Gronk may need back surgery

[JDM]

When you're drafting that late it takes a lot of picks to move up.

 

[Yankee Traveler]

Heck, the one guy they thought they had got KO'd by the Ravens' safety in that game.

And that means he's a poor running back? He took ashot to the head.
Prior to that he had 1300 yds and 12 TD's. Not to shabby for RB by committee.

 

[Yoshi]

And that means he's a poor running back? He took ashot to the head.
Prior to that he had 1300 yds and 12 TD's. Not to shabby for RB by committee.

More like blown up by Pollard with a shot to the head, who has a history of knocking out Patriots players in prior years.

On top of that, Ridley isn't shabby, and let's see what he has this coming season. Hopefully, that concussion doesn't have a lingering effect for him, but players who've had concussions are more vulnerable to having them again.

 

[JDM]

By the time you're in the NFl, most players have had at least one to two legitimate concussions, plus countless minor ones. It's part of football.

 

[Yoshi]

By the time you're in the NFl, most players have had at least one to two legitimate concussions, plus countless minor ones. It's part of football.

I found this to be an interesting read, especially the last few parts:

NFL Concussions: The 2012-13 Season In Review | Concussion Watch | FRONTLINE | PBS

 

[JDM]

I'm not reading all of that, but I've followed a lot of it as it happened because I personally have a history of concussions. (5 or 6 I bothered to report, including one where I lost multiple weeks of memory, probably hundreds of minor to moderate ones I didn't report) I was worse than a lot, for sure, but most I played with had at least one reported one and several on a more minor level.

Looking at the end you referred to, 34 players isn't enough of a sample size to demonstrate brain damage is higher, although I do believe it to be accurate. I understand tush for safety, especially from a legal perspective, but I don't want to ruin the game completely in the process. The point was I don't think he necesarily has a longer concussion history than most of the nfl. He just got his at the NFL level.

 

[Yankee Traveler]

More like blown up by Pollard with a shot to the head, who has a history of knocking out Patriots players in prior years.

Copy that. Not a big Pollard fan...(How many teams has he been on?)...But I would like to think it is strictly coincidence with him and Patriots injuries. I would hope anyway. I did think the Gronk tackle was a bit dirty the way he wraps his arms around Gronks midsecetion then swings his body against his knees.

But thats football.

 

[JDM]

I don't think any of his hits have been dirty with respect to us. The Gronk tackle was just because of how big and hard to bring down Gronk is.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

With Gronkowski sidelined, tight end Jake Ballard has looked sharp in each of the media-accessible OTAs, showing limited signs of restriction nearly 16 months after originally suffering a knee injury. He's shown reliable hands to go along with his big frame (6-foot-6, 275 pounds), and he should make a difference as a blocker when the pads come on.

More or less relevant here. Can't believe no other teams put in a claim for Ballard. Or that the Giants exposed him to get claimed. He's not great, but he's pretty solid all-around, and is a huge presence.

 

[dblakejr7]

So much for the taping angle.. How many year have they made it to the playoffs since?

 

[MHSL82]

So much for the taping angle.. How many year have they made it to the playoffs since?

Well, they got there without it. Won it with it. Since they've gotten there without it since, the argument goes is they are no better or worse than they were before it and not good enough without it (until they win without it).

If you cheat, I don't give you the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, many more would cheat if they got the same damn thing - the ends justifies the means.

Having said that, I haven't paid much attention to it, as evidenced by the fact I don't know which of the titles were in those years. First of three? First and second? All three? The last two? The last one?

 

[dblakejr7]

My point is even with a poor d that gives up tons of yards.. The pats have been better then 27-31 teams consistently since 2007 which is after the taping.. They have been to the bowl and the playoffs every year..

 

[Zig]

Well, they got there without it. Won it with it. Since they've gotten there without it since, the argument goes is they are no better or worse than they were before it and not good enough without it (until they win without it).

If you cheat, I don't give you the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, many more would cheat if they got the same damn thing - the ends justifies the means.

Having said that, I haven't paid much attention to it, as evidenced by the fact I don't know which of the titles were in those years. First of three? First and second? All three? The last two? The last one?

Actually there was no rule about what they were doing until that memo came out in 2006. It was 'common' for a lot of teams to do it before then. Commish himself said they broke no rules until 2006, they won their last SB in 2004, legally

Mr. Goodell, though, said none of the tapes or notes the league confiscated from the Patriots indicated any illegal activity took place before late in the 2006 season.

Roger on Spygate: Let It Go, People! - The Super Blog - WSJ

Pretty good piece on this(taping) from SI, and it came out before the Pats got busted

The most common practice is for a team to videotape an opponent's signal-givers on the sideline, and later marry up those indications to the game tape in order to identify tendencies or patterns.

Teams have also been chastised for having a second camera in the press box-area video box, with one camera shooting the game action and the other one being trained on the opposing team's signal-givers. On offense, that's why coaches have taken to holding their play-calling charts in front of their mouths when they're sending in the play to the quarterback via the radio headset system.

"That type of sign-stealing goes on a ton in the league,'' said one NFL source who was both a former coach and player in the league. "From a coaching standpoint, you know who's signaling in the personnel on the opposing sideline, and then there's another guy making the play calls on the headset. Defenses used to watch the play-caller, and if a guy spoke for a real long time, that was usually a pass, because the calls take longer. A run is always a shorter call. So coaches shield their mouths when they're calling plays now. If you make your calls out in the open, the other team will steal your signals and your tendencies.''

SI.com - Writers - Don Banks: Cheating in the NFL a matter of mind over matter - Wednesday July 25, 2007 2:02PM

They should have stopped when the new Sheriff told them (and everyone) to stop though.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

D line. Wilfork in the middle, with chandler jones on outside is great. Another pass rusher is needed off the left end

Linebackers. Mayo is one of the better MLB in the NFL. spikes is solid, and Hightower showed good promise. Ninkovich is not an amazing athlete, but is generally in the right place.

Corners. Talib is solid at number one. The rest are not dominant, but I don't think they're as bad as they have looked the last two years. They had legitimately no safety help in 2011 (Matthew slater played games there), and a little from devin McCourty late last year.

Safety. I like McCourty at free. He's not going anywhere. strong is the other big hole I mentioned. Adrian Wilson should do fine there for this year at least, but I'd like a longer term option.

Are they elite as a unit? Not by any means. But the bulk of the defense is very young and I think once you give them one or two more years to prove themselves they'll be in good shape. Adrian Wilson is 33, Wilfork is 31, ninkovich is 29. Pretty much everyone else on the defensive roster is under 27. For their age, 9 in points isn't bad at all.

A little late to be responding to this, but missed it at the time.

The run D is good. The pass D is pretty shaky. Sure, they were 9th in points allowed last year, but that's not the whole story. They let quite a few teams put up quite a few points on them, but benefited from a remarkably easy schedule and playing in what was almost undoubtedly the weakest offensive division in the league - the Pats themselves aside, of course.

In eight games against teams in the bottom-10 in terms of PPG (Tenn, AZ, NYJ, MIA, STL), the Pats allowed an average of 14.6 PPG. In the remaining eight games, they allowed an average of 26.8 PPG. Furthermore, they only played two road games against opponents that ranked outside the bottom-12 in PPG. They lost both games while allowing 24 and 30 points.

As for the individual position groupings, they don't have a great pass rush, and what they have benefits considerably from their offense forcing teams into passing situations. Spikes and Hightower both have limited range. Talib is solid, but there's little else at the position and little reason to give Belichick any benefit of the doubt in terms of finding CBs after so many recent failures. Safety seems passable. And in the year or two that it takes the young guys to figure it out, Wilfork may be gone or past his prime. Players his size don't last indefinitely, and he's a FA after 2014. I think there's a strong argument that he's their best defensive player right now. What happens to the unit when he walks away?

Right now, I think there are as many questions as answers for that unit.

 

[Yoshi]

So much for the taping angle.. How many year have they made it to the playoffs since?

Taping angle as in spygate? Well, let's just say the Pats have yet to win a SB since spygate.

 

[MHSL82]

Actually there was no rule about what they were doing until that memo came out in 2006. It was 'common' for a lot of teams to do it before then. Commish himself said they broke no rules until 2006, they won their last SB in 2004, legally

Roger on Spygate: Let It Go, People! - The Super Blog - WSJ

Pretty good piece on this(taping) from SI, and it came out before the Pats got busted

SI.com - Writers - Don Banks: Cheating in the NFL a matter of mind over matter - Wednesday July 25, 2007 2:02PM

They should have stopped when the new Sheriff told them (and everyone) to stop though.

Ok. You said they broke no rules until 2006. Did they tape before then?

As I said, I didn't care enough about it to know. So I wasn't too condemning or upset. We weren't in those Super Bowls so I didn't care. For me, I don't care if others do it and I don't care if it's against the rules or not, I feel doing it is cheating. If 3/4 teams do it, then 3/4 teams are guilty of cheating. If the Patriots were one of those teams, they're guilty. I am not going based upon league rules, it just smells like cheating. Other teams should get in trouble, too, but I guess you can only punish the caught? And the rules should be in line with what seems like cheating (filming the other team's practice).

I don't downgrade what I think based upon how many others did it. If I speed with others passing me, I still accept the ticket. Some challenge it. As an attorney, I wouldn't charge someone for cheating if it wasn't against the law at the time (if I don't have other legal duty arguments) and if I were representing the speeder, I'd help him challenge it, but personally, in sports when I have no effect, I'll just consider it cheating.

Some may think, if others are cheating and you don't, you lose. Fine, cheat, but I'll consider you a cheater, not a winner. I won't substitute the other team as a winner either, because we'll never know. Ultimately, no one cares what I think anyway, so I won't change my perception of what is tainted and what is not.

Now, if you can show that they didn't tape in any of the three years and only taped after, then that's fine. As to your point, one can be good enough to get to the playoffs every year without cheating. The question is can they win the big one without it? Favorable calls is a different thing, but can fall under the same category. I'll give you an example - the Jazz went to the playoffs like 18-20 times in a row, the Bulls fewer - but would anyone say that the Jazz were better? On the other hand, would anyone say they were no good? Post 2004, I'd put the Patriots in that category until they win again. (Overall, Patriots >>>>> Jazz, just grabbed a team I know about for the example, I'm sure there are better examples out there.)

 

[HammerDown]

 

[threelittleturds]

[MEDIA=twitter]347060071362088960[/MEDIA]

That is one of the worst homer stories I have ever seen... I don't even know where to begin... I know a lot of people don't like Brady and the Patriots, but he did what he did and you can't take that away from him...

I find it absolutely disgusting that this homer used his NFL.com job to somehow say Rodgers is the epitomy of greatness as a QB. In 2007, Brady had the best statistical year of any QB. 16 wins, 50 TDs, and 4800 yards. Rodgers had his best year in 2011 and he didn't top any of those numbers by Tom... oh blah blah blah, Erin Fraudgers sat out week 16, well tough shit, that was his choice.

Bottom line, Brady's accomplishments >>>>>>>>>> Rodger's accomplishments. This story was nothing more than a creative way to praise Rodgers and worship the Erin Altar.

And to imply that Gronk makes Tom Brady is disgusting, especially when he is saying greatness is a guy who has the best WR corps in the NFL with a really talented TE to boot... oh yeah? Jennings got hurt? Yeah, well Cobb might be better than Jennigns ever was...