Adam Schefter: Not realistic for Gronk to be ready week 1

[jmt57]

I had to laugh at how all Adam Schefter does is essentially say what everybody has been saying all along - that Gronk is probably not going to play week one at Buffalo - and the world wide leader goes in to full hype mode, with a bright red "Breaking News" on the crawl on the bottom of the television screen. That of course is followed by all of the other Bristol 'Insiders' re-wording the same, with slight variations, on how 'sources' have told them that Gronk will not be available to play week one.

After that predictably ever other sports media outlet and writer feels compelled to re-report the same news because even though there is absolutely no new information, they will appear to have totally dropped the ball if they don't publish something on their website or blog, or say something about it on their show.


The bottom line is that Schefter gave us absolutely no new information; this was just a contrived news story. For most the expectation right along has been late September. The only news will be the upcoming decision on whether or not to place him on PUP at the start of the season.

 

[Ivan]

If Gronk is going to be completely ready for week 3 then they should not place him on PUP. They can spare a roster spot for a couple of weeks.

 

[jmt57]

Some more on espn's non-news:

Source: Gronkowski 'right on schedule', could be ready by Week 3 | Karen Guregian, Boston Herald

You may be seeing Rob Gronkowski sooner, rather than later. How about Week 3 against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers?

According to a source, Gronk is doing very well in his rehabilitation from back and forearm surgeries performed in May and June. He's "right on schedule" for a mid-September return. In fact, he's healed and advanced to the point where he would be close to playing Week 1 in Buffalo, the source said.

However, the more realistic time frame for him to be ready and in "football shape" would be shortly after, right around Game 3 against Tampa Bay assuming there are no setbacks. Now, if that's the case, it would seem unlikely the Pats would keep the tight end on the physically unable to perform list, which is currently where he resides. Having him stay on PUP would guarantee he misses the first six games. Given the timetable laid out, unless the Pats go the overly-cautious route, it would appear they'd take him off the PUP list, with thoughts of having him as early as Game 3, or perhaps Game 4 in Atlanta.

As it is, the Pats have been doing their best to hold him back, according to the source.

Gronkowski's name came up today with an ESPN report saying it was "not realistic" to expect the Pro Bowl tight end to play the first week against the Bills. That was never really in the forecast, but the news is very encouraging. Gronk is closing in on a return. The mid-to-late September projections we had initially are on target. The PUP decision appears much clearer. Barring a setback once he gets back on the playing field in earnest, Week 3 looks about right.

​

 

[YearbookCurfew]

I want him back when he's 100% healthy. If that means weeks 12+, I am fine with that.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I want him back when he's 100% healthy. If that means weeks 12+, I am fine with that.

I really don't get where people are randomly getting these timelines from.

"Personally, I'd prefer that they hold him out until week 26, when we know he'll be 100% healthy."

 

[Kontradiction]

I really don't get where people are randomly getting these timelines from.

"Personally, I'd prefer that they hold him out until week 26, when we know he'll be 100% healthy."

Save Gronk for the stretch run in the 2067 season, IMO.

 

[RIpats88]

I dont get this concept that you can just have Gronkowski sit around for 6 weeks and not practice and then expect him to come out and be ready to go...he needs to practice, get in football shape and get game reps.

If he's close to 100%, let him start practicing week 1, 2 and bring him back week 3/4 and work him up to his regular game reps...theres some tough games coming up around that time where they are going to need his physical presence

 

[ausbacker]

Gronk will be ready by week 3. Normal service will resume and Gronk will catch multiple Touchdown scores, grab many receptions and it'll be as if he never left.

 

[Salva135]

If Gronk is medically cleared by the team to play and the team feels he's ready to play, then he should play, simple as that. I don't get the logic that holding him out longer than is necessary will improve the chances of him being fully healthy come playoff time. Once he hits the threshold for 100% football health, that's it. The logic only follows insofar as the fewer games Gronk plays in, the fewer games in which he could get injured... in which case, you might as well just hold him out until the playoffs start, right?

People are being too presumptuous about our playoff chances with Gronk missing a significant amount of the season. He could literally be the difference between a first-round bye and playing on the road wild card weekend. You don't just "save" one of your best players for a playoff run later on down the road in the NFL, it will inevitably bite you in the ass.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Gronk feel Good!
Gronk want play!
Gronk not want PUP.
Gronk Eat puppies!
Gronk gon practice this month!

 

[SB39]

I actually consider it a good sign that there is actually a discussion about whether or not Gronk will be on the PUP list or not. I thought it would be a no-brainer that he would miss 6 weeks at least so the fact that it is plausible he comes back before then is good news.

Having said that, I still believe he will be on the PUP list, but Coach Bill knows best.

 

[captain stone]

I dont get this concept that you can just have Gronkowski sit around for 6 weeks and not practice and then expect him to come out and be ready to go...he needs to practice, get in football shape and get game reps...

Tedy Bruschi was placed on Reserve PUP, was activated the moment he was eligible,
and played the very next game. Just sayin'.

 

[patsfan-1982]

Gronk feel Good!
Gronk want play!
Gronk not want PUP.
Gronk Eat puppies!
Gronk gon practice this month!

LMAO. Gronk Eat puppies that's funny

 

[shmessy]

Gronk will be ready by week 3. Normal service will resume and Gronk will catch multiple Touchdown scores, grab many receptions and it'll be as if he never left.

Repeating the same thing "as if he never left" means ......'and then break down in the playoffs'. Sorry, but this is not the goal.

Tired of the same movie.

This time, the man had 5 operations in the off season - - one a REPEAT one on his back.

The past two seasons, Home Field Advantage in the playoffs meant ZILCH.

There is no other team in the AFC East who is going to win more than 8 games. It's time to sweat the IMPORTANT things in the long season. Let the Pats cruise to a 10 win season while developing more depth. Bring Gronk back at full strength late in the season. Going into debt early on to win all the September-October games has not been a winning hand for this guy's body the past two years running.

Had he full health at the start of TC and had no operations in the offseason, I wouldn't be saying this.

 

[shmessy]

People are being too presumptuous about our playoff chances with Gronk missing a significant amount of the season. He could literally be the difference between a first-round bye and playing on the road wild card weekend. You don't just "save" one of your best players for a playoff run later on down the road in the NFL, it will inevitably bite you in the ass.

The last two SB Champs played on Wild Card Weekend.

In the last 3 seasons (all with Gronkowski) the Patriots have played playoff games only at home = 0 championships.

Health > Home

 

[Rob0729]

The last two SB Champs played on Wild Card Weekend.

In the last 3 seasons (all with Gronkowski) the Patriots have played playoff games only at home = 0 championships.

Health > Home

But putting Gronk on the PUP doesn't guarantee Gronk will be any healthier than if he plays week one if he is ready. The past two seasons, Gronk's injuries could have happened at any time and had nothing to do with wear and tear of a season. In AFCCG vs. Baltimore, Gronk's ankle buckled. Last year, he broke his arm on a freaking PAT attempt and broke it again landing wrong partly caused by the rod in his arm (he has a longer rod now that goes the length of his forearm.

I just don't get the logic of putting Gronk on the PUP to keep him healthy for the playoffs. In fact, I don't get that logic for any elite player. Most injuries in football are single incident injuries where a player hurts it on a single play which can happen on the first play of the season or the last. I am not worried about Gronk being worn down over the course of a season. That would be the only reason to sit him.

If Gronk is medically cleared and in football shape. You play him.

 

[shmessy]

But putting Gronk on the PUP doesn't guarantee Gronk will be any healthier than if he plays week one if he is ready. The past two seasons, Gronk's injuries could have happened at any time and had nothing to do with wear and tear of a season. In AFCCG vs. Baltimore, Gronk's ankle buckled. Last year, he broke his arm on a freaking PAT attempt and broke it again landing wrong partly caused by the rod in his arm (he has a longer rod now that goes the length of his forearm.

I just don't get the logic of putting Gronk on the PUP to keep him healthy for the playoffs. In fact, I don't get that logic for any elite player. Most injuries in football are single incident injuries where a player hurts it on a single play which can happen on the first play of the season or the last. I am not worried about Gronk being worn down over the course of a season. That would be the only reason to sit him.

If Gronk is medically cleared and in football shape. You play him.

5 operations in this offseason.

One a REPEAT operation on his back (disc).

 

[Kontradiction]

5 operations in this offseason.

One a REPEAT operation on his back (disc).

Didn't Rosenhaus describe that as mere maintainance, or was I drunk?

 

[supafly]

Didn't Rosenhaus describe that as mere maintainance, or was I drunk?

This specific back procedure is NOT a "repeat" procedure on his back. In other words, it had nothing to do with his old back issue:

"While several reports indicate this most recent back surgery is not connected to the back problem he had as a collegian — one that forced him to sit out a season while at Arizona — Tuesday’s surgery is the sixth one for the tight end in the last 17 months.

Gronkowski’s agent Drew Rosenhaus described the latest procedure as simply “preventative maintenance.”

“In Rob’s case, it’s not a serious back surgery, it’s unrelated to the original surgery that he had as a junior in college,” said Rosenahus. “That’s totally [fine] and recovered perfectly. This is a new injury and it’s minor. It’s not as significant."

(per WEEI)

It Is What It Is » Rob Gronkowski undergoes back surgery in Los Angeles

 

[supafly]

One a REPEAT operation on his back (disc).

I don't believe that is the case, Shmessy. All reports state that it's an entirely different issue w/ the back, and much more minor.

Also the phrasing of "5 offseason surgeries" is probably not entirely true either. His initial surgeries went back to last calendar year/last 2012 season.

The last arm surgery took place prior to the summer or pre-Memorial day, so that shouldn't be an issue any longer. I think the problem prior to that was that he had an unlucky break (or an argument of being brought back too soon for the playoffs, which I don't agree with) near the same spot, which then was followed with infection in the area.

That probably isn't much of a concern at this point since it's been quite some time for both the infection and the bone to have healed. Just my opinion of course.