If an article gets a fact as easily verifiable as this one wrong - why should I believe anything else it has to say?
I was looking for references in posts to the stories whirling around a reference to Milloy and BB losing the team in 2003 after the first game. Or how about Mankins, who supposedly was furious at the team and back home during his contract negotiations out of disgust at progress, admitted he spent most of that time in MA with teammates.
To say that professional athletes treat the absence of Gronk like a playground team might treat a missing player is ridiculous. The only players crying, logically, would be Brady and the running backs, who look better when he is in the game. Everybody else, whose contract dollars often turn on reps and opportunities, would probably be happy, and not quick to protest when a player sits out. I throw the BS flag on any player statement claims, given the fact this is the NFL not some pickup game. Fans sitting there with the picture that the players sitting in the locker room are moaning "what are we gonna do without Gronk?" or "we can't win without Gronk?" probably need a reality check on the egos in the NFL.
And I agree with the rational posters that Gronk has not one but two doctors who can clear him. Neither has to my knowledge. Given the fact Gronk returned for minutes, not games, after last attempt, whether that was caused by a freak injury or a lousy team doctor, that last run is good cause to be extra cautious. The Pats are 4-1, not 1-4 when another loss may mean the end of playoff hopes. Any fan saying he needs to "man up" is just plain ridiculous, unless he or she is a professional athlete in any sport who played through a severe injury or soldier/sailor/airman who took heavy damage in combat and won a significant medal for the superhuman events that followed. The fact you once lost sensation in your fingers after typing on the keyboard for nine hours straight, yet fought through it for that last post, is not quite the same thing.
If the Pats were displeased with Gronk taking a roster spot and did not believe he would return, then he would be on IR. Plain and simple. The team is not being held ransom by Gronk, as it always has that option to put this issue to bed once and for all. This is not a contract holdout either. The media wants soundbites and drama. This story is typical of the two Milloy and Mankins examples above. I am simply not joining this media "Gronk watch," figure he is on the field when he is on the field, and hopes his return marks the end of his injury issues for the season.
