clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Chiefs Lack Of Injuries: Good Preparation Or Good Luck?

New, comments

A topic of discussion when looking back at the Kansas City Chiefs 2010 season has been how many things they had going their way -- from the schedule to Matt Cassel's touchdown-to-interception ratio to the lack of turnovers and even to the lack of injuries.

Injuries are what I wanted to highlight out of that group. The Chiefs were one of three teams that did not place a starter on injured reserve meaning there were no "serious" injuries. Overall, they were second lowest in the league to the Atlanta Falcons in games missed by a starter with just 18, according to Rick Gosselin of the Dallas Morning News.

Anytime I see an outlying number like that, I wonder if it'll revert to the mean the following year. You can do things to avoid injuries and Todd Haley had his team in pads during training camp and the regular season more than most, if not all NFL teams. By many accounts, they were run pretty hard during the offseason resulting in a well-conditioned team. That certainly didn't hurt to the low injury numbers this year.

But with injuries, it's not all preparation. There's some luck involved. No matter how well you prepare, there will be injuries. My guess, based simply on the averages, is that the Chiefs will see more injuries in 2011 than they did last season.

Because some injuries are inevitable, it's important that you know how to react to them. The Chiefs would be wise to take a look at one team in the NFC Championship game this weekend. The Green Bay Packers topped the NFL in games missed by starters with 91 -- the equivalent of losing five-and-a-half starters for the year (yes, I know there isn't such thing as a half-player).

Chiefs GM Scott Pioli has talked before about the last four or five players on the roster and I think those guys are important if you're talking about injuries. As long as the Chiefs continue to draft well, the bottom of the roster will continue to get stronger.