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 RunKC:
O’Daniel needs to be out there too.
You can't put O'Daniel and Niemann on the field at the same time. I'll sacrifice some experience in exchange for athleticism but if you put both of those guys out there, you have the blind leading the blind. It would be especially dire with Berry not out there.
I mean you'd truly have Ron Parker responsible for aligning coverages for pretty much everyone. That strikes me as...unwise.
If you have Niemann or O'Daniel out there, you need Hitchens there as well to wear the green dot on his helmet and get folks aligned. Maybe I'd listen if you had Berry out there directing traffic but that poor guy's foot hurts so he can't play. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I was thinking it's time to give Ben Niemann a legitimate shot out there.
Yeldon just flat beat Ragland to a spot. I mean lord - you can't have that. That's playing backyard football with your family on Thanksgiving shit. Your old man says "you run to the mailbox and I'll hit you" then you just outrun your fat uncle with a trick knee...
I don't care how green Niemann may be. And I understand that our problem in zones right now is not being in the right place. But shit, Ragland's never in the right place anyway, partly due to not knowing where to be but also because sometimes he simply doesn't have the footspeed to get there.
Gotta at least make them outsmart you. Letting teams just physically abuse you can't keep happening.
If/when Niemann is the better option, don't you think he'll be in the game? KC, under this regime, tends to get the best players on the field when they can. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
If/when Niemann is the better option, don't you think he'll be in the game? KC, under this regime, tends to get the best players on the field when they can.
I can't say I trust them to make the right personnel decision on defense. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
If/when Niemann is the better option, don't you think he'll be in the game? KC, under this regime, tends to get the best players on the field when they can.
I'm not willing to extend them that level of trust with regard to defensive personnel... [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
Let's not worry about replacing Eric Berry until we find a way to get that useless motherfucker off the team.
And this is what it's come to, and it's sad, and I agree with it 100%.
Fact of the matter is, Berry cost us more than cap and more than reliable safety play.
Well, one thing that will never happen again is this:
You will NEVER hear me ask Clark Hunt to take an active hand in ANYTHING that is not his job regarding this franchise ever again. Please leave that shit to the people you HIRED to take care of it, Skippy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chiefspants:
Some of its proven, some of its connecting the dots, some of its gossip. I'll look for the reports tonight, but here's the generally agreed upon timeline.
There were whispers that EB and Dorsey "weren't close" to a deal - and that Berry was upset by the negotiations.
Berry's camp then leaked that Dorsey requested that Berry take out an insurance policy as part of his new contract. This is proven (I'll look for that report tonight). This had god awful optics for the Chiefs. This was in spite of the fact that the Chiefs honored over 6 million dollars in payments that they did not have to give Berry after he went on the PUP list in 2014.
Berry gets signed. Despite signing a record contract, he does not report to OTA's. Rumors are that Berry does not attend OTA's because he's still "upset" with Dorsey over the contract negotiations.
Here's the last piece - this one also proven. Clark Hunt publicly stated that after Dorsey's firing that his hesitancy to sign Berry and Houston was a big reason why he fired Dorsey. Clark himself heavily implies that he stepped into Berry's contract negotiation to get the deal done. Clark also cites Dorsey's inability to budget in his firing, but many believe these issues were partially caused by EB's contract, forcing Dorsey to make cuts elsewhere (the phone call to Maclin was still inexcusable, but whatever).
Thank you very much, Mr. Chiefspants. I sincerely appreciate your help on this matter.
And ... I do see dots. Lots of dots. Dots everywhere. But not much else.
Some of this I knew. Some of it I didn't know. But, thanks to you, I now have a grasp of the narrative that Planeteers have been reciting. Based on personal knowledge, I have my own views on this deal and they don't match up with this scenario.
But that's okay. This perception is probably far too ingrained to alter in any significant way at this point.
Originally Posted by FAX:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chiefspants. I sincerely appreciate your help on this matter.
And ... I do see dots. Lots of dots. Dots everywhere. But not much else.
Some of this I knew. Some of it I didn't know. But, thanks to you, I now have a grasp of the narrative that Planeteers have been reciting. Based on personal knowledge, I have my own views on this deal and they don't match up with this scenario.
But that's okay. This perception is probably far too ingrained to alter in any significant way at this point.
FAX
I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on this. Based on that knowledge. Seriously.
I've always thought Clark doing that deal sounded like bull shit [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bowser:
I think they'll put an emphasis on stopping the run......only to have Brady filet us with the short passing game to the backs and Edelman.
I've been reading through this thread with great interest and no minor amount of mind-numbing confoundedness.
It seems like there's a fan faction that wants us to do whatever is necessary to win the SB right now (as if we aren't already trying). I think they want to do that by surrendering future cap dollars and draft picks to acquire players who may or may not actually be available or fit our system. (I think that's right.)
Then, there's another fan faction that wants us to hold our cap money and draft capital water until the next off-season then make the necessary roster corrections, after which we go all out to win the SB the following year. (I believe that's a fair summary.)
There's a part of me that says, "Why can't we do both?" ... you know, win the SB this year, then do all that other stuff and win it again?
There's another part of me that views that as unrealistic because our roster has some extremely weak spots ... making a SB victory this year sort of ... dreamy. Then again, when is it not? For any team, really?
So I believe it could happen. It really could. Like any year, certain bounces need to go our way (and they usually don't), key players need to stay healthy (and they usually don't), and the opposition needs to do their part (which they usually don't). That's a whole lot of "usually don'ts" right there. And we've all seen that movie and every sequel.
Still, we need to focus on one game at a time. I encourage all Chiefs fans ... and especially Planeteers ... to stay positive. We have the first opportunity in our lifetimes to establish a true Chiefs dynasty. Wally has done us all a great favor in that regard. And I, for one, plan on seeing the whole damn thing from game one to the day Mahomes retires a Chief.
Today, I'm focusing on the Bradys and I fully expect to win in a bigtime shootout. (I don't think the Bradys will try to run and drain the clock on us ... they'll try to outscore us for sure.)
After that, I'll start ginning up some serious mojo for our next opponent. Because the Susanna Hoffs will want to knock off a 6 and 0 team, for sure.
Originally Posted by KC Tattoo:
Didn't Tony Gonzo have foot issues I know he played with pain. I wish Berry could find it in himself to play but i wouldn't want to wish him to play with pain. This just sucks for him after the cancer and blown knees and shit. With all his talent and leadership the dude has been through a lot of setbacks.
I'm pretty much past this now. Dude's getting paid a fortune and hasn't played a down in well over a year. He needs to work through his owie and get his ass on the field. [Reply]
Originally Posted by FAX:
I've been reading through this thread with great interest and no minor amount of mind-numbing confoundedness.
It seems like there's a fan faction that wants us to do whatever is necessary to win the SB right now (as if we aren't already trying). I think they want to do that by surrendering future cap dollars and draft picks to acquire players who may or may not actually be available or fit our system. (I think that's right.)
Then, there's another fan faction that wants us to hold our cap money and draft capital water until the next off-season then make the necessary roster corrections, after which we go all out to win the SB the following year. (I believe that's a fair summary.)
There's a part of me that says, "Why can't we do both?" ... you know, win the SB this year, then do all that other stuff and win it again?
There's another part of me that views that as unrealistic because our roster has some extremely weak spots ... making a SB victory this year sort of ... dreamy. Then again, when is it not? For any team, really?
So I believe it could happen. It really could. Like any year, certain bounces need to go our way (and they usually don't), key players need to stay healthy (and they usually don't), and the opposition needs to do their part (which they usually don't). That's a whole lot of "usually don'ts" right there. And we've all seen that movie and every sequel.
Still, we need to focus on one game at a time. I encourage all Chiefs fans ... and especially Planeteers ... to stay positive. We have the first opportunity in our lifetimes to establish a true Chiefs dynasty. Wally has done us all a great favor in that regard. And I, for one, plan on seeing the whole damn thing from game one to the day Mahomes retires a Chief.
Today, I'm focusing on the Bradys and I fully expect to win in a bigtime shootout. (I don't think the Bradys will try to run and drain the clock on us ... they'll try to outscore us for sure.)
After that, I'll start ginning up some serious mojo for our next opponent. Because the Susanna Hoffs will want to knock off a 6 and 0 team, for sure.
FAX
Speaking of 'why not both.'
Unless the Pats have unearthed some team speed on defense, we already showed last year they can't compete with our skill players.
We have the skill to punch the gut, get the edge on the sweep AND torch over the top. That's got to weigh heavy.
They're a sound defense, but they're not a fast defense, and you're not going to change that with want-to.
If I had to guess BB's gameplan for us, I'd say he's going to grind out long drives, but emphasize getting a TD out of all of them.
No matter how we overmatch them on offense, there's no way we're scoring in the 40s if he limits us to somewhere near 5 total offensive possessions.
I'm really pretty optimistic based on how well we're playing, and how well we already matched up with them in recent history, but if there's a path to beating us, long drives that end in points every time is that path. [Reply]