Does PUP stand for Physically Under Protection anymore in preseason games?

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I think teams are using the PUP tag more often than ever to just keep thier most important players off the field instead of risking injury during the mostly meaningless preseason games for the veterans that everyone knows are locks for the team.

Is it more for an actual injury anymore or really for protection to avoid a potential 'future' injury in the next preseason game or two.

Why not just say that the player is not injured but kept off of the field because of risk to injury,or is that not an acceptable excuse in the league?

I do not really understand why the PUP is tagged on a player that just about everyone knows can play as normal in a preseason game,every media source says Seymour and other stars on the team are fine but withheld because of risk of injury,why the PUP tag?.

 

[Remix 6]

Re: Does PUP stand for Physically Under Protection?

Physically Unable to Perform

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Re: Does PUP stand for Physically Under Protection?

Physically Unable to Perform

No kidding - The title was sarcastic a bit you might say,I'm not stupid

 

[letekro]

Thread of the year

 

[Pats726]

This thread is a winner...yippeee for football knowledge...LOL

 

[patsox23]

I'll bypass the sarcasm and answer what he actually meant - yes, teams do this a lot. I think the reason the NFL will never overtly acknowledge that is that it's already controversial for the owners to charge full-price for pre-season games (while paying the players "scale" and charging normal ticket rates).

 

[patchick]

OK everybody, I think we have a regional linguistic barrier here.

PATRIOTSFANINPA, I'm guessing you're from one of the pockets of the country where anymore means "nowadays." To us New Englanders, though, it only means "any longer." By that meaning, your thread title sounds pretty stupid, thus the scathing response.

 

[SoonerPatriot]

OK everybody, I think we have a regional linguistic barrier here.

PATRIOTSFANINPA, I'm guessing you're from one of the pockets of the country where anymore means "nowadays." To us New Englanders, though, it only means "any longer." By that meaning, your thread title sounds pretty stupid, thus the scathing response.

Nah, people 'round these parts' (as we say in the southwest) like to be scathing at every opportunity. It makes them feel better about themselves...or something.

 

[Pats726]

I do not really understand why the PUP is tagged on a player that just about everyone knows can play as normal in a preseason game,every media source says Seymour and other stars on the team are fine but withheld because of risk of injury,why the PUP tag?.

I guess "every media source" really doesn't count...does it??? It's all pretty dumb. OR did u just NOT know Seymour had offseason knee surgery?? It's the team and the physicians who are deciding about rehab and when they are ready..NOT the media sources or the fans...Geesh!!! That is what PUP is about. Seems like you have information or claim to about players being "ready" when they are OBVIOUSLY not.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

And here I thought it was up to the coaches whether to play players or not. I never realized that coaches put players on PUP to avoid the NFL making the coaches put them in the game.

 

[Pujo]

They wouldn't need PUP just to keep them out of games, they could just not play them. I think you're confusing cause and effect. Coaches generally want their players to practice, and they also have to balance it with letting players rest and heal. With veterans the balance might be a little bit more towards rest, but ideally you want both of those things. If coaches are keeping players out of practice, it's either because they're not medically cleared, or because they feel the player could use the rest more. If that's the case at the begining of training camp, why not put them on PUP and leave the window open to keeping them on PUP at the begining of the season, thus saving a roster spot? PUP players that don't come back by week 1 become the replacements-for-injuries-list. No NFL ticketing conspiracy, it's just another tool for roster management.

 

[PATRIOT64]

In response to the question in particular about Seymour, it has been noted around media sources that Seymour would be able to play if this were week 1 thus he would be off of PUP

 

[RayClay]

In response to the question in particular about Seymour, it has been noted around media sources that Seymour would be able to play if this were week 1 thus he would be off of PUP

Seymour played with 2-4 major injuries last year. why would you want him to play injured in exhibition games?

They don't count.