Week 10 NFL thread

[Michael_ Gee]

Abbott, speed creates injuries. Velocity x mass = you get hurt.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Flynn would seem to be a no-brainer, assuming he wasn't turned into a headcase, as some have suggested during his time in Seattle and Oakland (and Buffalo).

 

[poindexter]

Flynn would seem to be a no-brainer, assuming he wasn't turned into a headcase, as some have suggested during his time in Seattle and Oakland (and Buffalo).

You didn't see the Raider game against the Redskins, a month ago.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Flynn would seem to be a no-brainer, assuming he wasn't turned into a headcase, as some have suggested during his time in Seattle and Oakland (and Buffalo).

You didn't see the Raider game against the Redskins, a month ago.

No kidding.

Packers would be a drawback in that Flynn would be taking a job that requires him to actually play. That isn't his thing.

 

[I Should Coco]

The Packers have found a run game behind Lacy (although it helped they were playing against a patchwork Bears defense, which parted like the Red Sea at times).

Lifelong Bears fan, but with the injuries both they and the Packers have piled up, this might be Detroit's year. Especially if they win in Chicago on Sunday.

 

[IllMil]

I really question what's in the water in GB. The training staff/philosophy needs to be examined. Rodgers was a textbook shoulder injury, but it seems like it's a yearly thing now where they are just decimated by injuries. The frequency of them sure seems beyond coincidence.

What could the training staff have done to prevent Rodgers' injury? He was slammed, legally, on his side and the first thing that hit the ground was his shoulder.

The turf is natural on top of synthetic base, you can't blame the turf for being so hard and unyielding that it contributed to the injury. Though artificial turf, anecdotally, is worse for ACL and some other leg injuries.

Like I said, the Rodgers injury doesn't apply, but yeah, go ahead and gloss over words at your liking.

 

[IllMil]

Flynn would seem to be a no-brainer, assuming he wasn't turned into a headcase, as some have suggested during his time in Seattle and Oakland (and Buffalo).

You didn't see the Raider game against the Redskins, a month ago.

No kidding.

Packers would be a drawback in that Flynn would be taking a job that requires him to actually play. That isn't his thing.

What is this about? Totally missed this.

 

[joe king]

I really question what's in the water in GB. The training staff/philosophy needs to be examined. Rodgers was a textbook shoulder injury, but it seems like it's a yearly thing now where they are just decimated by injuries. The frequency of them sure seems beyond coincidence.

Do they have more injuries than other teams? I'd be surprised if they do. The list might be long, but the list is long for every team.

But, when your best defensive player is the #1 candidate in the "Bet on one guy who is absolutely positively juicing" competition, you're going to have to live with some hammy pulls and other stuff. Not that the broken thumb would be related to that, but when you're going through their laundry list of injuries and he's always on it, there's probably a reason for that. Couple other guys have gotten much larger since college too, in a way that human males aren't really able to do.

Yeah, Matthews is textbook in what to look for in someone who is juicing. All the hammy pulls don't help... The Packers were hit hard by injuries a couple years ago and still won the Super Bowl.

The whole league has been hit hard by injuries. Obviously, when you lose one of the best players in the league, it's going to draw attention to that team.

Last season, the Packers lost 83 games by starters due to injuries, most in the NFL. Washington was second with 75 games, followed by Dallas with 71.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Flynn would seem to be a no-brainer, assuming he wasn't turned into a headcase, as some have suggested during his time in Seattle and Oakland (and Buffalo).

You didn't see the Raider game against the Redskins, a month ago.

No kidding.

Packers would be a drawback in that Flynn would be taking a job that requires him to actually play. That isn't his thing.

What is this about? Totally missed this.

We're just speculating based on Flynn's history, Wallace's ineptitude and the fact that Flynn got his walking papers from Buffalo yesterday.

 

[IllMil]

I believe they also led that stat in 2010.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Flynn would seem to be a no-brainer, assuming he wasn't turned into a headcase, as some have suggested during his time in Seattle and Oakland (and Buffalo).

You didn't see the Raider game against the Redskins, a month ago.

I agree that Flynn probably can't handle the pressure of being a regular starter, but he wouldn't be that in GB. He would just need to fill in and hopefully not lose every game, two of which are against ****ty opponents. I know he's almost two years removed from it, but in theory, he should be more familiar with McCarthy's offense than he was in Seattle or Oakland.

Granted, I don't think any of the options the Packers have at this point are good ones...

 

[LongTimeListener]

The 49ers always raved about Tolzien, who looked very good in his limited preseason duty. I'd rather see him than Wallace.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

The 49ers always raved about Tolzien, who looked very good in his limited preseason duty. I'd rather see him than Wallace.

Yeah, that's an interesting one. I read something recently that said that Tolzien had the chance to go somewhere and be on the active roster, but opted to stay in Green Bay and get a raise to stay on the practice squad. It seemed strange unless they made him some kind of promise that he was the backup of the future...

 

[amraeder]

The 49ers always raved about Tolzien, who looked very good in his limited preseason duty. I'd rather see him than Wallace.

Yeah, that's an interesting one. I read something recently that said that Tolzien had the chance to go somewhere and be on the active roster, but opted to stay in Green Bay and get a raise to stay on the practice squad. It seemed strange unless they made him some kind of promise that he was the backup of the future...

Not so strange when the chance was to sign with the Browns.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

The 49ers always raved about Tolzien, who looked very good in his limited preseason duty. I'd rather see him than Wallace.

Yeah, that's an interesting one. I read something recently that said that Tolzien had the chance to go somewhere and be on the active roster, but opted to stay in Green Bay and get a raise to stay on the practice squad. It seemed strange unless they made him some kind of promise that he was the backup of the future...

Not so strange when the chance was to sign with the Browns.

Probably a fair point...

 

[IllMil]

Looking ahead, here's how I see things shaking out for Green Bay. If Rodgers is out 3 games, they go 1-2 beating Minnesota. That puts them at 6-5 going into Detroit with Rodgers possibly back.

I think they'll lose either to Detroit or one other random game (at Dallas maybe). That's 6 losses. I see them at 9-6 heading into the week 17 game at Chicago which will almost surely be flexed to prime time. They don't get any bigger than that one.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

According to PFT, Rodgers said on his radio show that it's a broken collarbone. So, I think anyone who thinks he'll be back quicker than four weeks is kidding themselves.

 

[amraeder]

According to PFT, Rodgers said on his radio show that it's a broken collarbone. So, I think anyone who thinks he'll be back quicker than four weeks is kidding themselves.

He said fractured, not broken. I'm not a doctor, so I don't know how that changes the timetable.

 

[albert77]

According to PFT, Rodgers said on his radio show that it's a broken collarbone. So, I think anyone who thinks he'll be back quicker than four weeks is kidding themselves.

He said fractured, not broken. I'm not a doctor, so I don't know how that changes the timetable.

Yeah, I think I read somewhere that it was a hairline crack and not a full break.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

According to PFT, Rodgers said on his radio show that it's a broken collarbone. So, I think anyone who thinks he'll be back quicker than four weeks is kidding themselves.

He said fractured, not broken. I'm not a doctor, so I don't know how that changes the timetable.

You're right... The headline said broken, story said fractured... That could make a difference of a week or two...