Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

Can anyone remember a time when a player (in any sport) went to see Dr. James Andrews for a 2nd opinion and didn't miss a significant amount of time? I serious can't remember one.

Why do we always call him Dr. James Andrews and not just Dr. Andrews? Is it because when you add the first name it is my scary? and you are always scared when you fantasy players or hometown players go visit him?

Many times, though I play fantasy baseball as well. More players and so more visits to Dr Andrews. Some are clear. Some are a sprain instead of severed ligament. 

They said the doctors had a hard time reading the MRI due to the scar tissue. No one better at reading MRIs than Dr Andrews.

So he may read it and agree that there's no significant damage to the knee.

or he may read it and notice something no one else noticed, ending Bradford's season. 

The worst visits to Dr Andrews are to "confirm" or "get a 2nd opinion about an" ACL - that's where player X is diagnosed but doesn't believe it. 

In this case the doctors said it's a bone bruise - and he's going to Dr Doom to confirm. 

But of course, he could find something. 

Hopefully it's good news. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Was week 1 not an absolute indictment of Jeff Fisher as the QB killer?  He managed to turn two #1 overall picks into fantasy and reality shyte.  Granted, Bradford suffered some injuries under Fisher,

Hey take it to the Frogs forum!  

Solid point you have going here, please expand.    

9 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

Can anyone remember a time when a player (in any sport) went to see Dr. James Andrews for a 2nd opinion and didn't miss a significant amount of time? I serious can't remember one.

Why do we always call him Dr. James Andrews and not just Dr. Andrews? Is it because when you add the first name it is more scary? and  you are always scared when you fantasy players or hometown players go visit him?

Similar to when your mom calls you by your full first name and throws in your middle name.    You knew you were caught and about to get punished.  "Michael John"!

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

Yeah I guess Keenum is 2-0 vs the Bucs. No idea why or if he actually had something to do with those outcomes, but that is the story going around.

The Vikings are at home which helps. About the only silver linings I can find here.

Lovie Smith. 

Different defense now, but they have a couple key guys already ruled out too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

Can anyone remember a time when a player (in any sport) went to see Dr. James Andrews for a 2nd opinion and didn't miss a significant amount of time? I serious can't remember one.

Why do we always call him Dr. James Andrews and not just Dr. Andrews? Is it because when you add the first name it is more scary? and  you are always scared when you fantasy players or hometown players go visit him?

Clearly so people don't confuse him with this guy:

https://www.dukehealth.org/find-doctors-physicians/paul-s-andrews-md

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arodin said:

Clearly so people don't confuse him with this guy:

https://www.dukehealth.org/find-doctors-physicians/paul-s-andrews-md

There are tons of James Andrews MD entries in Google as well.  I bet there are some orthopedic surgeons named James Andrews as well but they aren't "the" James Andrews.  Must be somewhat difficult for those other doctors living up to a name like that.  

He is an easy drop in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Not in start-2QB leagues. Probably not in 14+ team leagues, either.

Eh, it's been suggested he's out probably 6 weeks.  I'd rather have Luck at that point.  At least if Luck comes back, you know he won't go down if he steps on a curb awkwardly.  Bradford's reputation of being injury prone continues on.  Even in a 14 team league, he's a drop for me.  Start 2 QB, there's probably not much out there so I'd agree that you probably have to sit it out.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

No structural damage. Dr Andrews confirms initial diagnosis. 

It pays to be an optimist sometimes. 

:yes: 

After visiting Dr. James Andrews, Sam Bradford (knee) remains week-to-week with a bone bruise.

Bradford went to Andrews for a second opinion and mostly received good news. Andrews cleared him of any structural damage, meaning it will be an issue of pain tolerance for Bradford, who is sitting out for a second straight week. Obviously the Vikings will need to tread carefully given Bradford's long history of injuries, though the team is obviously anxious to get him back. He'd be an enormous upgrade on journeyman Case Keenum, who is starting against the Bucs in Week 3.

Source: NFL.com 

Sep 24 - 8:10 AM

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mphtrilogy said:

Great news!

Yeah, as Pollyanna as I sounded I was not pleased he was going to see Dr Death. lol

hopefully he responds better tontreatment this week.

bone bruises in the knee can be a real problem and take time. 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Saboo said:

Has Sam Bradford played his last game for the Vikings? 

https://thevikingage.com/2017/09/30/bradford-already-played-final-game-for-vikings/

What a terrible article. The Vikings are going to cast aside a guy who has a bone bruise over someone who ALMOST LOST HIS LEG and is lucky to ever play again? We have no idea what kind of mobility Teddy will have again. Ive seen this thinking a couple times now and I just don't get it. Also, Keenum played one decent game. He hasn't shown to be a long term answer at all in his career.

Edited by cap'n grunge
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, cap'n grunge said:

What a terrible article. The Vikings are going to cast aside a guy who has a bone bruise over someone who ALMOST LOST HIS LEG and is lucky to ever play again? We have no idea what kind of mobility Teddy will have again. Ive seen this thinking a couple times now and I just don't get it. Also, Keenum played one decent game. He hasn't shown to be a long term answer at all in his career.

Hes one of the worst Vikings writers out there and there are some other pretty bad ones that I avoid for my personal sanity.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, cap'n grunge said:

What a terrible article. The Vikings are going to cast aside a guy who has a bone bruise over someone who ALMOST LOST HIS LEG and is lucky to ever play again? We have no idea what kind of mobility Teddy will have again. Ive seen this thinking a couple times now and I just don't get it. Also, Keenum played one decent game. He hasn't shown to be a long term answer at all in his career.

Not only that but Bridgewater wasn't very good before he got hurt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bradford has some potential, but the Vikings can’t count on him long term. The guy is always hurt and has a significant history of knee problems. I would never give him a big $ deal.

Edited by Saboo
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Saboo said:

I think Bradford was some potential, but the Vikings can’t count on him long term. The guy is always hurt and has a significant history of knee problems. I would never give him a big $ deal.

I agree. to start this season he looked like the saving grace they needed... and if he did stay healthy he would be. he was off to a heck of a start. Vikings could move on but what do they do then? Bridgewater is far from a rosier future than Bradford.

Min has the next best thing at RB... two top of the line Ers. a good TE, revamped OL with a positive future, and a top defense...

going to a crappy QB or changing on a rookie could waste the window they have

Edited by Dr. Dan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news for Bradford, but he is still only limited and even if the possibility exists that he could play you most likely won’t know he status until Monday afternoon when all the other ab’s have played

Edited by Saboo
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-09-30 at 10:04 PM, Biabreakable said:

Hes one of the worst Vikings writers out there and there are some other pretty bad ones that I avoid for my personal sanity.

I think calling this an "article" is pretty charitable. It's a word salad of factual information intermixed with things that might or might not happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bradford: My Knee Feels Much Better This Week

He says his knee feels a lot better yesterday than it did two weeks ago.

That he doesn't expect to be 100% until maybe after the bye or maybe not until the end of the season. That the pain he has is something he will need to deal with and manage.

When asked about if he would be ready to start against Chicago, he is not commital about that and deflects the question. He says he will see how he feels in practice today and tomorrow and go from there. He is hoping by tomorrow he will have a better idea about that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve got Dalton & Bradford. 

Bradford a much better start if he plays. 

I’d rather have Dalton’s floor than Mitch’s, so I guess I’ll roll with Dalton one more week.

im just glad to (hopefully) have Bradford back in time for Dalton’s week 6 BYE.

I don’t really get dropping Bradford in FFB as good as he looked and with the weapons they have, especially after Cook went down, but ok. Each to their own. 

I have a feeling those who drop him might regret it when facing in later in the season. Why hold a guy for 3-4 weeks only to drop him right before he comes back? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It might bite me in the butt, but I think I’m gonna roll the dice that Bradford starts. 

I have no other MN options, but thanks to this rare Saturday practice update I’m taking the bait. 

Sam Bradford - QB -  Vikings

Sam Bradford (knee) practiced on Saturday.

Bradford has now practiced three days in a row, making it likely he plays Monday night. All receiving options receive a sizeable upgrade with Bradford playing, but Kyle Rudolph, who averages six more fantasy points and three more targets when Bradford plays, is likely to be the biggest beneficiary.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

It might bite me in the butt, but I think I’m gonna roll the dice that Bradford starts. 

I have no other MN options, but thanks to this rare Saturday practice update I’m taking the bait. 

 

 

Getting a 0 from QB would suck so bad though. I don't want to hold 3 QBs with Brees on Bye to grab another QB.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

It might bite me in the butt, but I think I’m gonna roll the dice that Bradford starts. 

I have no other MN options, but thanks to this rare Saturday practice update I’m taking the bait. 

 

 

My two cents as a Vikings fan and Frogs fan. Heyo!!!

Bradford and Dalton are ranked right around each other. Bradford probably a little higher. But is that risk worth taking a zero if for some reason he trots our their Monday and feels poorly? Probably not.

Bradford’s first and only game this year was great. But it was against a siv of a saints defense.

He had two good fantasy games to finish the season last year and one big one to start this year, but has been pretty mediocre other than that. In my opinion, just hard to trust on Monday night coming off his time off. 

Dalton has a low floor High ceiling at times. Hard to know when to start him, but as you saw last week. When he’s on, he’s on.

Edited by VikingFrog
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, VikingFrog said:

My two cents as a Vikings fan and Frogs fan. Heyo!!!

Bradford and Dalton are ranked right around each other. Bradford probably a little higher. But is that risk worth taking a zero if for some reason he trots our their Monday and feels poorly? Probably not.

Bradford’s first and only game this year was great. But it was against a siv of a saints defense.

He had two good fantasy games to finish the season last year and one big one to start this year, but has been pretty mediocre other than that. In my opinion, just hard to trust on Monday night coming off his time off. 

Dalton has a low floor High ceiling at times. Hard to know when to start him, but as you saw last week. When he’s on, he’s on.

No one has been on against the Bills though. While it’s not been a murderer’s row they’ve faced at QB, they’ve only allowed 1 TD to any QB they’ve faced.

its tough - I really don’t wanna start Dalton but I also really don’t want a 0. 

It also occurs to me that Bradford could start, get hit in the knee & leave the game. 

Chicago D is just so much better if a matchup than Buffalo. 

Tough call. I appreciate your Frogs fan insight though. I’ll have to mull it over more. Maybe Bradford will comment on his status again to give me more (or less) confidence in him). ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VikingFrog said:

My two cents as a Vikings fan and Frogs fan. Heyo!!!

Bradford and Dalton are ranked right around each other. Bradford probably a little higher. But is that risk worth taking a zero if for some reason he trots our their Monday and feels poorly? Probably not.

Bradford’s first and only game this year was great. But it was against a siv of a saints defense.

He had two good fantasy games to finish the season last year and one big one to start this year, but has been pretty mediocre other than that. In my opinion, just hard to trust on Monday night coming off his time off. 

Dalton has a low floor High ceiling at times. Hard to know when to start him, but as you saw last week. When he’s on, he’s on.

Just chiming in to say you've another Frog fan here on this board in me. I'm actually at the game today. Let's go Frogs!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Listed as questionable. Sounds like he’s gonna start. 

Without the probable designation the best thing we can go by is if the player had a full or limited practice or not. He had a full practice today.

If they did have the probable designation still I would guess that they would still list him as questionable not probable, due to only one full practice.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

Without the probable designation the best thing we can go by is if the player had a full or limited practice or not. He had a full practice today.

If they did have the probable designation still I would guess that they would still list him as questionable not probable, due to only one full practice.

Yeah - i didn’t mean “questionnable” so sounds like he’s gonna play.

Sorry, those were two seperate thoughts.

1. Listed as questionable 

and

2. It sounds like he’s gonna play. 

:P 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...