Falcons C Alex Mack dealing with sprained ankle

[BelichickFan]

That injury looked pretty bad, took him a while to get off the field. He came back on the next drive but maybe it just got worse down the stretch. He will play but probably won`t be able to move or wrestle around like he used to.

Gronk returned to the Baltimore game in 2011 after he had that bad sprain that screwed his Super Bowl two weeks later.

 

[The Brandon Five]

He has a high ankle sprain. He'll play, but he won't be anywhere near 100%. He was limited in a walk through yesterday. This will cause them to regularly double team Branch which should open up opportunities for the rest of the Pats front.

Especially because RG is already a liability.

 

[Kontradiction]

Especially because RG is already a liability.

Yep. And, given the fact that they are not playing a mobile quarterback, I'd expect to see a lot of A and B gap blitzes with a heavy amount of pre-snap disguise.

 

[letekro]

The leg. Sweep it.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Gronk returned to the Baltimore game in 2011 after he had that bad sprain that screwed his Super Bowl two weeks later.

1st I'm hearing of this.

I have never heard that returning to the game made it worse.

 

[Hop Hop Schaefer City]

1st I'm hearing of this.

I have never heard that returning to the game made it worse.

I think he is saying that even though he was able to return to the game, it still screwed him up in the Super Bowl.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Mack will play and he'll play like his ankle is not bothering him one bit.
I've heard that Atl's medical staff can do amazing stuff in this area :

 

[BelichickFan]

I think he is saying that even though he was able to return to the game, it still screwed him up in the Super Bowl.

Right, I never said that returning to the game made it worse. I said that after going to the locker room he returned to the game (maybe not full time but he was in for some snaps). My point being that Gronk had an ankle sprain that screwed his SB two weeks later but returned to the game in which he sprained it. So Mack's return to his game doesn't mean that he won't be hindered by it in the SB.

 

[ViperGTS]

He has a high ankle sprain. He'll play, but he won't be anywhere near 100%. He was limited in a walk through yesterday. This will cause them to regularly double team Branch which should open up opportunities for the rest of the Pats front.

I've never heard of high ankle listed as a fibula though. Wonder if it's more of a small fracture. Either way, this is major news. He's the glue to that line. Honestly. Without him, a lot more falls on Ryan and that's not good.

 

[skinnydog]

Well expect the Pats to test Mack early in the game to see how his ankle is holding up. I'd keep an eye on how the Pats line up over Mack on the first couple of plays.

 

[Mack Herron]

Hightower and Bennett also hampered by injury, and likely several more (Mitchell, Amendola, Slater). Not sure why this is any different.

 

[Nikolai]

Hightower and Bennett also hampered by injury, and likely several more (Mitchell, Amendola, Slater). Not sure why this is any different.

OL injuries can hurt even a good offense, much like it did for us last year.

I think it's being a tad overblown, but it's not a non-story either.

 

[BelichickFan]

Hightower and Bennett also hampered by injury, and likely several more (Mitchell, Amendola, Slater). Not sure why this is any different.

Those guys have been playing multiple games with those injuries. The level of play we've seen from the Patriots includes these injuries. There was nothing new in the AFCCG. The Mack injury is new, that injury didn't exist entering the NFCCG.

 

[Brit patriot]

This looks potentially huge. I understand that no-one is really 100% at this time, and that DH and MB aren't near 100%. However, the centre is huge, especially in this team where Ryan isn't a Wilson type mover. You can factor in some of our injuries, and we have done. The Falcons will look to play Mack 100% of the time, and he is vital every single play. The fact he isn't right will only mean bad things for the O, especially considering it is their strong suit.

 

[1960Pats]

I stopped caring about other team's injuries a long time ago. I still care about the players, no matter what team they're on. Maybe it started when we lost Brady in 2008 or during the 2001 playoffs when Pitt tried to take him out in the AFCC. It could even go as far back as the 70's and Stingley.

I did feel sympathy for Derek Carr this year though, especially considering the point in the season and the game when he was lost, but it was the Raiders, so tough sh!t. I care but I don't.

For the Pats I like the BB approach of not acting like injuries matter at all. That seems to work best. They've had some teams with plenty of injuries that still made it deep into the playoffs. One of them, 2003, ended up winning it all.

 

[Danger Zone]

This is one of the reasons I was never that good at poker.

I over think things.

I'm pick up a tell, but what does it mean? He's bluffing and worried I'm going to call or he's got a good hand but is nervous I have something better or that I might fold and he can't milk me along?

Maybe I'm too used to Belichick, but why would any coach admit he's worried about Mack's injury? Whats to be gained from that?

Say he's fine, but the Patriots spend too much time and resources going at a point of their strength.

Glad I'm not the one having to make these decisions. I'm guessing Belichick probably simplifies the board and gameplans for a healthy Mack and if he's not, then bonus.

 

[luuked]

This is one of the reasons I was never that good at poker.

I over think things.

I'm pick up a tell, but what does it mean? He's bluffing and worried I'm going to call or he's got a good hand but is nervous I have something better or that I might fold and he can't milk me along?

Maybe I'm too used to Belichick, but why would any coach admit he's worried about Mack's injury? Whats to be gained from that?

Say he's fine, but the Patriots spend too much time and resources going at a point of their strength.

Glad I'm not the one having to make these decisions. I'm sure Belichick probably simplifies the board and gameplans for a healthy Mack and if he's not, then bonus.

Fortunately in this situation the coaching staff can just test Mack's ability on a series and see if there is anything they can exploit in his movement. Your poker situation is a bit more risky..

 

[1960Pats]

This is one of the reasons I was never that good at poker.

I over think things.

I'm pick up a tell, but what does it mean? He's bluffing and worried I'm going to call or he's got a good hand but is nervous I have something better or that I might fold and he can't milk me along?

Maybe I'm too used to Belichick, but why would any coach admit he's worried about Mack's injury? Whats to be gained from that?

Say he's fine, but the Patriots spend too much time and resources going at a point of their strength.

Glad I'm not the one having to make these decisions. I'm guessing Belichick probably simplifies the board and gameplans for a healthy Mack and if he's not, then bonus.

The difference between you and I and Daniel Negreanu: He has instincts and we have instinks.

There's definitely too much Mack talk. It could be fake news or it could be too serious to keep away from the mediots.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Apparently alex mack is doing ok. Coaches not concerned anymore.

Falcons coaches positive about Alex Mack playing in Super Bowl

 

[FourierSeries]

Apparently alex mack is doing ok. Coaches not concerned anymore.

Falcons coaches positive about Alex Mack playing in Super Bowl

Sounds like some damage control after Quinn stupidly said he was very concerned about Mack to the media yesterday.

Or maybe he's trying to play games. That can't be though, because @DaveEG told us Quinn doesn't do that since he has too much integrity.