Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***** OFFICIAL Rob Gronkowski - taking his talents to TB *****


Recommended Posts

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he were out for the season. This whole thing has been weird and I don't know if he'll lineup at TE in a game or they'll say he's out till next season. I don't understand how the guy is practicing every day but not playing on Sunday. I could see how Patriot players are getting frustrated though. You have guys like Amendola out there dinged up taking heavy shots and a bruiser like Gronkowski collecting checks on the sideline but healthy enough to practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he were out for the season. This whole thing has been weird and I don't know if he'll lineup at TE in a game or they'll say he's out till next season. I don't understand how the guy is practicing every day but not playing on Sunday. I could see how Patriot players are getting frustrated though. You have guys like Amendola out there dinged up taking heavy shots and a bruiser like Gronkowski collecting checks on the sideline but healthy enough to practice.

Bingo. I know he has been "limited" - whatever that means to BB - but still . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the topic:

Team Gronk said to the Patriots they want him to go on PUP and start in week 7 to be sure. The patriots did not like that idea, because of concerns about their reciving corps etc. and activated him before the season started. Following that Gronk recieved medical clearance from Dr. Gill (Patriots team doc) in week 2-3 but did not play because team Gronk was stuborn and said Gronk is not ready to play. Prior to week 6 they consulted Andrews again who RECOMMENDED that he would not play. It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

If there were really a bigger problem with his arm, he would not "dominate" in practice against the first team defense (he played on the scout team last week).

My verdict on the situation is therefore that he will play this week, because Team Gronk made their point that he should have been on the PUP list and now it's time to mend fences and be one happy 6-1 team again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

Why?

Andrews is probably being professional with his choice of wording. If he says Gronk isn't medically cleared to play, he's going directly against the Pats team doctors who have cleared him. By saying he "recommends" Gronk doesn't play, he is avoiding the appearance of saying the Pats Drs are wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

Why?

Andrews is probably being professional with his choice of wording. If he says Gronk isn't medically cleared to play, he's going directly against the Pats team doctors who have cleared him. By saying he "recommends" Gronk doesn't play, he is avoiding the appearance of saying the Pats Drs are wrong.

Andrews is not the team doctor and performed none of the procedures. I am not sure how he can clear someone who is not his patient. They asked him for his expert opinion but I doubt it was ever a case of waiting on clearance from a doctor that came into the process recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the topic:

Team Gronk said to the Patriots they want him to go on PUP and start in week 7 to be sure. The patriots did not like that idea, because of concerns about their reciving corps etc. and activated him before the season started. Following that Gronk recieved medical clearance from Dr. Gill (Patriots team doc) in week 2-3 but did not play because team Gronk was stuborn and said Gronk is not ready to play. Prior to week 6 they consulted Andrews again who RECOMMENDED that he would not play. It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

If there were really a bigger problem with his arm, he would not "dominate" in practice against the first team defense (he played on the scout team last week).

My verdict on the situation is therefore that he will play this week, because Team Gronk made their point that he should have been on the PUP list and now it's time to mend fences and be one happy 6-1 team again.

This is what I meant by Gronks folks having an agenda. They didnt get their way when the Pats once again rushed (In their opinion) to make Gronk active as soon as possible so they began the stalling and used the other doctor's recommended diagnosis to stall until the date they originally asked to have Gronk held out until. If he doesnt play week 7 then I am totally wrong but thats my thoughts as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many FF types blasting Gronk.

When you take a step back, the Pats are the ones that look awful. The Pats' doctor butchered Gronk's procedure causing mega-post surgical problems. The method used, instead of giving it extra time to heal, led to re-break upon the first serious impact to the area because Gronk really shouldn't have been on the field. Now again, the Pats medical staff has cleared Gronk to play, he's been cleared for weeks. Whoopee! Problem is that Gronk's own doctor who did his most recent surgery has not cleared Gronk. They then bring in the renowned Dr Andrews to give a 3rd opinion and Dr Andrews, says "NO" he's not ready (some stooge even questioned if Andrews has any credentials to opine on arms).

Yes, Gronk is running around at full speed at practice. Big deal.

Also, he hasn't been able to lift at full tilt for months so his strength is much less than what it was

:goodposting:

Another year another Patriots scandal that will get swept under the rug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

Why?

Andrews is probably being professional with his choice of wording. If he says Gronk isn't medically cleared to play, he's going directly against the Pats team doctors who have cleared him. By saying he "recommends" Gronk doesn't play, he is avoiding the appearance of saying the Pats Drs are wrong.

Andrews is not the team doctor and performed none of the procedures. I am not sure how he can clear someone who is not his patient. They asked him for his expert opinion but I doubt it was ever a case of waiting on clearance from a doctor that came into the process recently.

Again, I think it's professional courtesy. If a patient requests a 2nd opinion, (and some early reports said the Pats were going to let Andrews make the final decision, although later reports contradicted that), the patient becomes the 2nd Dr's patient, as well. So, Andrews didn't say the Pats Drs were wrong, but by only giving a "recommendation," he also protects himself from liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the topic:

Team Gronk said to the Patriots they want him to go on PUP and start in week 7 to be sure. The patriots did not like that idea, because of concerns about their reciving corps etc. and activated him before the season started. Following that Gronk recieved medical clearance from Dr. Gill (Patriots team doc) in week 2-3 but did not play because team Gronk was stuborn and said Gronk is not ready to play. Prior to week 6 they consulted Andrews again who RECOMMENDED that he would not play. It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

If there were really a bigger problem with his arm, he would not "dominate" in practice against the first team defense (he played on the scout team last week).

My verdict on the situation is therefore that he will play this week, because Team Gronk made their point that he should have been on the PUP list and now it's time to mend fences and be one happy 6-1 team again.

This is what I meant by Gronks folks having an agenda. They didnt get their way when the Pats once again rushed (In their opinion) to make Gronk active as soon as possible so they began the stalling and used the other doctor's recommended diagnosis to stall until the date they originally asked to have Gronk held out until. If he doesnt play week 7 then I am totally wrong but thats my thoughts as well.

I understand that this is what you think happened. But do we actually KNOW if any of this is true? Prior to last week, we kept hearing how "Gronks folks" were targeting week 6; not we are assuming it was/is week 7. How can we give more/less credibility to ANY reports about this situation, since it seems like EVERYONE has been wrong on this, at least once?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many FF types blasting Gronk.

When you take a step back, the Pats are the ones that look awful. The Pats' doctor butchered Gronk's procedure causing mega-post surgical problems. The method used, instead of giving it extra time to heal, led to re-break upon the first serious impact to the area because Gronk really shouldn't have been on the field. Now again, the Pats medical staff has cleared Gronk to play, he's been cleared for weeks. Whoopee! Problem is that Gronk's own doctor who did his most recent surgery has not cleared Gronk. They then bring in the renowned Dr Andrews to give a 3rd opinion and Dr Andrews, says "NO" he's not ready (some stooge even questioned if Andrews has any credentials to opine on arms).

Yes, Gronk is running around at full speed at practice. Big deal.

Also, he hasn't been able to lift at full tilt for months so his strength is much less than what it was

:goodposting:

Another year another Patriots scandal that will get swept under the rug.

Not to mention the reports that Gronk's teamates are getting frustrated or whatever about him "dominating in practice" but not playing on gameday. Wonder who leaked that report?? lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many FF types blasting Gronk.

When you take a step back, the Pats are the ones that look awful. The Pats' doctor butchered Gronk's procedure causing mega-post surgical problems. The method used, instead of giving it extra time to heal, led to re-break upon the first serious impact to the area because Gronk really shouldn't have been on the field. Now again, the Pats medical staff has cleared Gronk to play, he's been cleared for weeks. Whoopee! Problem is that Gronk's own doctor who did his most recent surgery has not cleared Gronk. They then bring in the renowned Dr Andrews to give a 3rd opinion and Dr Andrews, says "NO" he's not ready (some stooge even questioned if Andrews has any credentials to opine on arms).

Yes, Gronk is running around at full speed at practice. Big deal.

Also, he hasn't been able to lift at full tilt for months so his strength is much less than what it was

:goodposting:

Another year another Patriots scandal that will get swept under the rug.

Not to mention the reports that Gronk's teamates are getting frustrated or whatever about him "dominating in practice" but not playing on gameday. Wonder who leaked that report?? lol

But then there's reports that say everything is fine in the locker room. Every report out there has something contradicting it, so it's hard to get an accurate read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many FF types blasting Gronk.

When you take a step back, the Pats are the ones that look awful. The Pats' doctor butchered Gronk's procedure causing mega-post surgical problems. The method used, instead of giving it extra time to heal, led to re-break upon the first serious impact to the area because Gronk really shouldn't have been on the field. Now again, the Pats medical staff has cleared Gronk to play, he's been cleared for weeks. Whoopee! Problem is that Gronk's own doctor who did his most recent surgery has not cleared Gronk. They then bring in the renowned Dr Andrews to give a 3rd opinion and Dr Andrews, says "NO" he's not ready (some stooge even questioned if Andrews has any credentials to opine on arms).

Yes, Gronk is running around at full speed at practice. Big deal.

Also, he hasn't been able to lift at full tilt for months so his strength is much less than what it was

:goodposting:

Another year another Patriots scandal that will get swept under the rug.

Not to mention the reports that Gronk's teamates are getting frustrated or whatever about him "dominating in practice" but not playing on gameday. Wonder who leaked that report?? lol

But then there's reports that say everything is fine in the locker room. Every report out there has something contradicting it, so it's hard to get an accurate read.

I dont buy any report saying there is no problem in the locker room. Imagine if you are a player in that situation and your best player suits up and kicks butt in practice and then is a no show on game day. I would be pissed. The "everything is fine" talk is PR damage control by the team.

Edited by Breesisdaman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting to note that Andrew's diagnosis is referred to as either "recommended" or "suggested" which to me means something other then "did not medically clear him".

Why?

Andrews is probably being professional with his choice of wording. If he says Gronk isn't medically cleared to play, he's going directly against the Pats team doctors who have cleared him. By saying he "recommends" Gronk doesn't play, he is avoiding the appearance of saying the Pats Drs are wrong.

Andrews is not the team doctor and performed none of the procedures. I am not sure how he can clear someone who is not his patient. They asked him for his expert opinion but I doubt it was ever a case of waiting on clearance from a doctor that came into the process recently.

Again, I think it's professional courtesy. If a patient requests a 2nd opinion, (and some early reports said the Pats were going to let Andrews make the final decision, although later reports contradicted that), the patient becomes the 2nd Dr's patient, as well. So, Andrews didn't say the Pats Drs were wrong, but by only giving a "recommendation," he also protects himself from liability.

Yes, I agree. I'd like Arwald to explain why he thinks what he thinks, since it's clearly at odds with other people's understanding of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For subscriber's there is a lot of good info in Dr Jene Bramel's 10/14 report

Thanks for the info, can you share any of the messaging?

I appreciate Bramel's report, but it doesn't really shed any new light on the situation. It eliminates nerve damage as a worry (but, in my mind, I never accepted that as an issue, after he began practicing). Otherwise, it just says either his arm is healthy now, or it isn't going to be any time soon. Getting that from a reliable source is beneficial, but it doesn't really provide any clarity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For subscriber's there is a lot of good info in Dr Jene Bramel's 10/14 report

Thanks for the info, can you share any of the messaging?

We are essentially left with more questions than answers. It wasn't explicitly said, but someone could read Dr Bramel's article and conclude that this could be a psychological issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I checked in with my orthopedic contacts... All of them told me that it's possible that Gronkowski's arm has yet to fully heal on followup imaging studies. If that's the case, it's highly unlikely that it heals before the season ends. None of them could think of a bone issue that persists through five months that would resolve within the next month.

Essentially, that means that Gronkowski is medically ready to play now or he won't be for an indefinite period. And that statement doesn't fit with allowing Gronkowski to practice for a month, yet not gaining clearance from two noted orthopedic surgeons.

Dr. Bramel's summary.

I think he's ready, but is being extra cautious. Four surgeries on the same problem would blow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

So how many games would he have to play to count '13 as a year of service? Used to be 6, right? Not sure if it changed under the current CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

So how many games would he have to play to count '13 as a year of service? Used to be 6, right? Not sure if it changed under the current CBA.

I'm not sure if that even applies. He wasn't holding out. Technically he was available to play but was held out due to injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

What's the argument here? That he's willing to forgo relatively small potatoes this year to make sure he's healthy engough to cash in on the bigger $$ next year and beyond?

Edited by wdcrob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

So how many games would he have to play to count '13 as a year of service? Used to be 6, right? Not sure if it changed under the current CBA.

I'm not sure if that even applies. He wasn't holding out. Technically he was available to play but was held out due to injury.

I thought of that after I posted. This is an injury, not a hold out. But even so, he could just be playing it safe in '13 instead of risking further injury until the big money kicks in in '14. Follow the money...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

What's the argument here? That he's willing to forgo relatively small potatoes this year to make sure he's healthy engough to cash in on the bigger $$ next year and beyond?

Not really an argument but more of a possible explanation as to what's going on. Gronk is getting paid peanuts this season and might make himself available to play if the Pats reworked his deal and brought some of the future bonuses or salaries forward. Not really a hold out, but a mini hold out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

You very well may be on to something with this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

You very well may be on to something with this

Hard to fault gronk if this is the case. The team had already put his career in jeopardy, has a doc who's been league investigated and they've pushed him to get back even after complications that seem to be the teams doings.

If I were him I wouldn't trust the pats at all especially knowing that the Pats could be costing him tens of millions when he hasn't even seen a big paycheck yet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

hes never seeing that 2016 payday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

Those last 4 years are a team option in 2016 and should actually be treated like a separate contract. Gronkowski took the deal originally since he wasn't confident of his long-term health and wanted the guaranteed money the Pats offered ($13.6M).

He's right to be concerned about his health and I wouldn't take the field either if my doctor told me I was at risk of re-injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

You very well may be on to something with this

Hard to fault gronk if this is the case. The team had already put his career in jeopardy, has a doc who's been league investigated and they've pushed him to get back even after complications that seem to be the teams doings.

If I were him I wouldn't trust the pats at all especially knowing that the Pats could be costing him tens of millions when he hasn't even seen a big paycheck yet

I wouldn't say it's hard to fault Gronk at all. Those numbers leave out the large signing bonus that Gronk got, and neglect to mention that it was done on top of him already being under contract for much less (IE they could have waited out his rookie deal).

Let's not pretend Gronk is a victim being forced to play for scraps of what he's worth. He just got a nice chunk of money upfront when the Pats could have left him as a guy being forced to play for the scraps of his rookie deal (the signing bonus on his extension alone was double the payout of his entire rookie contract).

Edited by FreeBaGeL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but unless they are talking money, how can this be resolved?

If Gronk is "holding" out to make sure he gets some of that money, then he would need to say "guys, uh, I've played great my first few years, but you have jacked up my forearm & I'm not sure that I will see all that money that's in my contract. If you give me some of that now, I'll play."

If he did that, the backlash would be HUGE. So while you may be onto something, I don't see how it get settled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

Those last 4 years are a team option in 2016 and should actually be treated like a separate contract. Gronkowski took the deal originally since he wasn't confident of his long-term health and wanted the guaranteed money the Pats offered ($13.6M).

He's right to be concerned about his health and I wouldn't take the field either if my doctor told me I was at risk of re-injury.

IIRC, Gronk got an $8 million signing bonus and his first 3 years of salary guaranteed. Most of the 2016 money is a $10 million bonus, so the Pats certainly have an out if they don't want to pay him big money on the back half of the deal. Not sure why players or agents agree to these kinds of deals, as it really doesn't net them all the money the contract seems like it does (as many times teams won't keep the player for all the years and bonuses).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this is money related. Here is what Gronk is due in total for each season for the remainder of his contract:

2013: $660,000

2014: $4 million

2015: $5 million

2016: $13 million

2017: $5 million

2018: $9 million

2019: $10 million

Sounds to me that if the Pats shifted the money around and gave him say $5 million cash now then he'd be good to go this weekend.

You very well may be on to something with this

If this is the case (and it makes perfect sense -- follow the money), then I'm starting to feel like he won't play this season. BB is a stubborn bastard and I can't see him being the one to blink. We've seen how he treats players like replaceable parts, even really integral ones like Welker. Guy was getting targeted constantly, then one day he's not part of the game plan. That was no accident. I think Belichick actually relishes being seen as evil, and might possibly even be an incarnation of Satan or a lesser demon, not unlike Jerry Jones.

On the other hand, if the forearm really is fine, how long can he keep using it as an excuse? If he's cleared and still doesn't play and it becomes clear that this is about money, he becomes a pariah as ESPN is already saying is starting to happen. And if that's the situation over the next few weeks, at what point can the Pats threaten to void his contract for refusing to play?

Yep, definitely more questions than answers at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say it's hard to fault Gronk at all. Those numbers leave out the $8 million signing bonus that Gronk got, and neglect to mention that it was done on top of him already being under contract for much less (IE they could have waited out his rookie deal).

Let's not pretend Gronk is a victim being forced to play for scraps of what he's worth. He just got a nice chunk of money upfront when the Pats could have left him as a guy being forced to play for the scraps of his rookie deal (the signing bonus on his extension alone was double the payout of his entire rookie contract).

The Pats could have played hard ball with him but he also could have held out. Instead he got a 4 year, $18M deal with $13M guaranteed. That's extremely cheap compared to the deal Jimmy Graham is about to get.

Link to comment
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...