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.
Will Rodgers be back in week 15 ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter cantstop1999
- Start date
Yet you were adamant about him being useless and whatnot. And that the Packers had no chance. Why so?
You were talking about him like the end might be near. LOL. And of course, the Pack had no chance of winning their next two games.....which they did.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Let it go man. I've already acknowledged being wrong like 5 times. Unreal. I'm a Packer fan. The team barely beat the 4-9 Bucs and 0-13 Browns. Barely. I'm glad they won. Will be even happier if Rodgers comes back this week and is healthy.
Dacomish
Footballguy
My biggest concern is if the Packers wait till Sat or even Sunday AM to activate him I have no choice but to go with Stafford who plays on Sat night in my League Championship game.
If it happens earlier in the week then I'm rolling the dice with Rodgers and enjoy him tossing 3 TD's to Nelson, Adams and Williams.
If it happens earlier in the week then I'm rolling the dice with Rodgers and enjoy him tossing 3 TD's to Nelson, Adams and Williams.
Weebs210
Footballguy
Mostly Nelson. Rodgers sees the way Hundley has treated Nelson and wants to force feed him multiple TDs this week.
Last edited by a moderator:
TripleThreat
Footballguy
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
I don't think that I would start him if he weren't active. In that case, I would probably drop Stafford for the most reasonable choice on the wire who plays on Sunday.
I have the feeling he is playing. They are still leaving doubt as of right now but would you expect it to be any different? They want to wait until late in the week and keep the Panthers guessing. Preparing for Rodgers and preparing for Hundley are two vastly different things and I think they want the Panthers to prepare for both.
The thing about Rodgers injury is that with the type of surgery he had it doesn't have to be 100% healed to play because the plate is stronger than bone and will always remain in his shoulder. There is a only a minor risk of a re-break but even if he were to re-break it there would be no long term ramifications to that. He still should be able to fully recover in plenty of time for next season even if he re-breaks it.
The thing about Rodgers injury is that with the type of surgery he had it doesn't have to be 100% healed to play because the plate is stronger than bone and will always remain in his shoulder. There is a only a minor risk of a re-break but even if he were to re-break it there would be no long term ramifications to that. He still should be able to fully recover in plenty of time for next season even if he re-breaks it.
I don't think re-breaking is the concern - it's that it might not heal properly. A bone that hasn't healed properly becomes a life-long issue. These guys are precision athletes and have developed very specific throwing motions that have allowed them to be in the top .1% that have ever played the sport. Shifting that collarbone healing by half a millimeter on a slightly jarring hit from a linebacker could alter a nerve or a bone such that his throwing motion is never the same.
Any running back who breaks their leg ends up being done for their career. The leg just doesn't heal exactly the way it was before and they lose their elite burst and elusiveness. I imagine it's the same for QBs.
As a Packers fan I'd love to see Rodgers back but I don't want him to risk his career. We still have at least 5 more years of his elite play left. Why risk it?
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Wat?
you're thinking of racehorses. A broken bone is the easiest injury for an athlete to recover from. It’s tissue damage that’s the bigger concern for running backs, especially the soft tissue of the knee (lateral movelent) or ankle (tendons, Achilles is the worst for quickness recovery)
unless it’s an extremely complex break that also involves soft tissues, or of a specific nature (e.g. Garrison Hearst necrosis of the ankle) then there’s zero concern for recovery for a RB from a broken bone.
I have no idea where you’re getting this, but it’s absolutely false.
Last edited by a moderator:
TheDirtyWord
Footballguy
Interesting quandary for the Packers. If ATL wins against the TB, GB loses tie-breaker for WC against them if CAR beats GB (and tie-breaker against CAR as well). Week 16/17 won't matter.
However, if Rodgers comes back for Week 15, that means he's back for week 16 & 17 as well IMO. But those could be worthless games. However, GB's best shot against CAR is to have Rodgers.
To me, it feels like pushing all your chips to the middle of the table.
However, if Rodgers comes back for Week 15, that means he's back for week 16 & 17 as well IMO. But those could be worthless games. However, GB's best shot against CAR is to have Rodgers.
To me, it feels like pushing all your chips to the middle of the table.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Not fully healed. Tackled once and the collarbone breaks.
Not to mention they have to go 3-0 and Atl 1-2.
He isnt playing.
Not to mention they have to go 3-0 and Atl 1-2.
He isnt playing.
Weebs210
Footballguy
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
The bolded part is almost an argument for why he would play, even with the added risk.
I thought I read somewhere that the decision was going to be made today about whether he starts or not -- is that actually true? Unless there are rules at play, seems the smart thing the Packers woudl do is to not declare him active and/or starting until late as possible before the game.
Conan Troutman
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
The only speculation is whether or not the packers and rodgers are willing to accept the fact that since his collarbone will not be fully healed that his chances of rebreaking it are astronomically higher on the most routine of tackles.
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is the medical expert opinion on how the clavicle works and what the risk is by Dr. David Chao
Reward probably outweighs risk when considering Aaron Rodgers' return
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/profootballdoc/sd-sp-pfd-aaron-rodgers-practice-return-1212-story.html
Reward probably outweighs risk when considering Aaron Rodgers' return
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/profootballdoc/sd-sp-pfd-aaron-rodgers-practice-return-1212-story.html
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Total opposite for me. Even with a perfectly healthy rodgers the chances of both the pack going 3-0 and the falcons going 1-2 or worse is rather slim.
We want to risk severe injury or even a simple rebreak for that slim of a chance of just making the playoffs?
That is fundamentally wrong. As long as he is 80% healed then the risk of re-break is minimal and even if it did re-break it is not that big a deal.
Read the article I linked by Dr. David Chao.
I personally think the decision has already been made and he is playing. The Packers are just dragging out publicly admitting it so the Panthers are kept guessing.
Last edited by a moderator:
cantstop1999
Footballguy
I heard on one of the podcast that his injury only needed to be 80% healed to be cleared, not sure if this is correct, just saying I don’t believe it has to be fully healed.
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
And those odds get exponentially slimmer if Rodgers isn't playing.
Saving Rodgers when he's at least 80% for the long haul versus the upside of him playing and making a playoff bid even with the risk of reinjury seems nearly a no-brainer. This is a win now league.
From Dr. David Chao.
So what is the risk?
Rodgers could suffer a break at the fracture site or the screws could pull out. The plates he had inserted during surgery in October are metal and unlikely to break, no matter how hard he is hit or slammed to the ground. And he was double-plated. The most likely break would come at the end of the plates, though even that possibility is remote.
If he did suffer another break, it would almost certainly not be a career-threatening injury. There is always a small risk every time a player steps on a football field that a career will be ended, just like every time you get in a car there is a risk you could get in a fatal accident.
If there was a re-fracture, Rodgers would go through the pain and hassle of another surgery, this time with a longer recovery. But he would certainly recover in 4-6 months and be essentially guaranteed to be ready for training camp, if not before. I have no doubt he would be able to play next season. In my 17 years in the NFL, I never heard of a clavicle fracture or re-fracture that ended a career.
The fact is, there is no way for Rodgers clavicle to be 100 percent healed eight weeks after surgery. Full healing won’t occur for at least six months.
If the question were simply what is best for his clavicle, he should not play football this year. Or next. Or ever.
If the question is whether it is safe enough to play now, then the answer will be found in the CT scan Rodgers reportedly had on Monday.
If he is at 80 percent healed with the additional strength provided by the two plates inserted during surgery, it is safe enough for him to return
So what is the risk?
Rodgers could suffer a break at the fracture site or the screws could pull out. The plates he had inserted during surgery in October are metal and unlikely to break, no matter how hard he is hit or slammed to the ground. And he was double-plated. The most likely break would come at the end of the plates, though even that possibility is remote.
If he did suffer another break, it would almost certainly not be a career-threatening injury. There is always a small risk every time a player steps on a football field that a career will be ended, just like every time you get in a car there is a risk you could get in a fatal accident.
If there was a re-fracture, Rodgers would go through the pain and hassle of another surgery, this time with a longer recovery. But he would certainly recover in 4-6 months and be essentially guaranteed to be ready for training camp, if not before. I have no doubt he would be able to play next season. In my 17 years in the NFL, I never heard of a clavicle fracture or re-fracture that ended a career.
The fact is, there is no way for Rodgers clavicle to be 100 percent healed eight weeks after surgery. Full healing won’t occur for at least six months.
If the question were simply what is best for his clavicle, he should not play football this year. Or next. Or ever.
If the question is whether it is safe enough to play now, then the answer will be found in the CT scan Rodgers reportedly had on Monday.
If he is at 80 percent healed with the additional strength provided by the two plates inserted during surgery, it is safe enough for him to return
Last edited by a moderator:
And with the Wentz injury the NFC feels more wide. Slim as the chances may be, the Pack held together without Rodgers and if they found themselves in the playoffs they'd be a threat, I guarantee no NFC team would like to see Rodgers coming into town during the playoffs.
So you are not talking about just a slim shot for the playoffs here, we are talking about a slim shot for the whole thing and slim or not you got to take that shot especially when it's the kind of injury that should the worst case scenario go down he'd have plenty of time to recover.
And as for Doc Chao, he's the reason I have Rodgers on a few teams. He's been spot on with this reporting from the get go, always saying chances were strong that Rodgers could return week 15 if he wanted to. Now even if he's active the rust and matchups are a factor. Will be a heck of a tough decision I'll have in a lot of leagues on if I'd use Rodgers or not this week or next if he returns and for fantasy purposes might just end up being long suffering Jordy owners who see the most benefit.
Also keep in mind if the Packers go 3-0 they could also beat the Panthers into the Playoffs.
If the Panthers go 1-2 and the Packers go 3-0 then the Pack would get the tiebreaker vs them due to the head to head win.
Week 17 is Panthers at Falcons. Whoever loses that game would likely get beat out vs the Packers if GB goes 3-0.
The odds are actually really good for the Packers to make it if they win their last 3 games.
If the Panthers go 1-2 and the Packers go 3-0 then the Pack would get the tiebreaker vs them due to the head to head win.
Week 17 is Panthers at Falcons. Whoever loses that game would likely get beat out vs the Packers if GB goes 3-0.
The odds are actually really good for the Packers to make it if they win their last 3 games.
UncleZen
Footballguy
Weebs210
Footballguy
UncleZen
Footballguy
cantstop1999
Footballguy
He’s an NFL starting QB , if healthy enough to play he’s going to play.
Weebs210
Footballguy
UncleZen
Footballguy
How many games did he play after breaking his collar bone for the 2nd time in 2015? That would be a token start in the final game of the 2016 season. Yes, I know it was his back that held him out of the 2016 season but my comment was tongue in cheek. Lighten up Francis!Weebs210 said:
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
This is probably true for just about any NFL team, and certainly true of the Packers. Having followed this management team since day 1, my opinion is that it is highly unlikely they will provide any information other than the absolute minimum required under their interpretation of league rules and only at the last moment it is required.
Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson feel no obligation whatsoever to inform the public of anything, at anytime regarding their team, and usually give the impression they have a strong sense of disdain, if not outright antagonism, toward anyone who seeks such information from them.
Weebs210
Footballguy
I mean you are just wrong behind the reason he retired. Nothing to lighten up about just setting the record straight.
Megatron Bombs
Footballguy
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
Interesting that this is coming from Rodgers, not the team. Wonder if there’s some tension there (team wants to hold him out, Rodgers wants to play-he’s forcing their hand?)
LOFL. So now you're right. Even though every thing you said was wrong. Nice way to twist it around.
sho nuff
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Please, tell us, what was right? Was it the fact that Green Bay won the two games that he said they had no chance of winning? Which was it?
Similar threads
