What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Preist Holmes injury (1 Viewer)

Dropping Trent Green wouldn't be worth it. If anything, Priest looks to be out for a short time period, if at all (nothing confirmed). Dropping a 4000 yd QB after 2 weeks for a backup RBBC which will be used for a couple weeks at the longest isn't a good idea IMO.

 
Dropping Trent Green wouldn't be worth it. If anything, Priest looks to be out for a short time period, if at all (nothing confirmed). Dropping a 4000 yd QB after 2 weeks for a backup RBBC which will be used for a couple weeks at the longest isn't a good idea IMO.
You're absolutely right. Thank you for talking some sense into me. :bag:
 
This is huge news and Sportscenter has said nothing!What's up with that?!?
I started a thread here yesterday regarding this very topic and I was basically called a nervous nelly. Maybe no one cares as much as we do.
:bag:
We as in fantasy football junkies not me and the other guy... :popcorn:
Actually, the bag was for my head, not yours. I should have used more of my Monday for other things.
Me too. I am losing guys left and right here. This year might be more about luck then any I can remember in the past. Time to take up fantasy bowling. :P
LOL."Luck". :rolleyes:This is extremely laughable considering that "Luck" is how you got Holmes in the first place (unless you are in a keeper/dyn league, and didn't draft first cause you were last place last year... :lol: ).To hear about how bad your "luck" is when you've lucked onto Priest in the first place makes us that picked lower hate you instead of feel sorry for you. :sleep:
 
How does Tony Richardson fit into this picture? He's been there for years and is a better blocker than the other two guys.
No noticable difference in T-Rich's stats. Whoever gets the job, either Blaylock or LJ, will be more than capable of carrying the load.
 
I wouldn't drop anyone until we hear more on this. I saw the injury, it looked "straining" more than "breaking" or "tearing" that's for sure. I didn't think Holmes looked that slow to get up. He walked off on his own power and he stood on the sidelines with his bucket strapped on ready to roll.I think he's injured, I don't think he's hurt badly based on what I saw. For those who didn't see it...Remember those quad/hamstring stretches you used to do where you put one leg out straight and the other bent back under itself? If you lean forward, you stretch your hammy, if you lean backwards far enough, you stretch your quad. Holme's injury was just that. His leg was pinned under him and he got thrown to the ground backwords. I can see an ankle injury, a pulled quad, maybe even a strained knee but I can't see this being something beyond that. Someone with some decent flexibilty could get themselves into that position pretty easily. The fact that he was pinned and landed on makes it worse, but the position itself didn't look too bad to me.My $.02

 
Thanks to all for the info regarding who would be the man...Blaylock or Johnson assuming Priest were to miss time.

 
This is huge news and Sportscenter has said nothing!What's up with that?!?
I started a thread here yesterday regarding this very topic and I was basically called a nervous nelly. Maybe no one cares as much as we do.
:bag:
We as in fantasy football junkies not me and the other guy... :popcorn:
Actually, the bag was for my head, not yours. I should have used more of my Monday for other things.
Me too. I am losing guys left and right here. This year might be more about luck then any I can remember in the past. Time to take up fantasy bowling. :P
LOL."Luck". :rolleyes:This is extremely laughable considering that "Luck" is how you got Holmes in the first place (unless you are in a keeper/dyn league, and didn't draft first cause you were last place last year... :lol: ).To hear about how bad your "luck" is when you've lucked onto Priest in the first place makes us that picked lower hate you instead of feel sorry for you. :sleep:
Wow you might want to head on over to those anger management courses.With 3 of the top 5 (if not more if you count LT's toe) preseason backs having major injury concerns by week 2, I'd say it's an odd year at the very least. Typically this much bad LUCK doesn't go down with such vengence this early in the game. Hence, lucky to those that have their backups and unlucky to those that are losing players, LUCK is involved either way you dice it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone else think they are doing this more as a precautionary thing since they have an early bye? Give Priest a little rest now while he is not 100% to get him to full strength from week 6 on instead of pushing the envelope with their injured star?
They're 0-2 with 2 losses at Arrowhead (iirc). I highly doubt they're resting him as a precaution. They need to win some games pronto.COlin
Game one was in Mile High.Yes, they need to win some games - however throwing an injured Priest into a ballgame in week 3 and risking further injury when your passing game has looked like it has is, IMO, a recipe for losing a LOT of games. With a bye in week 5, and knowing Priest would be less than 100%, wouldn't YOU hold him out this game and let him know on Monday he needs to recuperate for the week on the hope of a couple weeks or more rather than him trying to aggresively rehab it to try and go in 6 days??This isn't week 14 and you gotta win to stay alive - this is a guy who is the entire team and he is banged up really good - they don't want him rushing back on the field (b/c you know he'd try to go if he can).Hasn't he been complaining about soreness in the repaired hip, too, stating that it was not at 100%?
 
How does Tony Richardson fit into this picture? He's been there for years and is a better blocker than the other two guys.
No noticable difference in T-Rich's stats. Whoever gets the job, either Blaylock or LJ, will be more than capable of carrying the load.
It's Blaylock for me. He's sitting there but I can't get to him tomorrow (after our waiver wire is set). Problem is I'm one of two 2-0 teams and I'll be on the bottom of the wire. :yucky: But his stats are so low he may not rise to the guppy radar. We have some sharks but I don't think they'd purge to pick up a part-timer.Blaylock against the Texans...Predictions?
 
This is huge news and Sportscenter has said nothing!What's up with that?!?
I started a thread here yesterday regarding this very topic and I was basically called a nervous nelly. Maybe no one cares as much as we do.
:bag:
We as in fantasy football junkies not me and the other guy... :popcorn:
Actually, the bag was for my head, not yours. I should have used more of my Monday for other things.
Me too. I am losing guys left and right here. This year might be more about luck then any I can remember in the past. Time to take up fantasy bowling. :P
LOL."Luck". :rolleyes:This is extremely laughable considering that "Luck" is how you got Holmes in the first place (unless you are in a keeper/dyn league, and didn't draft first cause you were last place last year... :lol: ).To hear about how bad your "luck" is when you've lucked onto Priest in the first place makes us that picked lower hate you instead of feel sorry for you. :sleep:
Wow you might want to head on over to those anger management courses.With 3 of the top 5 (if not more if you count LT's toe) preseason backs having major injury concerns by week 2, I'd say it's an odd year at the very least. Typically this much bad LUCK doesn't go down with such vengence this early in the game. Hence, lucky to those that have their backups and unlucky to those that are losing players, LUCK is involved either way you dice it.
It might be considered "lucky" that all of these top guys are going down at the same time. Levels out the playing field a bit. And don't get me wrong, I don't wish or think it's "lucky" for anyone to have an injury, even if it improves my chances of winning.
 
Heads up. they're about to talk about the Chiefs on Monday Night Countdown.Also, KFFL update...not much more than we already know.

Chiefs | Holmes Has Sprained Ankle, Status Uncertain - from www.KFFL.comMon, 20 Sep 2004 16:27:53 -0700Adam Teicher, of the Kansas City Star, reports Kansas City Chiefs RB Priest Holmes (ankle) has a sprained ankle. His status is uncertain for the Sunday, Sept. 26, game against the Houston Texans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
clearly luck in nothing more than when preparation meets opportunity - Hopefully we have all drafted well and handcuffed appropriately, stolen someone else's backup (like i did with Rhodes in one league when i had davenport snaked from me)! This is why you need to build depth through the draft - although WOW this is unbelievable - you have to figure everyone is going to get bitten at some point during the year by the injury bug in which case hopefully you have enough depth to weather the storm - but if you have already lost a couple of starters well face it, luck does play a part and even if you have a great draft etc. you need to be at least a little lucky to win it all!

 
Hasn't he been complaining about soreness in the repaired hip, too, stating that it was not at 100%?
Uh, no. Not at all. In fact, just the opposite of that.
No, I'm pretty sure he was saying that his hip was hurting, but he played through it all last year so he didn't think he'd have a problem this year. If it wasn't true, then my whole reasoning for taking LT #1 was wrong...
 
Hmmmm...Countdown says Vermiel says Priest will be Questionable this week. Nothing else.Does that sound serious?

 
Anyone else think they are doing this more as a precautionary thing since they have an early bye? Give Priest a little rest now while he is not 100% to get him to full strength from week 6 on instead of pushing the envelope with their injured star?
They're 0-2 with 2 losses at Arrowhead (iirc). I highly doubt they're resting him as a precaution. They need to win some games pronto.COlin
I think they need Holmes healthy a lot more than getting a win. KC is at home vs. Houston next week. Blaylock and Johnson should be able to do enough to help them get a win. No need to rush Holmes back for that game, they'll need him more vs. Baltimore week 4.If Blaylock and Johnson can't get the job done to help them beat Houston, then the whole team is desperately in need of help and they aren't going anywhere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hasn't he been complaining about soreness in the repaired hip, too, stating that it was not at 100%?
Uh, no. Not at all. In fact, just the opposite of that.
No, I'm pretty sure he was saying that his hip was hurting, but he played through it all last year so he didn't think he'd have a problem this year. If it wasn't true, then my whole reasoning for taking LT #1 was wrong...
That was what I remember, too - him saying near the end of the preseason that the hip was kind of sore and bothering him a bitm it wasn't at 100% of where hje wanted it, but he played through it last year and he'd play through it this year, too.
 
I found this link on kcchiefs.com with the Vermeil press conference. I don't see anything about him potentially being listed as doubtful, unless I just missed it, I kind of skimmed through it.

“Priest Holmes has a sore ankle. After the ballgame I talked to him and was concerned about his knee because I saw him get it bent back. But it turned out this morning that his ankle was a little sore as the end result. It’s nothing serious but it may cost him to miss some time during the week…hopefully, not the ballgame.
Q: When did you know that Priest was hurt? Did you find out today when you came in?VERMEIL: “This morning.”Q: Why wasn’t he in the game at the end yesterday?VERMEIL: “Just left him out because it was the kind of stuff that we were doing that Derrick Blaylock can do and do well in the kind of situation in the game.”Q: Is it an ankle twist, is it a sprain?VERMEIL: “Just a slight sprain, just a slight swelling. Nothing to do with a high ankle sprain or anything like that.”Q: Do you expect him to play on Sunday or is that yet to be determined?VERMEIL: “I don’t know. I just got the report today and I know that it’s not a serious ankle sprain. I don’t know how long it takes him to recover. John Tait used to get an ankle sprain and play on Sunday. But every guy’s a little bit different and every ankle’s a little bit different.”Q: Is Priest the kind of guy who maybe could go all week without practicing and then play?VERMEIL: “He could, he could do that. He could work late and go. But we’ll be prepared to go without him if he can’t go. It’s not serious, it’s just how quickly he can mend.”Q: Is the diagnosis process over with? Have the doctors looked at it?VERMEIL: “Yeah. Mild soreness (reads a long medical evaluation). Moderate swelling.”Q: So his knee’s bad too?VERMEIL: “No, it was just sore from getting bent back. But it’s fine.”Q: Who plays for him assuming Priest doesn’t play?VERMEIL: “Blaylock would and then Larry (Johnson) would get ready to go.”Q: What packages do you have that don’t involve Priest?VERMEIL: “Nothing.”Q: Then why wasn’t he in the game? I’m not sure I understand why he wasn’t in the game….VERMEIL: “Because we didn’t want him in the game at the time. Is that a good enough answer? It had nothing to do with his injury because I walked right up to him and asked him and that’s the only thing I can tell you. The truth. That’s why he wasn’t in the game. The situation in a game like that down by 11 we just left him out of there.”
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone else think they are doing this more as a precautionary thing since they have an early bye? Give Priest a little rest now while he is not 100% to get him to full strength from week 6 on instead of pushing the envelope with their injured star?
They're 0-2 with 2 losses at Arrowhead (iirc). I highly doubt they're resting him as a precaution. They need to win some games pronto.COlin
Game one was in Mile High.Yes, they need to win some games - however throwing an injured Priest into a ballgame in week 3 and risking further injury when your passing game has looked like it has is, IMO, a recipe for losing a LOT of games. With a bye in week 5, and knowing Priest would be less than 100%, wouldn't YOU hold him out this game and let him know on Monday he needs to recuperate for the week on the hope of a couple weeks or more rather than him trying to aggresively rehab it to try and go in 6 days??This isn't week 14 and you gotta win to stay alive - this is a guy who is the entire team and he is banged up really good - they don't want him rushing back on the field (b/c you know he'd try to go if he can).Hasn't he been complaining about soreness in the repaired hip, too, stating that it was not at 100%?
:excited: Sweet.Smelvin and HERD are fighting! :boxing: :excited: Cheers
 
The question on my mind is who was responsible for drafting LJ? Priest had already broken out and Blaylock was an established backup(I think) before LJ was drafted. The key to me, was it "managment" or was it Vermeil? If it was DV, then I think it would benefit LJ, based on nothing more than the pride in human nature to prove your point by taking what was a risky draft pick(they should have went D and we see that more and more each week). This is a chance to vindicate Larry Johnson's selection, so I think he may be the man like it or not. When I read DV's comments about Blaylock fitting what they wanted to do "at that time", I read into that the fact the Chiefs were trailing and Blaylock was a more attractive safety valve moving the ball down field. Now, if they think Blaylock is a more attractive recieving option than LJ(as appears to be the case), then it will undercut what the offense and LJ could accomplish. But at the end of the day, it's one hell of a line for whoever gets the call to run behind. IF DV was behind picking him, I fully expect LJ, at least for the next 2-3 weeks(if Father Holmes is out that long).

 
Hasn't he been complaining about soreness in the repaired hip, too, stating that it was not at 100%?
Uh, no. Not at all. In fact, just the opposite of that.
No, I'm pretty sure he was saying that his hip was hurting, but he played through it all last year so he didn't think he'd have a problem this year. If it wasn't true, then my whole reasoning for taking LT #1 was wrong...
That was what I remember, too - him saying near the end of the preseason that the hip was kind of sore and bothering him a bitm it wasn't at 100% of where hje wanted it, but he played through it last year and he'd play through it this year, too.
Wow so you are suggesting that what you meant was that he was complaining of soreness in his hip last year? I'll buy that obviously.I said, "just the opposite" meaning that he is/has not complained about the hip at all this year. No soreness, no reason to rest it. I kind of get the feeling you are dancing on this one, correct me if I am wrong.
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.

 
It’s nothing serious but it may cost him to miss some time during the week…hopefully, not the ballgame.
VERMEIL: “I don’t know. I just got the report today and I know that it’s not a serious ankle sprain. I don’t know how long it takes him to recover. John Tait used to get an ankle sprain and play on Sunday. But every guy’s a little bit different and every ankle’s a little bit different.”Q: Is Priest the kind of guy who maybe could go all week without practicing and then play?VERMEIL: “He could, he could do that. He could work late and go. But we’ll be prepared to go without him if he can’t go. It’s not serious, it’s just how quickly he can mend.”Q: Is the diagnosis process over with? Have the doctors looked at it?VERMEIL: “Yeah. Mild soreness (reads a long medical evaluation). Moderate swelling.”Q: So his knee’s bad too?VERMEIL: “No, it was just sore from getting bent back. But it’s fine.”Q: Who plays for him assuming Priest doesn’t play?VERMEIL: “Blaylock would and then Larry (Johnson) would get ready to go.”
Thanks :thumbup: This doesn't sound too bad. We often hear about players who are "questionable" and miss practice but play.And it also let's us know that Blaylock will be the starter if needed. Great info!
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
He did mention his hip has been bothering him this year. Here are a couple quotes from this past August:
-- Holmes Hurting, But... --Tue Aug 3, 2004 --from FFMastermind.comThe Kansas City Star reports 2003 was not a particularly fun year for RB Priest Holmes. He spent most of it practicing, training, getting massages, psyching himself up to play another game. That's why in March he gave a little thought to quitting. “Every year, I ask myself if I'm ready to give my all to football for another year or if I should just walk away,” Holmes says. “This time, for the first time, I had my doubts. It's the first time I've ever talked about it with a coach. I wasn't sure.” He decided that he still has a purpose to play football. But that doesn't make it any easier. The pain is not quite what it was a year ago — and from a sideline view Holmes looks a step quicker than he did then — but the hip is not what it was. How could it be? “I'm probably at 80 percent,” he says. “And what I'm trying to do now is build up my stamina and my strength so that I'm ready to go, in case the plan is to give me the ball as many times as they have the last couple of years.” He smiles. “I have no reason to believe the plan will be any different.”
-- Chiefs Injury Update - Holmes Tired --Tue Aug 3, 2004 --from FFMastermind.comIn an interview on the team's official website, Kansas City Chiefs HC **** Vermeil touched on what's ailing his team. RB Priest Holmes seems a bit run-down. “He’s fine. His hip got tired on him today and he just sort of ran out of gas and got weak. He just backed down and probably won’t practice tonight.
 
Didn't Vermeil say that Holmes was "fine" yesterday? If so, I'd like to get a nice big Webster's, open it up to the page with "fine" on it, and shove it right up his lying and/or stupid ####.

 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
My memory is not the greatest, but I don't recall PH complaining about his hip at all, he was asked a question and he answered it. Has he been asked about it since the start of the season?
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
You're flat out wrong. As posted above he said in August it's bothering him, continues to bother him and will continue to bother him and that at best his hip is 80% going into the season and will not improve. What part of that is so hard to understand. He didn't complain about it much last year either - and I give him kudos for that - but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.With or without the ankle sprain, Holmes is a 31 year old running back living on borrowed time with the hip. Most of us knew that going into the draft, I find it odd that you didn't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
OOH OOH...Staff fight
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
You're flat out wrong. As posted above he said in August it's bothering him, continues to bother him and will continue to bother him and that at best his hip is 80% going into the season and will not improve. What part of that is so hard to understand. He didn't complain about it much last year either - and I give him kudos for that - but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.With or without the ankle sprain, Holmes is living on borrowed time with the hip. Most of us knew that going into the draft, I find it odd that you didn't.
I totally disagree. He's not complaining about the hip at all, it's not a subject.Maybe it does bother him, but time off isn't going to help. He had off the entire offseason.The point was that he was complaining about the hip bothering him, which he isn't.Nothing wrong about that.
 
Of course Priest Holmes' hip is still hurting him. It will continue to ache probably forever. Priest Holmes plays through the aches and pains, but it is very worrisome that he even contemplated retirement this offseason. Holmes strikes me as the kind of guy who will unexpectedly retire after a season, like Robert Smith.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
You're flat out wrong. As posted above he said in August it's bothering him, continues to bother him and will continue to bother him and that at best his hip is 80% going into the season and will not improve. What part of that is so hard to understand. He didn't complain about it much last year either - and I give him kudos for that - but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.With or without the ankle sprain, Holmes is living on borrowed time with the hip. Most of us knew that going into the draft, I find it odd that you didn't.
I totally disagree. He's not complaining about the hip at all, it's not a subject.Maybe it does bother him, but time off isn't going to help. He had off the entire offseason.The point was that he was complaining about the hip bothering him, which he isn't.Nothing wrong about that.
Gotta agree with Dave here, the hip isn't the issue at hand. Priest's ankle and knee are. I do remember him saying that his hip bothered him during the preseason, but that it shouldn't impact his game play at all. Like a few others have said, I don't think it's something that's going to improve, it's just something he's going to have to live with.I wish Vermeil was more forthcoming with his injury status. Would make for easier decision for tonight's wavier pickup. Do I grab Blaylock or LJ or do I need to grab both? Damn you ****, damn you.
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
You're flat out wrong. As posted above he said in August it's bothering him, continues to bother him and will continue to bother him and that at best his hip is 80% going into the season and will not improve. What part of that is so hard to understand. He didn't complain about it much last year either - and I give him kudos for that - but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.With or without the ankle sprain, Holmes is living on borrowed time with the hip. Most of us knew that going into the draft, I find it odd that you didn't.
I totally disagree. He's not complaining about the hip at all, it's not a subject.Maybe it does bother him, but time off isn't going to help. He had off the entire offseason.The point was that he was complaining about the hip bothering him, which he isn't.Nothing wrong about that.
I guess that depends on what you consider to be this year.If you mean these last two weeks you're right (I guess, I haven't seen complaints about that - there've been other things to talk about I suppose).If you mean in calendar year 2004 - right up until last month, before most drafts - you're wrong.Regardless, whether he's complained about it or not these last two weeks, it is acknowledged that the hip is a chronic problem, and seems more likely to become worse rather than better. I think that's why the hip was brought up in the first place.Now on top of that you've got a sprained ankle - which he also hasn't complained about this year. It's just another health problem of his we know about now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The question on my mind is who was responsible for drafting LJ? 
From what I understand Carl Peterson, GM, wanted to draft LJ for insurance because PH was come off the hip injury, but even more so as leverage for contract negotiation with PH. I've heard that DV wanted to draft a defensive player. So LJ may not be getting a fair shake since he was not DV's choice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does someone need a time out?
Now, now. This is a very difficult time for all of us. We need to rally together to get through this. If we're at each other's throats we're doomed to fall. ;)
 
The question on my mind is who was responsible for drafting LJ? 
From what I understand Carl Peterson, GM, wanted to draft LJ for insurance because PH was come off the hip injury, but even more so as leverage for contract negotiation with PH. I've heard that DV wanted to draft a defensive player. So LJ may not be getting a fair shake since he was not DV's choice.
Good info MOE. I'm going to try to find some solid facts on the internet somewhere. I'll post a link if I come across anything.
 
Marc, this is what you said:

Yes, they need to win some games - however throwing an injured Priest into a ballgame in week 3 and risking further injury when your passing game has looked like it has is, IMO, a recipe for losing a LOT of games. With a bye in week 5, and knowing Priest would be less than 100%, wouldn't YOU hold him out this game and let him know on Monday he needs to recuperate for the week on the hope of a couple weeks or more rather than him trying to aggresively rehab it to try and go in 6 days??This isn't week 14 and you gotta win to stay alive - this is a guy who is the entire team and he is banged up really good - they don't want him rushing back on the field (b/c you know he'd try to go if he can).Hasn't he been complaining about soreness in the repaired hip, too, stating that it was not at 100%?
You stated that Priest being injured was a recipe for losing a lot more games if he were rushed back, and oh by the way hasn't he has also been complaining about his hip. The answer is he has not, and it's not fair to the readers of the forums to bring in extraneous information.What you should try to do Marc as a contributor is add something of relevance rather than just popping off polished little wise cracks of no relevance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe it does bother him, but time off isn't going to help. He had off the entire offseason.
THAT - I agree with
The point was that he was complaining about the hip bothering him, which he isn't.Nothing wrong about that.
That, I disagree with.See my post - my original statement was whether it seemed to anyone a bit precautionary with the bye week coming up soon and him injured to have him sit. The fact that up, until the season started, he reported soreness in the hip is ENTIRELY relevant from the team's perspective.And jeez - I'm SHOCKED Priest isn't telling the public (and opposing teams) that his hip is sore now that the season's started - esp, with the team at 0-2. Priest is an animal, but I doubt he wants opposing Ds knowing his hip is still sore. Why do you think HC's are so tight lipped about injuries to players who they plan to have play in games?
 
Maybe it does bother him, but time off isn't going to help. He had off the entire offseason.
THAT - I agree with
The point was that he was complaining about the hip bothering him, which he isn't.Nothing wrong about that.
That, I disagree with.See my post - my original statement was whether it seemed to anyone a bit precautionary with the bye week coming up soon and him injured to have him sit. The fact that up, until the season started, he reported soreness in the hip is ENTIRELY relevant from the team's perspective.And jeez - I'm SHOCKED Priest isn't telling the public (and opposing teams) that his hip is sore now that the season's started - esp, with the team at 0-2. Priest is an animal, but I doubt he wants opposing Ds knowing his hip is still sore. Why do you think HC's are so tight lipped about injuries to players who they plan to have play in games?
Seriously, you are way off on this.His hip injury caused chronic pain. Everyone knows about it, and the very meaning of the word chronic is that it's not going away. What is there to hide? Are you serious on this?He's not complaining, and the hip has nothing to do with this whatsoever.
 
No - end of preseaosn this year he stated as a plain fact that his hip was still sore and did not feel 100% but since he played on it last year, he would play on it this year.
And in the context of what you said, wtf does that matter? He had the entire offseason to rest it, hasn't complained about it at all since the first carry of game one and obviously wouldn't benefit at all from taking a few games off.That's the point, the hip is healthier than at any point last year and HE HAS NOT COMPLAINED about it at all.
OOH OOH...Staff fight
My favorite! :yes: :excited: :boxing:
 
I'll let the thread get back to it's original intent...info on Holme's injury.I don't think the hip is a concern at all here.With any luck, we'll be talking about a new topic next Sunday.

 
Thanks Moe!! Your INFORMATIVE post rocked. The bickering only made this topic 3 pages instead of 2!! I just snagged Blaylock!! :yes:

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top