With respect it's more than clear you don't know what you're talking about but say the burden is on me lol ???
This is common knowledge my friend and I'm not being sarcastic or mean. This is something that's obviously a hot topic and been looked upon over and over recently.
You guys are stubborn and dont want to learn or join the year 2023 lol.
Who's to say which hits are worse? Blindside you can't see coming in the pocket or when you're heads on a swivel? Look numbers have been showing for a while there's no difference.
Sorry but you're so wrong it's not funny. And again this is old news. It's almost like you just started watching football and I'm not being mean. You ever hear of Michael Vick? Steve Young? Fran? Cam? Cunningham? All those players played over 10 years.
Is the increased likelihood of injury to mobile QBs just as much of a myth as injury-prone? Dr. Edwin Porras examines.
www.fantasypoints.com
"Injury Proneness of Running QBs is Overstated
October 17, 2019, 12:49 pm ET
24
Good research in this Yahoo! piece from our buddies at Sports Info Solutions finds that the risk of getting injured on a designed quarterback run is remote. Quarterbacks are much more likely to be injured on a scramble or a sack -- and particularly, on a quarterback knockdown after a pass is thrown."
This year’s Super Bowl matchup shows you don’t need a particular type of quarterback to win in the NFL. The Ravens’ Joe Flacco has 38 rushing yards...
slate.com
"As you’ll see in the chart below, regardless of how we sliced the data, there was no statistically significant difference in injury rates between mobile and conventional quarterbacks. Quarterbacks of both types tend to lose 11 to 14 percent of their starts to injury. Even without counting the thus-far injury-free Kaepernick, three of the four tests produced a lower injury rate for mobile quarterbacks. The gap, though, is small enough that a statistician would call it zero."
@They_Hate_We also posted a link.