Any Update on Winslow? (1 Viewer)

[Klimtology]

 

[duece2626]

Crennel said he will play Sunday.

 

[simey]

link

Wednesday October 15, 2008, 11:27 AMBEREA -- Browns tight end Kellen Winslow is still at home being treated for his undisclosed illness and is questionable for Sunday's game in Washington.

Coach Romeo Crennel said today that he's hoping to have Winslow available for the game and that he will, "if things keep progressing.''

Winslow sat out the Browns' 35-14 victory over the Giants on Monday night after spending three nights at the Cleveland Clinic. He was released from the Clinic on Sunday, but ruled out on game day. He was replaced by Steve Heiden, who caught five passes for 59 yards.

 

[buck naked]

From Rotoworld:

Browns expect Kellen Winslow back this week

Browns coach Romeo Crennel expects Kellen Winslow (illness) to play this week against the Redskins.

Check back later in the week to make sure he practices, but it sounds like Winslow will be fine for Sunday. Get him back in your lineup. Oct. 15 - 9:57 am et

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

 

[heinfatha]

UPDATED

In a conference call with Redskins media, Browns coach Romeo Crennel said he was "unsure" of Kellen Winslow's (illness) status for Week 7.

Crennel told Cleveland media that Winslow should be ready. Predictably, he backed off that stance with reporters from the opponent. "He's questionable," Crennel said. "I'm hopeful he plays, but there's no guarantee." Expect the Browns to call Winslow a game-day decision at the end of the week.

I am a bit worried!

 

[monessen]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

 

[Scooby1974]

Cleveland is probably afraid of bruising Kellen's pride. It's not quite as "manly" to say "I overcame a swollen teste" as it is to say "I beat cancer".

Certainly we wish Kellen the best.

 

[MCguidance]

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2008/10/15/kellen-...ble-for-sunday/

Not really new but is still questionable.

 

[T Bell]

Brett Favre called him this morning and cured him of his AIDS.

 

[The Redbeard]

Brett Favre called him this morning and cured him of his AIDS.

 

[monessen]

Cleveland is probably afraid of bruising Kellen's pride. It's not quite as "manly" to say "I overcame a swollen teste" as it is to say "I beat cancer".Certainly we wish Kellen the best.

Yes, we wish him the best. And we certainly can't have an NFL player with bruised pride or apprehensions about his manliness. That would be utterly horrific, and totally unprecedented.Meanwhile, more sources are reporting on the nature of his condition while the so-called mainstream sports media does not. My fervent hope is that Winslow does not experience any feelings of shame that could conceivably prompt some form of depression as a result of the disclosures. Of course, such symptoms might ensue regardless as a consequence of watching how the Browns took down the Giants so decisively without Winslow.

 

[PR Sparty]

Update??

 

[King of the Jungle]

His frank is again above his beans.

 

[kaa]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

 

[T Bell]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

 

[Baron Samedi]

His frank is again above his beans.

 

[Bobcat10]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

I'm thinking injury and illness are approached differently. This is not an ankle sprain. Can you link to the exact "rule" you are talking about?

 

[sho nuff]

His frank is again above his beans.

[Warren] Have you seen my baseball?[/Warren]

 

[T Bell]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

I'm thinking injury and illness are approached differently. This is not an ankle sprain. Can you link to the exact "rule" you are talking about?

If it affects his playing status, there's no distinction.

 

[Mighty Mice]

(Rotoworld) Kellen Winslow (illness) rejoined the Browns on Thursday, but was not medically cleared to resume practicing.

Analysis: Winslow was spotted walking at the Browns' practice facility, but didn't take part in Thursday's workout. Practicing Friday would be a great sign for his chances of facing the Redskins. For now, his status remains up in the air.

Not able to go today either.

http://www.kansascity.com/491/story/843671.html

 

[Butters]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

I'm thinking injury and illness are approached differently. This is not an ankle sprain. Can you link to the exact "rule" you are talking about?

If it affects his playing status, there's no distinction.

NFL rules do not trump the Health Insurance Portability and Availability Act (HIPAA). If I were the Browns (and the NFL), I'd keep my mouth shut as well until Winslow decides it's OK.

 

[MCguidance]

(Rotoworld) Kellen Winslow (illness) rejoined the Browns on Thursday, but was not medically cleared to resume practicing.

Analysis: Winslow was spotted walking at the Browns' practice facility, but didn't take part in Thursday's workout. Practicing Friday would be a great sign for his chances of facing the Redskins. For now, his status remains up in the air.

Not able to go today either.

http://www.kansascity.com/491/story/843671.html

Thanks, MM. I am probably going to go second option, Daniels, at this point.

 

[T Bell]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

I'm thinking injury and illness are approached differently. This is not an ankle sprain. Can you link to the exact "rule" you are talking about?

If it affects his playing status, there's no distinction.

NFL rules do not trump the Health Insurance Portability and Availability Act (HIPAA). If I were the Browns (and the NFL), I'd keep my mouth shut as well until Winslow decides it's OK.

HIPAA only applies to health care providers, so a non-league affiliated hospital will reveal nothing.The team, OTOH, is governed by league rules, and must divulge certain information, and Winslow has waived his privacy/HIPAA rights to object to the team doing that as a condition of playing in the league.

 

[KellysHeroes]

I doubt he plays this week

 

[Butters]

HIPAA only applies to health care providers, so a non-league affiliated hospital will reveal nothing.

The team, OTOH, is governed by league rules, and must divulge certain information, and Winslow has waived his privacy/HIPAA rights to object to the team doing that as a condition of playing in the league.

HIPAA applies to "covered entities", which are usually health care providers (or administrators), as you say. However, there are times when employers are covered entities as well.It was gray to me as two whether the NFL would be one or not, and quite frankly I've already spent ten more minutes on this than I planned to spend in my entire life, but here's what I saw....

How might an employer be a covered entity?

Normally, an employer will only deal with covered entities, not actually be one. However, if an employer has any kind of health clinic operations available to employees, or provides a self-insured health plan for employees, or acts as the intermediary between its employees and health care providers, it will find itself handling the kind of PHI that is protected by the HIPAA privacy rule.

When is patient authorization necessary?

Patient authorization is not necessary if a disclosure is made for purposes of treatment, securing payment, or in accordance with the operations of a health care provider. If PHI is to be disclosed for any other purpose, the patient's written authorization is mandatory.

When disclosing PHI, what must a covered entity do?

Whether the PHI must be authorized or does not need to be authorized, the covered entity must always release only as much information is necessary to address the need of the entity requesting the information (what the regulation refers to as the "minimum necessary" information to satisfy the inquiry).

Are there any exceptions to the privacy rule?

It is possible to disclose PHI without authorization if there is a compelling need for disclosure, such as when the information is needed for public health situations, court and agency proceedings (such as workers' compensation claim proceedings - see below), agency requirements (such as OSHA 300 logs - see OSHA Standards Interpretation Letter, August 2, 2004, http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.sh...amp;p_id=24898), law enforcement, emergencies, identification of deceased people, and national security-related situations (see 45 CFR § 164.512(a, e, and l)).

End of by me.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

I'm thinking injury and illness are approached differently. This is not an ankle sprain. Can you link to the exact "rule" you are talking about?

If it affects his playing status, there's no distinction.

NFL rules do not trump the Health Insurance Portability and Availability Act (HIPAA). If I were the Browns (and the NFL), I'd keep my mouth shut as well until Winslow decides it's OK.

HIPAA only applies to health care providers, so a non-league affiliated hospital will reveal nothing.The team, OTOH, is governed by league rules, and must divulge certain information, and Winslow has waived his privacy/HIPAA rights to object to the team doing that as a condition of playing in the league.

Correct. HIPPA does not apply to workers' compensation claims.

 

[chris1969]

New update...

The left one says that he'll play, but the right one has him almost convinced enough to shoot himself in the head.

(absolutely no pun intended here)

 

[T Bell]

New update...The left one says that he'll play, but the right one has him almost convinced enough to shoot himself in the head.(absolutely no pun intended here)

Are they the Nuts Who Say Ni!

 

[amnesiac]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

I'm thinking injury and illness are approached differently. This is not an ankle sprain. Can you link to the exact "rule" you are talking about?

If it affects his playing status, there's no distinction.

how specific do they have to be? i thought Questionable - Illness was sufficient.btw, why are you so concerned about what he has? do you think they need to list the exact virus? are you afraid of him being contagious?

 

[monessen]

Nobody thinks Winslow is contagious. That's just a throwaway comment.

In 1972, when Vida Blue contracted something similar, the Oakland A's put out a statement to the effect that he had an illness or infection that manifested itself as a groin injury, making it painful for him to raise his leg when trying to pitch. All the Browns had to do-----especially in order to avoid all the snide jokes, bad puns, and endless speculation----was issue a similar statement. They did themselves and Winslow more of a disservice with the "undisclosed illness" bit. Such a characterization leads to conjecture of a range of potentially possibilities, from a sore throat to conditions far more severe, even prospectively fatal. So, under the guise of confidentiality, they worsened the situation. They did themselves and him no favors.

 

[amnesiac]

i think it's silly too, but they have stated that he's ill, and they have been forthcoming with his status for the football games.

i really don't get what the big deal is here.

 

[Marc Levin]

Any chance we can, instead, talk about whether he participated in morning practice?

I think if he has a serious health issue, the facts of it will ultimately be his business as the league would CHOOSE to protect his privacy. If he is not seriously ill, then they don't need to care enough to report what he has or doesn't have in public reports.

 

[simey]

Winslow set to practice today; status for Sunday to be determined

by Mary Kay Cabot Friday October 17, 2008, 11:36 AM

Browns tight end Kellen Winslow was at practice today and said he hoped to play on Sunday when the Browns face the Washington Redskins.

Winslow said it had been the Browns decision not to disclose his illness, which kept him out of last week's victory over the New York Giants on Monday night and forced him to miss nearly two weeks of practice. He said he agreed with the Browns decision and declined to disclose the nature of the illness.

"It's good to be back," Winslow said this morning.

When asked if it was an infection, Winslow said no. He also said he had not lost any weight.

He said no decision had been made regarding his status for Sunday's game and that the coaches would make that decision after seeing him in practice.

 

[Interseptopus]

Heard on the radio today from an insider with the team that Winslow is suffering from swollen #### (both) for the last 3 weeks... Wish him the best, never wish someone to have troubles their equipment

No joke, completely serious

Seems to explain why he wanted it kept hushed up!

EDIT: you can't say test-icles in here?

 

[monessen]

If Peyton Manning or Tony Romo or LaDanian Tomlinson missed 2 weeks with an "undisclosed illness" that required an extensive hospital stay, the mainstream sports media would be all over the story. However, it wasn't a player of that magnitude (a player to alter the point spread), only someone his fantasy owners and fans of the Browns would care about. Cleveland beat the Super Bowl champs without him.

In any event, it's encouraging to know he may play. Or he may not. But he seems to be progressing. That's good news.

As far as what words can be posted, it seems to be an arbitrary matter of what that particular board mod thinks at the time. You can use the term Testaverde without incident, I believe.

 

[Marc Levin]

As far as what words can be posted, it seems to be an arbitrary matter of what that particular board mod thinks at the time.

So, you think the mods read through all the posts and insert those "###"?

 

[simey]

Winslow missed Monday night's win over the New York Giants. The Pro Bowler may play in Sunday's game against Washington. He worked with the first-team offense Friday during the portion of practice open to the media.

 

[amnesiac]

As far as what words can be posted, it seems to be an arbitrary matter of what that particular board mod thinks at the time.

So, you think the mods read through all the posts and insert those "###"?

 

[monessen]

As far as what words can be posted, it seems to be an arbitrary matter of what that particular board mod thinks at the time.

So, you think the mods read through all the posts and insert those "###"?

Winslow indeed, according to Rotoworld, can be penciled in to play on Sunday.Gents, the broader point is that the board mods can delete posts they deem questionable, particularly if the messages use obscenity or bad taste. I don't think they painstakingly read all messages to blot out words, and believe you know that. The Testaverde remark was facetious. Why some words are subject to deletion and others not is possibly a bit odd to us but the footballguys must have some system to flag dubious language that makes sense to them.Interesting that Tom Brady's leg infection flare-up made the news today, given how close-mouthed the Pats usually are about a player's health. And that the other day, the Vice-President of the U.S. had another heart episode which became public, and rightfully so. But the groin injury of a Cleveland Browns' tight end who's been on scholarship his entire life is a national security issue.Anyway, play Winslow if you got him. Redskins couldn't handle Witten though they did contain Joe Klopfenstein of the Rams. My sense is that Winslow is better than Joe and probably more integral to the Cleveland passing attack than Joe F is to the Rams.

 

[amnesiac]

Interesting that Tom Brady's leg infection flare-up made the news today, given how close-mouthed the Pats usually are about a player's health.

have you heard what kind of infection it is?

 

[monessen]

ESPN.com reports that Brady underwent a second knee surgery on Oct 6 but then later 'felt ill (heard that before recently)." So, he had to be put on antibiotics due to a post-surgical infection, which isn't uncommon. I can't cite the link here but it is on their website and also on the AP wire.

 

[meanjoegreen]

ESPN.com reports that Brady underwent a second knee surgery on Oct 6 but then later 'felt ill (heard that before recently)." So, he had to be put on antibiotics due to a post-surgical infection, which isn't uncommon. I can't cite the link here but it is on their website and also on the AP wire.

What does that have to do with Kellen Winslow?

 

[monessen]

ESPN.com reports that Brady underwent a second knee surgery on Oct 6 but then later 'felt ill (heard that before recently)." So, he had to be put on antibiotics due to a post-surgical infection, which isn't uncommon. I can't cite the link here but it is on their website and also on the AP wire.

What does that have to do with Kellen Winslow?

Nothing. The amnesiac asked a question about Brady and I answered it. He may have forgotten he asked it. Go up a couple of posts and read his question. It's there.Winslow will play. How much action? We don't know. But he'll be active.

 

[amnesiac]

i had already read that bit, was just wondering if you had anymore info. sorry to get off topic.

i personally don't think Winslow will play a whole lot in the game. the Browns proved they had TE depth in the Giants game, and i would think they would limit him a little this week while working him back in.

 

[brady2moss]

i had already read that bit, was just wondering if you had anymore info. sorry to get off topic.i personally don't think Winslow will play a whole lot in the game. the Browns proved they had TE depth in the Giants game, and i would think they would limit him a little this week while working him back in.

I disagree. the team went from rock bottom to beating the world champs monday night. I don't think you limit someone or ease him back in from an illness. Either you can play or you can't. P.S. I don't own Winlsow. I am stuck with Zach Miller

 

[Marc Levin]

i had already read that bit, was just wondering if you had anymore info. sorry to get off topic.i personally don't think Winslow will play a whole lot in the game. the Browns proved they had TE depth in the Giants game, and i would think they would limit him a little this week while working him back in.

Why would they limit him in the game? If he is recovered enough to play, and if he was able to fully participate in practice today and tomorrow, they should be working him in as much as they usually do on game day. It's not like an injury where they need to worry about re-aggravation. If he is medically cleared to play the game, hasn't lost weight, is able to fully practice for two straight days, I'd expect him physically fit enough to play a game.

 

[BIGGjohnny]

As long as they fit him for a new jock strap......i am going to penicl him.....and his BIG BALLS into my lineup!

 

[John Mamula]

Here is the link for Crennel's "about face" on Winslow's status. One message for the Cleveland media, another for Washington's.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsi...ml?nav=rss_blog

Winslow's medical condition has reached proportions similar to media secrecy of the 1930s opting not to report that FDR was in a wheelchair. When the "soldier" from the U of Miami went down after a motorcycle accident a couple of seasons ago, there was consternation then about identifying the extent of his injury. This most recent scenario has been a farce since several outlets have discussed his "undisclosed illness." The Cleveland Clinic, obviously, was not obligated to provide any details why Winslow spent so many days at their facility. But this lack of disclosure from the team about the severity and nature of his affliction has become silly. Baseball teams like the Red Sox and Diamondbacks were far more candid about the much more serious health problems of Jon Lester and Doug Davis in recent years that the past week of Winslow's mishaps from NFL sources.

Why are you being critical of the Browns here? If it is for non-football reasons, Winslow is protected by a right to privacy. It is up to Winslow's discretion and his alone to reveal the nature of this problem.http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclo...confidentiality

Your privacy rights go out the window if you're a player in the NFL and you're listed as anything other than "Out" (or are IR'd). If there's a possibility of you playing, then the nature and extent of your injury is supposed to be reveealed.

 

[Marc Levin]

Nice update here - substantively the same as the one Simey posted, but in greater detail (By TOM WITHERS, AP Sports Writer), and interesting quotes re: the privacy issues we felt some need to hammer on in the thread.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=432524&st=0

Winslow glad to be back on field - says illness is his own biz

From the article:

He said it would be up to Cleveland’s coaching staff to decide whether he plays against the Redskins.

“It’s not for sure that I’m going to play,” he said.

Winslow worked with the first-team offense during the portion of Friday’s practice that was open to reporters. He looked fine while running pass routes for quarterback Derek Anderson, who had his best game of the season against the defending Super Bowl champions despite not having one of his primary targets.

“I’m not going to tell you exactly,” Winslow said. “It was really the Cleveland Browns’ decision to keep it undisclosed and I agree with that. Just because I catch a football doesn’t mean I should tell what’s wrong with me or what happened. I’m back and I’m happy to be back. I think I’m good to go.

“I just feel because I play professional football and can catch a football, it doesn’t mean I should let people into my personal business.”

Last week, Browns coach Romeo Crennel cited privacy laws and Winslow’s preference not to disclose any medical information.

 

[monessen]

Nice update here - substantively the same as the one Simey posted, but in greater detail (By TOM WITHERS, AP Sports Writer), and interesting quotes re: the privacy issues we felt some need to hammer on in the thread.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=432524&st=0

Winslow glad to be back on field - says illness is his own biz

From the article:

He said it would be up to Cleveland’s coaching staff to decide whether he plays against the Redskins.

“It’s not for sure that I’m going to play,” he said.

Winslow worked with the first-team offense during the portion of Friday’s practice that was open to reporters. He looked fine while running pass routes for quarterback Derek Anderson, who had his best game of the season against the defending Super Bowl champions despite not having one of his primary targets.

“I’m not going to tell you exactly,” Winslow said. “It was really the Cleveland Browns’ decision to keep it undisclosed and I agree with that. Just because I catch a football doesn’t mean I should tell what’s wrong with me or what happened. I’m back and I’m happy to be back. I think I’m good to go.

“I just feel because I play professional football and can catch a football, it doesn’t mean I should let people into my personal business.”

Last week, Browns coach Romeo Crennel cited privacy laws and Winslow’s preference not to disclose any medical information.

So, to paraphrase Winslow to the media: "I'm back and have nothing to say." Very honest and candid about his condition and his status for Sunday. So glad the AP ran with those comments.