The graph indicated that the high point of players missing games with injuries was in Week 10. At that time, a little more than three players per team were out with injuries. The low point came in the final week of the regular season, when an average of just more than one player per team missed action.

The study is flawed in multiple areas.

First, the usage of injury reports to measure risk is laughable. Injury reports are often doctored by coaches, and they are far from a truthful measure of a team's health (see: "Tom Brady, shoulder, probable").

Second, all the report truly shows, as noted in the Times story, is that players play with injuries when the games are most important.

As part of an expanded season, owners are considering increasing roster size from 53 (a safe estimate would be 54-55 players) and altering the injured reserve rules (it's possible that 1-2 players could go on a list that sidelines them for six games).

So it's not as if they're simply overlooking the potential for more injuries. But such alterations might not be enough to keep the game strong.

"I think it would hurt the product and also be too much football," Brown said. "To me, part of what makes football such a special game is how rare the product is - every game has so much importance riding on it.

"In football, every week counts, and if you start adding weeks on it, you don't have the same live-and-die-for-this-week from a fan or team perspective. I think you're diluting the product. It doesn't have the same strength."

Not to mention that the strength and well-being of the players could be compromised, something better gauged by listening to those who play the game than crunching flawed statistics.

Retirees getting a voice

Three questions for Bruce Laird, the former Colts defensive back, who is president of "Fourth and Goal," an organization that represents retired players, advocates for improved pension and disability benefits, and raises funds to provide assistance:

You recently had the chance to address NFL owners at their spring meeting in Fort Lauderdale with Harry Carson. How did that come about?

"For years and years, retired players always felt that there was a possibility the union, the NFL Players Association, did indeed work for past, present, and future players. It's in their constitution. It's in their mission statement. Unfortunately, we found out the hard way, with John Mackey, that wasn't true. So we went to the other avenue. I decided, along with other advocates like John Wooten, Harry Carson, Jerry Kramer, and Mike Ditka, to ask the league if they would allow us to talk to them regarding retired players' needs. There were many conversations, letters, and e-mails over a two-year span, and Roger Goodell finally said, 'I think it's about time we sit down with these retired players and see if we can work - not together as a partner - and have dialogue about the alumni's needs.' That's what I was there to do, to introduce a new program where the NFL alumni would go back to its roots, how it was founded in 1967, to take care and look after retired players' needs. I was there to explain to the owners that we're not here looking for welfare, we're here looking for a helping hand up, and hopefully that retired players are such an asset to the league and to the owners out there that we can hopefully pay for ourselves."

How did you feel the visit was received, and how was the situation left with the owners?

"I couldn't be more pleased with the reception we had. Many owners came up to both Harry Carson and I and thanked us very much for the presentations. Mr. [Robert] Kraft was one who came up to me and said, 'That's one of the reasons I bought the New England Patriots,' because he grew up watching the players from the past and wanted to be a part of it. He told me that he realized the alumni were very vital, to not only his franchise, but also the league. [Colts owner] Jim Irsay spoke on my behalf about the teams of the past and how they created what he has in Indianapolis. [Packers president] Mark Murphy spoke and asked some questions. Everyone was really supportive. We have a lot of work to do, in the back room, ironing out some things, but I think we're headed in the right direction. This allows retired players, as a separate entity, to talk about our needs. Not our wants, but our needs. I think we've bridged a huge gap."

Is it accurate that there is a new group that has been formed to represent all retired players, which could help better mobilize efforts?

"Yes. There are three parts of the NFL alumni. There is the NFL Alumni Association, a [nonprofit] corporation that has been dormant since 1977. We will be working with that entity. Then there is NFL Caring For Kids. That entity is alive and well. And then there is Pro Legends, which is a for-profit organization that we can use with the [NFL] shield and hopefully now start intellectual property rights of retired players. Roger Goodell plans to meet with retired players four times a year, and the CBA committee of the owners will meet with us. There is no legal obligation, because we are not part of a union, which we totally understand now. This should help us keep moving forward."

Etc.

Quarterback - Rex Grossman. In 2006, he was at the controls when the Bears marched to the Super Bowl.

Running back - Edgerrin James. Now 30, he'll eclipse the 3,000-carry total this season, but still can be effective in a 1-2 punch.

Wide receiver - Plaxico Burress. The only reason he was let go, and isn't signed, is his off-field troubles.

Tight end - Nate Jackson. More of a pass-catcher than blocker, he spent the last six seasons with the Broncos.

Offensive tackle - Levi Jones. Former Bengals blocker will be a solid option for needy teams upon a full return to health.

Guard/center - Pete Kendall. Durable guard could step in and start for a team that has an unexpected injury.

Mike Reiss can be reached at mreiss@globe.com; material from personal interviews, wire services, other beat writers, and league and team sources was used in this report.