REPORT: Eric Berry has a Haglund’s deformity on his heel
New information on Berry’s sore heel injury emerged on Saturday.
By Pete Sweeney Sep 29, 2018, 1:15pm CDT
Eric Berry has not practiced or played for the Kansas City Chiefs since August 11 in St. Joseph, Missouri, because of what the team has described as a “sore heel.”
The last we heard from the Chiefs athletic training staff was in early September, when head athletic trainer Rick Burkholder described the injury as “literally day to day.”
More information on Berry’s injury emerged Saturday morning, via NFL Network’s Mike Garafolo:
Mike Garafolo: “My understanding, and I’ve spoken to people familiar with his injury situation. He’s got what’s called a Haglund’s deformity in that Achilles. That’s a bone spur that basically digs into the Achilles. Shaun O’ Hara, our colleague at NFL Network, he had it. I spoke to him this week. He said it is extremely painful. He actually used a more colorful word that I won’t use here. It’s just something that continues to irritate the area. Some guys have been able to play with it—you get a shoe here or there, you can adjust … but that’s what’s going on. It’s going to be a pain management thing. It’s not like this thing will tear the Achilles necessarily. A lot of these cases don’t result in a tear, but that’s why with Berry right now, he has not played, and they’ve been doing OK. That’s going to allow them a little bit more patience with Berry, but it is extremely painful.”
This provides a little more clarity than Berry’s injury simply being a “sore heel,” which is good, but what’s bad is there still seems to be no timetable. Remember, Berry missed nearly the entirety of the 2017 season due to a ruptured Achilles on the other leg.
Chiefs head coach Andy Reid was mum on the injury when asked about it Saturday afternoon after the Chiefs’ final practice of the week.
Berry is officially ruled doubtful heading into the Monday night game against the Denver Broncos.
----
Here are the notes from our in-house medical expert, Aaron Borgmann:
A lot of talk today regarding something known as a Haglund’s deformity. It was reported by a media source that the player in question suffers from this condition. This discussion is not to confirm or deny that possibility, as I can only explain the available information that we have been given. To be clear, the team has not confirmed this diagnosis and I have no advance knowledge of the player’s current condition.
The simple explanation here that it is indeed a bone spur on the backside of someone’s heel. This is frequently known as a “pump bump” from the occurrence that it is often seen in women’s fashion from the shoes that they wear. However, incidence in football players is also common, sometimes referred to as “retrocalcaneal bursitis” as well.
The bone spur irritates the bursa (fluid-filled sac) that sits between the bone and the tendon or even the tendon itself directly. This can cause a great deal of inflammation and discomfort with any sort of dynamic ankle/foot movement, worse with pressure on the spot itself.
Having one in and of itself it not uncommon, but the degree to which it bothers someone is the issue. Depending upon demands of movement, these can range from debilitating to just a nuisance. Obviously, in football players, the degree of inflammation is what dictates the level of function.
These are diagnosed both visually and radiographically and it is a situation where if you see it and player complains of certain symptoms (pain with movement in that exact spot, swelling, redness) then you can be pretty sure that is what it is.
Treatment focuses on reduction of inflammation obviously directly over the spot. This can be done both topically and through systemic medication. Soft tissue lengthening in both the calf and bottom of the foot is also done to alleviate the issue from both sides – this is due to the fact that both the calf and plantar fascia connect to the calcaneus (heel bone) on either side.
Not to be forgotten is footwear modification and adjustment. Very rigid shoes can cause this irritation, and in some athletes, I would even cut the shoe in the heel to allow room for the bump. Other options include specialized padding and friction reduction methods. Heel lifts have been shown to be helpful in some.
For this condition, non-surgical intervention is preferred to reduce the inflammation as opposed to surgical due to the immobilization period.
If the inflammation can be reduced and the function level high, many players learned to adapt their daily routines to accommodate. They may have to put in a bit more time in order to get ready due to the condition’s demands but can nonetheless get by and still perform at a high level. [Reply]
Originally Posted by thegame214:
I have a feeling Berry returns this week or at least gives it an attempt.
I think Berry goes and gets his vengeance on the field that cost him his season.
Then rest his ass for playoffs lol
Maybe with Murray and Watts dinged up, but my guess is that Chiefs would rather Berry play on grass at home as his first game back and not field turf. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jettio:
Maybe with Murray and Watts dinged up, but my guess is that Chiefs would rather Berry play on grass at home as his first game back and not field turf.
This is one game where they REALLY need him though. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
This is one game where they REALLY need him though.
I sure would love to see him play. He might be our version of 2006 Bob Sanders with the Colts. Save him for the postseason and have a decent defense all of a sudden. [Reply]
You act like they are hiding shit. That makes no sense.
There would be far less speculation regarding this matter if it weren't for documented skulduggery on the part of ownership going back to his contract negotiations.
Originally Posted by SAUTO:
Shit we are getting close having the draftabulators back.
DRAFTABULATORS...
Mount up.
Well, SAUTO, when your team building philosophy is proven correct in the most glaringly obvious way, it is natural to return to the site of the battle, standing tall upon the hill and surveying the corpses of your foes with grim satisfaction.
Face it; Mahomes walked right in to the tailgate with nine inch nail in hand, whipped out his Texas-sized man-hammer, and pounded the final nail in to the coffin of every opposing, idiotic philosophy that did not include building a team around a franchise QB.
Originally Posted by Claysexual:
There would be far less speculation regarding this matter if it weren't for documented skulduggery on the part of ownership going back to his contract negotiations.
Well, SAUTO, when your team building philosophy is proven correct in the most glaringly obvious way, it is natural to return to the site of the battle, standing tall upon the hill and surveying the corpses of your foes with grim satisfaction.
Face it; Mahomes walked right in to the tailgate with nine inch nail in hand, whipped out his Texas-sized man-hammer, and pounded the final nail in to the coffin of every opposing, idiotic philosophy that did not include building a team around a franchise QB.
Originally Posted by jettio:
Maybe with Murray and Watts dinged up, but my guess is that Chiefs would rather Berry play on grass at home as his first game back and not field turf.
Not necessarily. There are medical studies showing incidences of ligamental (key in Berry's case), neural, and head traumas are lower on field turf than natural grass. That said, I've seen most evidence shows that the difference in the surfaces is relatively negligible regardless of the slant towards one or the other.
From my personal experience, it depends more on the weather. I'd much rather play on field turf than grass if it's wet or extremely cold. Slipping and sliding on wet grass causes so much ligament strain. Cold ground is just hard and I don't want to bounce my head off that shit too many times. In hot weather, I'd rather play on grass because field turf gets incredibly hot.
If I had to pick a surface to put down in a stadium, I'd probably pick the turf. Always had more muscle fatigue but, in general, the elements had far less effect on the body on turf. That new turf really gives about as well as grass, so that old argument is almost null. Sure, if we were talking 1980's astroturf, then that's a different animal. When it comes down to injuries, it's rarely the surface that causes the injury. In football, it's almost always getting hit from an odd angle or rolled up on. Biomechanics are biomechanics... certain parts only move certain ways and only give so much going the wrong way. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Not necessarily. There are medical studies showing incidences of ligamental (key in Berry's case), neural, and head traumas are lower on field turf than natural grass. That said, I've seen most evidence shows that the difference in the surfaces is relatively negligible regardless of the slant towards one or the other.
From my personal experience, it depends more on the weather. I'd much rather play on field turf than grass if it's wet or extremely cold. Slipping and sliding on wet grass causes so much ligament strain. Cold ground is just hard and I don't want to bounce my head off that shit too many times. In hot weather, I'd rather play on grass because field turf gets incredibly hot.
If I had to pick a surface to put down in a stadium, I'd probably pick the turf. Always had more muscle fatigue but, in general, the elements had far less effect on the body on turf. That new turf really gives about as well as grass, so that old argument is almost null. Sure, if we were talking 1980's astroturf, then that's a different animal. When it comes down to injuries, it's rarely the surface that causes the injury. In football, it's almost always getting hit from an odd angle or rolled up on. Biomechanics are biomechanics... certain parts only move certain ways and only give so much going the wrong way.
The issue with astroturf wasn't even really the turf, it was the underlayment which sometimes was freaking bare concrete. LOL
Field turf, pelletized rubber, it feels so much like natural sod without any of the hassles. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Claysexual:
There would be far less speculation regarding this matter if it weren't for documented skulduggery on the part of ownership going back to his contract negotiations.
I'm at a complete loss as to what that has to do with anything. That makes zero sense. [Reply]