New Reports that Gronk will be ready for Season Opener!!!

[Rob0729]

Gronk starts season = Gronk is worn down by game 10 = Gronk is out injured, season over by game 15 = another postseason of missed opportunity with no Gronk.

And we will have deja vu all over again, no Gronk when we really need him. It would be idiotic not to err on the side of caution here and take time getting him back onto the field.

If they have learnt anything from the last two postseasons, surely it has got to be that we need a fit Gronk during the postseason. Let him miss the first 6 games, we don't need him then. But we do need him fit and healthy for the business end of the season.

Huh?!? Gronk didn't miss a game in his first three years. None of his injuries over the last two years were because he was worn down from a long time of wear and tear over a seasonand could have happened as easily in week one as week 17.

• In 2011 (actually 2012 since it was the playoffs), he sprained his ankle because when he was hit by Pollard which caused his ankle to buckle. Hernandez had a similar injury last year in week 2.
• In 2012, Gronk broke his arm twice. I have never heard of bones breaking because a player is worn down by the end of the season.

Gronk is one of the best conditioned athlete in the league and one of the toughest. I am not worried about him getting worn down. He plays reckless at times, but the only way to prevent injuries that way is to either change the way he plays or sit him until the playoffs. And you don't shelf your best players just to keep them healthy for the playoffs. If Gronk is ready to play, you play him.

 

[Kontradiction]

Huh?!? Gronk didn't miss a game in his first three years. None of his injuries over the last two years were because he was "worn down" and could have happened as easily in week one as week 17.

• In 2011 (actually 2012 since it was the playoffs), he sprained his ankle because when he was hit by Pollard which caused his ankle to buckle. Hernandez had a similar injury last year in week 2.
• In 2012, Gronk broke his arm twice. I have never heard of bones breaking because a player is worn down by the end of the season.

Gronk is one of the best conditioned athlete in the league and one of the toughest. I am not worried about him getting worn down. He plays reckless at times, but the only way to prevent injuries that way is to either change the way he plays or sit him until the playoffs.

You sure about that?

 

[PatsFan37]

I wouldn't mind, though, if they take out the play where Gronk lands on his head in the end zone.

 

[Oswlek]

Agreed, although I wouldn't really compare bringing Gronk back too early at the end of last season to this. At that point, I think the goal was just to have Gronk on the field and producing in whatever capacity he could for the playoffs. If he re-broke the arm, then he'd have a whole offseason to heal, and I think the Pats took that gamble figuring that the chances of things going doing the way they did were pretty slim. Despite how it worked out, I understand why they did what they did.

At the beginning of the season, though, the whole equation changes. It's no longer about getting whatever you can out of the guy for the next month - it's about having a healthy player on the field for as much of the season as possible, and especially for the playoffs. Purely because of that, I can't see how the Pats would be as cavalier with Gronk's health now as they were at the end of last season.

Best Joke from "The Naked Gun" - YouTube

 

[Jackson 2]

I wouldn't mind, though, if they take out the play where Gronk lands on his head in the end zone.

The end zone likely wouldn't mind either. I'll bet it wasn't too pleasant for that piece of turf.

 

[Rob0729]

You sure about that?

Sorry, I meant first two years. My bad. But a more accurate way of saying it is his first 30 games (26 regular season games and 4 post season games).

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Gronk won't wear out. In particular, he'll have an alternate, say Fells or Studfield to take some reps and maybe block on PTAs to share some of the load, particularly with a big lead.

 

[VrabelJr]

Some of you sure have a seriously results oriented approach to injuries.

 

[PatsFan2]

I wouldn't rush Gronk back for games One and Two neither the Bills or Jets are real teams. Week 3 is when everything starts rolling.

 

[signbabybrady]

Very good news, but for people who have been playing close attention, it isn't nearly the shocker that the media will portray it to be. They took the worst-case scenario on Gronk's rehab schedule as reality from day one, which made them wrong from the outset. On top of that, they seem to be ignoring the fact that he's been ahead of schedule pretty much the whole way.

Not a shocker at all is right. People always took the worst case scenario he had his back surgery and June having waited for the infections to clear. The surgery was said to come with a 10 week rehab which I remember lining up with week two. And then for some reason everyone in the media decided if he wasnt going to be ready for week 1 that the Patriots would PUP him.

IMO set backs aside using that timeline there was no way they would start him on the PUP. Why would you give up 5 games with the players to save a roster spot for one game? Unless his rehab was going slowly or he had a set back there would be no reason to reserve PUP other than being a chicken little.

Problem was from a media prespective his not being ready for the start of camp was a story that they could beat to death. What will the Patriots do without their top 5 targets only makes sense when the #1 target is missing and if they admitted Gronk was likely not to be pupped then this easy sensational line couldnt be spewed.

 

[dales804]

Why are people trying to choose what game he comes back for? When he's 100%, he should play. Whether that's week 1, week 5 or week 10.

 

[TB12_laser designator]

Too many to quote here, so I will give a general elaboration on my initial post. There seems to be a bit of confusion with my use of the expression 'worn down'. It was not to be taken literally. What I meant was - one way or another and based on our last two seasons, Gronk will end up injured. I wasn’t talking about a chronic or ongoing issue with a quadriceps or hip abductor issue. But with all this talk of 'freak' injuries, whether they are freak or not is irrelevant. The fact is they happened and we lost him.

Are freak injuries somehow o.k.? Do they not matter? It doesn’t make it more acceptable to me that his injury was a freak occurrence or not. The ankle injury was a freak injury. The arm break was a freak injury, but they happened. And then he had the freakiest of all freak injuries, when he broke the arm again. Worryingly, all these freak injuries do raise a rather important question and that is. Is Gronk prone to 'freak' injuries? Because in the last two seasons, he has now suffered three freak injuries. Which is a very unusually high rate of attrition by any standard.

At the end of the day, the semantics and nature of an injury, whether it’s a fracture or soft tissue does not concern me. What concerns me is if Gronk starts week 1, then I will be filled with trepidation regarding his ability to make it to the postseason healthy. And I really admire anyone who has the confidence to think otherwise. Gronk broke his arm the second time because we have had an over reliance on Gronk. Yes it was the playoffs, but we didn’t need him out there against the Texans and it was a totally unnecessary risk imo. I can only hope the team learned an invaluable lesson from that episode.

The silver lining from all of this could be, if Sudfeld, Hooman, Fells, Dobson, Thompkins and Boyce can surpass our expectations and have good productive campaigns. Then it will reduce our reliance on Gronk and make him a luxury on the field, rather than a necessity. And that will hopefully make a very significant contribution towards keeping him healthy. Yes there are no gaurantees, but reducing his workload is a step in the right direction.

 

[fnordcircle]

Some of you sure have a seriously results oriented approach to injuries.

Unf, I can't like this post enough.

 

[everlong]

I just want him 100% healthy for the playoffs.

 

[Urgent]

Well, it says he could avoid the PUP list, but that doesn't mean he's ready for the season opener. It just means they project he'll be back early enough that wasting his first six weeks would be unnecessary.

Still, good news! I'd love to have him back for Tampa, mostly to knock off the game one rust before heading to Atlanta.

Exactly.
Someone is speculating that the "buzz" is that Gronk might not go on PUP, forcing him to miss a minimum of six games.

But I hope Schefter asks Belichick this question at the next press conference!
"Hey coach, will you detail Gronkowski's current health and rehab, and project whether he will start on opening day?"

 

[tombonneau]

LOL. "Buzz seems to be building."

How to Report News Without Actually Having Any News by Adam Schefter

 

[JMC00]

I think the thread title should be changed to


Gronk Could (if everything goes right) be ready for Season Opener

 

[patchick]

I think the thread title should be changed to


Gronk Could (if everything goes right) be ready for Season Opener

Yep, and even "ready" doesn't necessarily mean effective. But regardless, the sooner he's deemed healthy enough to practice, the better -- in every way.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

You don't win or lose division titles in September....if he ain't 100% of the dominating Gronk,you sit him.

Plain and simple.......

Even if the team goes as bad as 3-3 without him,the season has a long way to go

 

[GIF Man]

Report Says Rob Gronkowski's Back Rehab Has Positive Buzz » Ex-Pats