ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
OLB Rosevelt Colvin (ankle)
CB Randall Gay (thigh)
RB Laurence Maroney (groin)
G Stephen Neal (shoulder)
WR Donte' Stallworth (knee)
WR Kelley Washington (hamstring)
NT Vince Wilfork (shoulder)
S Eugene Wilson (ankle)
DE Mike Wright (knee)
G Billy Yates (shoulder)
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
I'm amazed that anyone who considers themselves a Patriots fan is ever putting any weight into the injury reports.
I'll tell you why it worries me. At one point when people were complaining that Belichick manipulates the injury reports, someone tallied a year of reports and determined that those he listed as questionable didn't play 50% of the time.
More than half the players on the list are regular contributors.
OTOH, the Bengals don't have Rudy, so I'm not sure it matters.
I'll tell you why it worries me. At one point when people were complaining that Belichick manipulates the injury reports, someone tallied a year of reports and determined that those he listed as questionable didn't play 50% of the time.
More than half the players on the list are regular contributors.
OTOH, the Bengals don't have Rudy, so I'm not sure it matters.
Mmm ... yes, I take your point. But it's at least arguable that there has been an important change.
Recently, it's been pointed out that to list a player as probable means that it is "virtually certain" that he will play. (The increasingly asinine Florio asserted that, if a player who was listed as probable did not play, the club would be in violation of league rules. But that seems so stupid that not even the NFL would try to enforce it. Nevertheless, the idea that the probability is over 75% seems to have taken hold.)
So, if that's the case, what is BB to do if he has a player who is likely to play but not "virtually certain" (and if he's not reluctant to make the league look ridiculous)? Edit Oops! Noticed that Brady is listed as probable so scrap claim that he is not on the list. But still, I think that we can say that, at this stage, he is "virtually certain".
If you need encouragement, that's something to hang on to.
__________________
My prized possessions: Our family pictures; my dad and me getting doused by Bruschi in Super Bowl XXXIX [Shalize Manza Young Up Close with ... Bill Belichick]
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
They say what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Well, Pats fans should be invincible by now. [Fitzy, 16 November 2009]
Mmm ... yes, I take your point. But it's at least arguable that there has been an important change.
Recently, it's been pointed out that to list a player as probable means that it is "virtually certain" that he will play. (The increasingly asinine Florio asserted that, if a player who was listed as probable did not play, the club would be in violation of league rules. But that seems so stupid that not even the NFL would try to enforce it. Nevertheless, the idea that the probability is over 75% seems to have taken hold.)
So, if that's the case, what is BB to do if he has a player who is likely to play but not "virtually certain" (and if he's not reluctant to make the league look ridiculous)? Edit Oops! Noticed that Brady is listed as probable so scrap claim that he is not on the list. But still, I think that we can say that, at this stage, he is "virtually certain".
If you need encouragement, that's something to hang on to.
Right, not thinking about Brady. Thinking about Colvin, Maroney, Wilfork, Wilson. Also not worried so much about this game, but the trend. Worried is probably too strong a word. Virtually certain that I'm not worried. Unless you find that questionable.
Right, not thinking about Brady. Thinking about Colvin, Maroney, Wilfork, Wilson. Also not worried so much about this game, but the trend. Worried is probably too strong a word. Virtually certain that I'm not worried. Unless you find that questionable.
Yes, Wilfork would be huge. I mean, he is huge -- huge if he's there and huge if he's not. Losing the others would be pretty bad too.
__________________
My prized possessions: Our family pictures; my dad and me getting doused by Bruschi in Super Bowl XXXIX [Shalize Manza Young Up Close with ... Bill Belichick]
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
They say what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Well, Pats fans should be invincible by now. [Fitzy, 16 November 2009]
Not worried...concerned more in the Yates/Neal situation..both out might be a problem for a backup...4th interior lineman..meaning they might have to move Kzczur inside.. Wilfork is a concern as there is a big falloff to a backup...Colvin?? Wilson? Maroney? I think they'll play..
10 questionable for Mon night
Linear Mode
