Our tackling may not be perfect, but it's light years better than it was under Fran. I can't speak to the finer details of form, but we do usually get the guy in the ground.

Bob Harris said:

---

This thread was like a weird trip to an old folks home...

---

Without the gratuitous banana pudding.

Quote:

---

High school football

---

/eyeroll

Way back when I was at A&M, we had to walk 5 miles to class, through 3 feet of snow, during month-long hurricanes, with no food or water, ON OUR BARE SHOULDERS.

We were just tougher back then.

Quote:

---

Our tackling may not be perfect, but it's light years better than it was under Fran.

---

It's better than with Fran's "Aggie Shove Tackle", but it still makes a recurrence. It's still not great. The single best tackler I ever saw was Dat Nguyen. Just every time it was hit, wrap, TWIST, and plant the guy. Good things happened from that but more importantly, nothing bad happened. I'm not saying that we need Dat as a coach (though Sumlin did run him off) but that technique would go a long way. It's almost a rugby style tackle than anything.

ashley said:

---

Jack Cheese said:

---

ashley said:

---

Jack Cheese said:

---

ashley said:

---

riverrataggie said:

---

Not sure what your talking about but usually shoulder injuries are related to poor tackling form.

---

That's not true. Where did you get that?

---

Except that it's absolutely true. I have personally experienced it and have scars to show. Shoulder injuries are almost never related to how big the padding is. Thats not how shoulders work.

---

You mention your experience, what exactly is that?

---

High school football, shoulder surgery. You?

---

Coaching for many years.

---

OK. All I'm saying is that I've had extensive shoulder injuries in football resulting in surgery.

Are you arguing along with OP that players injure their shoulders because their pads aren't big enough? Because if so that's a dumb argument. Has a lot more to do with arm position and direction of force, not direct impact on the joint.

OP's argument is like saying that knee injuries are the result of not wearing thicker knee pads. Would you agree with that?

CapCity12thMan said:

---

Quote:

---

High school football

---

/eyeroll

---

/eyeroll right back at you. I'm no football expert based on playing in HS but I do know a little bit about shoulder dislocations and separations. They are not caused by lack of padding on the shoulders.

Or maybe you think they do. /eyeroll

I must have missed that newsletter. Do we use significantly different shoulder pads than other teams?

You said shoulder injuries were because of poor tackling form. Is this still your claim?

cevans_40 said:

---

You said shoulder injuries were because of poor tackling form. Is this still your claim?

---

Way more likely to cause it than thickness of shoulder pads. And it wasn't my claim, but Ashley the coach of many years said it was "absolutely not true".

I do know for a fact that poor tackling form can lead to a relatively severe dislocation because it happened to me. That's all I'm saying.

Caused by pads = stupid.
Caused by poor form = yes it for sure can happen.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_wwRZ4U8AAvm-O.jpg

Jack Cheese said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

You said shoulder injuries were because of poor tackling form. Is this still your claim?

---

Way more likely to cause it than thickness of shoulder pads. And it wasn't my claim, but Ashley the coach of many years said it was "absolutely not true".

I do know for a fact that poor tackling form can lead to a relatively severe dislocation because it happened to me. That's all I'm saying.

Caused by pads = stupid.
Caused by poor form = yes it for sure can happen.

---

So a running back at 225 comes thru the line. Your a CB at 180. You lower your shoulder make a form tackle head across his waist, and your shoulder straight into his hip bone. And the CB immediately drops to ground grabbing shoulder or collar bone.

I am a stupid person for suggesting that a few more inches of padding might make a huge difference in protecting your shoulder.

Your a genius!

oldschool87 said:

---

Jack Cheese said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

You said shoulder injuries were because of poor tackling form. Is this still your claim?

---

Way more likely to cause it than thickness of shoulder pads. And it wasn't my claim, but Ashley the coach of many years said it was "absolutely not true".

I do know for a fact that poor tackling form can lead to a relatively severe dislocation because it happened to me. That's all I'm saying.

Caused by pads = stupid.
Caused by poor form = yes it for sure can happen.

---

So a running back at 225 comes thru the line. Your a CB at 180. You lower your shoulder make a form tackle head across his waist, and your shoulder straight into his hip bone. And the CB immediately drops to ground grabbing shoulder or collar bone.

I am a stupid person for suggesting that a few more inches of padding might make a huge difference in protecting your shoulder.

Your a genius!

---

*You're

oldschool87 said:

---

I am a stupid person for suggesting that a few more inches of padding might make a huge difference in protecting your shoulder.

---

Given that we wear the same pads that everyone else in college and NFL wears, yeah pretty much.

Jack Cheese said:

---

oldschool87 said:

---

I am a stupid person for suggesting that a few more inches of padding might make a huge difference in protecting your shoulder.

---

Given that we wear the same pads that everyone else in college and NFL wears, yeah pretty much.

---

And shoulder injuries are off the charts.

TecRecAg said:

---

Most shoulder injuries have nothing to do with padding, gramps. It's mostly over extension of the joint. Pads won't fix that. That's why guys wear shoulder braces.

---

Nah I'm pretty sure if you hit something hard enough with your shoulder you can injure it. Try running straight into your wall without padding and see what happens. I don't know where you guys are getting it's because of bad form. Or that we're not wearing shoulder pads (lol) And I don't remember seeing 6 dudes leave the game with shoulder injuries. I think most of this entire thread is all conjecture.

Conjecture...

2004 - 2017 Shoulder injuries are 16%,

If you do the last 6 years it is over 22%... Wonder when they switched the pads...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4954547/figure/fig1-2325967116657530/

1988 to 2003 8.4%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1941296/table/i1062-6050-42-2-221-t06/


You use to could run into a goal post with your pads, now you can't. It's really not that hard to understand.

oldschool87 said:

---

Conjecture...

2004 - 2017 Shoulder injuries are 16%,

If you do the last 6 years it is over 22%... Wonder when they switched the pads...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4954547/figure/fig1-2325967116657530/

1988 to 2003 8.4%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1941296/table/i1062-6050-42-2-221-t06/


You use to could run into a goal post with your pads, now you can't. It's really not that hard to understand.

---

Erroneous!

.....I think you mean shoulder shrug.

oldschool87 said:

---

Conjecture...

2004 - 2017 Shoulder injuries are 16%,

If you do the last 6 years it is over 22%... Wonder when they switched the pads...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4954547/figure/fig1-2325967116657530/

1988 to 2003 8.4%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1941296/table/i1062-6050-42-2-221-t06/


You use to could run into a goal post with your pads, now you can't. It's really not that hard to understand.

---

Wow. And ankle injuries are down from 15 to 12%. I guess ankle pads are working!

You ignore that the old data is unspecified "INJURIES" while the newer data is specifically "SURGERIES". Apples to oranges.

You still have not answered the basic question - what is the difference in the padding you refer to? Materials science has come a long way in 10 years so I can envision a more effective yet thinner pad. Can you confirm this has not occurred?

Dumbest thread of the day !!

oldschool87 said:

---

You use to could run into a goal post with your pads, now you can't.

---

You used to could?

Tell us more about how much better things were back then, dad.

Need to recruit rugby players
They tackle with no pads

From what I've heard, our new strength coach may be to blame. Hubenak's shoulder injury happened while lifting but could have been prevented with better coaching. The new strength coach is not as good as he's hyped up to be. There's a rumor that several interior player's squat maxes have dropped by up to 100lbs.