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)

He's not complaining, and the hip has nothing to do with this whatsoever.
Maybe so, maybe not - I am not the doctor - I DO know he wouldn't talk about the pain once the season started regardless - that is Priest.I also am not a doctor on the inside of the organization - but it is probably omething the medical staff will consider when deciding their input on whether to sit Priest this week in light of two more leg related injuries.The Rams doctors certainly knew that Faulk's knees were hurting him before the season last year. They knew his knee would get worse and was degenerative b/c they had operated on it before - they sent him into the season with it having bearing on the decision to sit him, since he'd have to play the year with the pain anyway, right? But, when he got injured, they decided to have surgery since he was sitting anyway to give him temporary relief in the knees so he could play the rest of the year at a top level.I see this the same way - Priest has two injuries that maybe he could struggle through and play on - or they could be safe and sit him this week. Since his hip has been sore anyway, maybe a week off from the pounding early in the year with a break in two weeks for the bye will make it more bearable as the season progresses - it worked wonders for Faulk to sit for 6 games.The comment about his hip was not popping off - I wanted (and received) confirmation that he had been reporting that the hip still bothered him - it would be a factor in a decision whether to sit him, in my opinion, but it was my opinion, not me wisecracking a non-relevant comment.
 
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 David.Let's stay with the ankle here.Thanks.J
 
He's not complaining, and the hip has nothing to do with this whatsoever.
Maybe so, maybe not - I am not the doctor - I DO know he wouldn't talk about the pain once the season started regardless - that is Priest.I also am not a doctor on the inside of the organization - but it is probably omething the medical staff will consider when deciding their input on whether to sit Priest this week in light of two more leg related injuries.The Rams doctors certainly knew that Faulk's knees were hurting him before the season last year. They knew his knee would get worse and was degenerative b/c they had operated on it before - they sent him into the season with it having bearing on the decision to sit him, since he'd have to play the year with the pain anyway, right? But, when he got injured, they decided to have surgery since he was sitting anyway to give him temporary relief in the knees so he could play the rest of the year at a top level.I see this the same way - Priest has two injuries that maybe he could struggle through and play on - or they could be safe and sit him this week. Since his hip has been sore anyway, maybe a week off from the pounding early in the year with a break in two weeks for the bye will make it more bearable as the season progresses - it worked wonders for Faulk to sit for 6 games.The comment about his hip was not popping off - I wanted (and received) confirmation that he had been reporting that the hip still bothered him - it would be a factor in a decision whether to sit him, in my opinion, but it was my opinion, not me wisecracking a non-relevant comment.
Marc, the wisecrack was asking if anyone needed a timeout. But I didn't need to tell you that. I see your point, time to move on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know that this a bad time for Priest owners and I'd be upset as well, but there were signs that he was an injury risk. I had him in '02 and rode him all the way to the playoffs, where I promptly was knocked out after he hurt his hip. This year when I had a chance to draft him, I looked at the injury chances between him and LT and decided that getting a few more points out of Priest wasn't worth the injury risk. Injuries can happen to anyone (like this week) but after hearing him say his hip was still hurting and comtemplating retiring, that should have scared you. Of course I was told that I was stupid for picking LT over Priest, but sometimes you have to take the safer pick.

 
He's not complaining, and the hip has nothing to do with this whatsoever.
Maybe so, maybe not - I am not the doctor - I DO know he wouldn't talk about the pain once the season started regardless - that is Priest.I also am not a doctor on the inside of the organization - but it is probably omething the medical staff will consider when deciding their input on whether to sit Priest this week in light of two more leg related injuries.The Rams doctors certainly knew that Faulk's knees were hurting him before the season last year. They knew his knee would get worse and was degenerative b/c they had operated on it before - they sent him into the season with it having bearing on the decision to sit him, since he'd have to play the year with the pain anyway, right? But, when he got injured, they decided to have surgery since he was sitting anyway to give him temporary relief in the knees so he could play the rest of the year at a top level.I see this the same way - Priest has two injuries that maybe he could struggle through and play on - or they could be safe and sit him this week. Since his hip has been sore anyway, maybe a week off from the pounding early in the year with a break in two weeks for the bye will make it more bearable as the season progresses - it worked wonders for Faulk to sit for 6 games.The comment about his hip was not popping off - I wanted (and received) confirmation that he had been reporting that the hip still bothered him - it would be a factor in a decision whether to sit him, in my opinion, but it was my opinion, not me wisecracking a non-relevant comment.
Marc, the wisecrack was asking if anyone needed a timeout. But I didn't need to tell you that. I see your point, time to move on.
Absolutely. Drop it and move on. Thanks.J
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to complete my original post, here is a Belated Link :hophead:
Damned subscription sites...
My bad - Posted on Mon, Sep. 20, 2004 Chiefs' Holmes has sprained ankleBy ADAM TEICHER The Kansas City StarThe Chiefs may play without halfback Priest Holmes in Sunday's game against Houston.Holmes, who missed the last half of the fourth quarter of Sunday's loss to Carolina, has what the Chiefs called a sprained left ankle.“I know it's not a serious ankle sprain,” coach **** Vermeil said. “I don't know if he's had one before or how long it takes him to recover. Every guy is a little bit different, and every ankle is a little bit different.“We're prepared to go without him if he can't go. Obviously, we want him to be ready. It's not serious. It's just how quickly he can mend.”Derrick Blaylock would be the starter and featured halfback against the Texans if Holmes isn't ready to go.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top