10 questionable for Mon night
 

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)


http://www.boston.com/sports/footbal.../reiss_pieces/

Faulk is probable as is, of course, Brady.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

means less than nothing. We're healthy and ready to go. Maybe Yates, Washington and Mike Wright don't play. Otherwise, we're fine.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

Still rather have them not listed.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

I'm amazed that anyone who considers themselves a Patriots fan is ever putting any weight into the injury reports.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

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.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

I'm a pessimist. While they don't mean a lot it's not like he's making them up. Relax.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

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.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

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.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

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.

Re: 10 questionable for Mon night
 

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..