Usually, word that a star player won’t have surgery is interpreted as unequivocal good news.

But many Chiefs fans were so expecting saferty Eric Berry to have surgery after missing all but three games last season that the news coach Andy Reid shared Thursday surprised them.

After receiving dozens of twitter questions and almost a thousand people expressing interest in know more, here are my thoughts on the decision by the Chiefs and Berry to forego surgery.

Hard to do in 280 characters.

If there is enough interest In #EricBerry heel, I can try to write an article. If enough people reply/retweet/like, I will do it. Thanks. https://t.co/j5wDcQxnTN — David J. Chao, MD (@ProFootballDoc) February 28, 2019


Berry tore his left Achilles tendon in the first game of the 2017 season and missed the rest of that season after surgery. Upon return for the 2018 season, he had issues in the right heel that caused him to miss the preseason and sit out until late in regular season. Even then, his return was limited. It was reported as a Haglund’s deformity by NFL Network’s Mike Garafolo. As we explained at the time, this is a bone spur that can rub on the Achilles tendon and cause pain.

So the natural question is why not remove the bone spur in the offseason?

First, not all bone spurs are symptomatic. In the case of a Haglund’s deformity, the presence of a spur itself does not always equal surgery. Obviously, the medical staff feels it can be managed without surgery.

Secondly, the presence of this type of bone spur rarely leads to Achilles tendon rupture.


Finally, surgery to remove the spur is not always simple. Often, removing the spur means detaching all or part of the Achilles insertion (essentially creating a tear) and then repairing it. The recovery from that can be tricky.

Understandably, fans want a definitive solution to having missed almost all of last season with the heel issue. And given that Berry missed the previous season with a heel tendon rupture, the fears are understandable.

Exit physicals are a very important part of a medical staff’s job. That is when offseason plans are made to get players fully healthy for next season. Certainly, surgery was contemplated, a second opinion was obtained, and the thought is that with conservative care the symptoms can go away.

A four-month rest timeline, as Berry had from the preseason into late in the regular season, is interminable in the NFL world. But that is normal for dissipation of symptoms away in the real world.


Knowing what I know about Achilles tendonitis and associated Haglund’s deformity, the decision not to have surgery is understandable. Fans should trust the Chiefs medical staff and Berry didn’t opt to take this path without full consideration of all options.

The decision for no surgery should have nothing to do with thoughts that Berry might be cut.

While it is true that releasing an injured player (or one with recent surgery) has financial repercussions, the decision to have or not have surgery is ultimately up to the player. Berry did get an outside second opinion from a foot/ankle specialist. Also, if Berry were cut, he could still file an injury grievance regardless of whether he had surgery.

In my time as an NFL team doctor, I was never told (and would never listen if I was told) to act based on contractual factors, as a doctor’s job is to provide sound medical advice regardless of circumstances.