Aaron Rodgers update

[rodell330]

When was the last time the Packers gave an injury timetable where the player actually made it back as projected? Whenever I hear a timetable from McCarthy now, I automatically add 3-4 weeks.

Learned this a few years ago.

Exactly..Woodson missed like ten games last yr with his collar bone. I don't expect this one to be any different. I'm starting to think he's out for Chicago to. Word to the wise..try to avoid breaking your collar bone if you are a GB Packer.

 

[Royal Pain]

I've always felt the Packers erred on the conservative side with respect to clearing a player returning from injury. In one of their typical "stir the pot" posts, profootballtalk.com suggested the Packers are slow to clear Rodgers because they don't have a billionaire owner pressuring the medical staff to bring him back early. As an owner with no clout, but with a vested emotional interest, I trust the medical staff's judgement and will throw my support behind Matt Flynn for another week.

 

[adambr2]

I trust the medical staff, it's just getting to be quite frustrating when it sounds like Aaron is pretty much completely ready to go and feeling no ill effects. I wish we knew more medically on the determining factors for this decision.

We've got 2 games left to go in the season and we need to win both of 'em to take the division. The best QB in football is ready and able to physically play for us and we're not playing him. It's hard not to be frustrated with that situation.
Especially when, really, is anyone on the team really 100% at this point in the season?

 

[Packers_16-0]

If we win this week I really do think Aaron Rodgers will play next week.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I for one would not want to be in Mike's shoes. Say we lose Sunday. The fallout will be earth shattering in Packer land.

 

[Darth Garfunkel]

I've always felt the Packers erred on the conservative side with respect to clearing a player returning from injury. In one of their typical "stir the pot" posts, profootballtalk.com suggested the Packers are slow to clear Rodgers because they don't have a billionaire owner pressuring the medical staff to bring him back early. As an owner with no clout, but with a vested emotional interest, I trust the medical staff's judgement and will throw my support behind Matt Flynn for another week.

If Rodgers played for Snyder and Shanahanananan he'd have been out there with a bone sticking out of his shoulder and have his 2014 season ruined before this season was over.

 

[98Redbird]

Exactly..Woodson missed like ten games last yr with his collar bone. I don't expect this one to be any different. I'm starting to think he's out for Chicago to. Word to the wise..try to avoid breaking your collar bone if you are a GB Packer.

Try avoid stubbing your effing toe in the middle of the night if you're a GB Packer...

 

[98Redbird]

I for one would not want to be in Mike's shoes. Say we lose Sunday. The fallout will be earth shattering in Packer land.

Dude.. This is NOT on MM. Mike WANTS Aaron to play. He gave him about as strongly a ringing endorsement as I've seen in a long time that he thought he was ready to start Sunday.

This is a TT and Pat McKenzie decision, period.

Granted, TT and PM are big vaginas and will not face the media for what is their decision and theirs alone.... so I see your point, MM will catch all the backlash for something that wasn't his fault to begin with.

 

[Carl]

I for one would not want to be in Mike's shoes. Say we lose Sunday. The fallout will be earth shattering in Packer land.

One season not in the playoffs after years of contending is only a big deal to all the crazy fans who overreact.

 

[Dan115]

LOL Yes big deal each and every year.

 

[JacobInFlorida]

One season not in the playoffs after years of contending is only a big deal to all the crazy fans who overreact.

The only problem I have is I feel like we have a chance to do something in the playoffs. I hate to throw that away over being conservative. The risk of breaking the collarbone again and having to rehab in the offseason is worth it to me. Rodgers is a veteran. It's not as if he needs all the snaps in OTA's and minicamps anyway.

What happens if Rodgers gets held out ultra conservatively this year, we lose Sunday to the Steelers and lose out on the playoffs? THEN week 1 or 2 next year he takes a hit like Brady did and tears an ACL. That's two years of an elite QB down the drain.

Ultimately, I believe the risk is worth the possible reward. Just me though and I know we don't have all the info on Rodgers situation but it certainly appears to be a conservative move rather than a just not ready to go move.

 

[Bus Cook]

One season not in the playoffs after years of contending is only a big deal to all the crazy fans who overreact.

Yes, that would be the only issue. It wouldn't have anything to do with injury preparation, our defense, the backup QB fiasco, our continuing Oline issues, special team or safety.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Dude.. This is NOT on MM. Mike WANTS Aaron to play. He gave him about as strongly a ringing endorsement as I've seen in a long time that he thought he was ready to start Sunday.

This is a TT and Pat McKenzie decision, period.

Granted, TT and PM are big vaginas and will not face the media for what is their decision and theirs alone.... so I see your point, MM will catch all the backlash for something that wasn't his fault to begin with.

I heard on NFL Network it was an organizational decision. So sounds like McKenzie, TT, and Mike. They also said the Packers are the most conservative team in the league dealing with injuries.

 

[Bignutz]

What worries me is Aaron is going to be rusty when he does come back, *** long will it take him to shake the rust off?

 

[GoPGo]

I for one would not want to be in Mike's shoes. Say we lose Sunday. The fallout will be earth shattering in Packer land.

We're only eliminated if we lose AND Chicago wins. If that's the case, it's over. If Chicago also loses, then we would need to win next week and the Lions would have to lose one of their last two.

 

[GoPGo]

What worries me is Aaron is going to be rusty when he does come back, *** long will it take him to shake the rust off?

No worries. Aaron isn't an iron man. He's stainless steel, so we're good.

 

[FrankRizzo]

What worries me is Aaron is going to be rusty when he does come back, *** long will it take him to shake the rust off?

That's true Bigballz.

Even missing just one game, and then the bye (=2 weeks time), he WAS rusty in 2011 when he came out and we lost to the Giants, on a 15-1 season. He had some rust. Enough, as just a little, makes a difference.

I think Matt Flynn, unless HE too gets hurt, IS OUR QB for the remainder of the season.
In Flynn we Trust.

 

[Ogsponge]

I heard on NFL Network it was an organizational decision. So sounds like McKenzie, TT, and Mike. They also said the Packers are the most conservative team in the league dealing with injuries.

I agree except I don't think MM has anything to do with it being an "organizational" decision which is exactly why both he and Rodgers are throwing out the "organization" word left and right. They can't say what they really want to say which is that both of them feel like he should be playing. No, this "organization" decision is coming directly from the Doc and/or TT at this point and that is it. All you have to do is watch the press conferences and see the frustration of both A-Rod and MM when speaking about this.


I mean have you not noticed that the only people in the "organization" who are available to comment on this are A-Rod and MM and they both toe the company line by using this BS "organization" phrase that neither one of them really wants to use? This kind of talk is management 101, when your boss tells you to do something you do not agree with, you have to put on a fake smile and do what the boss tells you to do in order to keep the entire "organization" in line. That is EXACTLY what is happening here.


Also, maybe the freaking Packers need to stop being so flocking conservative with injuries since they are also one the most injured teams in the league over the last few years. Coincidence? I think not.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I agree except I don't think MM has anything to do with it being an "organizational" decision which is exactly why both he and Rodgers are throwing out the "organization" word left and right. They can't say what they really want to say which is that both of them feel like he should be playing. No, this "organization" decision is coming directly from the Doc and/or TT at this point and that is it. All you have to do is watch the press conferences and see the frustration of both A-Rod and MM when speaking about this.


I mean have you not noticed that the only people in the "organization" who are available to comment on this are A-Rod and MM and they both toe the company line by using this BS "organization" phrase that neither one of them really wants to use? This kind of talk is management 101, when your boss tells you to do something you do not agree with, you have to put on a fake smile and do what the boss tells you to do in order to keep the entire "organization" in line. That is EXACTLY what is happening here.


Also, maybe the freaking Packers need to stop being so flocking conservative with injuries since they are also one the most injured teams in the league over the last few years. Coincidence? I think not.

When I look at the Packer web site I see coaches, doctors, scouting department, front office, etc. under organization. I don't know whether Mike has bought into the decision or not. Yes there's frustration showing with him but the source of it could that Rodgers just isn't playing. I can't tell. As far as Mike being the spokesman, Thompson hardly ever speaks. And I wouldn't expect either Thompson or the doctor to say anything.

 

[Ogsponge]

When I look at the Packer web site I see coaches, doctors, scouting department, front office, etc. under organization. I don't know whether Mike has bought into the decision or not. Yes there's frustration showing with him but the source of it could that Rodgers just isn't playing. I can't tell. As far as Mike being the spokesman, Thompson hardly ever speaks. And I wouldn't expect either Thompson or the doctor to say anything.

I would not expect them to talk either, all I am saying that this is 100% about the doc and TT making this call at this point which is why we are seeing the language we are seeing. Also, I am not even suggesting there is anything wrong with the decision. Players and coaches are about winning now, right now and right now only. The doc is concerned with the player's health and TT has to be concerned about not only winning now, but next year, the year after that, and so on.

All I was getting at is that I have been in management long enough to easily see and know when someone is saying things that they do not agree with or believe in because the directive is coming from higher up. I myself have to do it at least once a month when discussing policies with the owner of the business and put them into effect.

 

[Shawnsta3]

It's no coincidence how the Packers and Redskins have dealt with their respective quarterbacks injuries in the past year, and how the teams have had success under their current management.

If the bone hasn't fully healed and we send him back out there against the Steelers and he gets sacked on that same shoulder by Lawrence Timmons there's a heightened risk he re-injures that collar bone and we go from him being nearly back to throwing all off-season preparation out the window for the upcoming season and hope he can rehab and come back week one.

I'll bring it back to the Redskins, look how Robert Griffin looked when he was put under that same scenario. He still looked injured, and he didn't get any better in the off-season. Talk about disaster scenario.

I want Rodgers back as much as the next guy, but it's about risk management.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I would not expect them to talk either, all I am saying that this is 100% about the doc and TT making this call at this point which is why we are seeing the language we are seeing. Also, I am not even suggesting there is anything wrong with the decision. Players and coaches are about winning now, right now and right now only. The doc is concerned with the player's health and TT has to be concerned about not only winning now, but next year, the year after that, and so on.

All I was getting at is that I have been in management long enough to easily see and know when someone is saying things that they do not agree with or believe in because the directive is coming from higher up. I myself have to do it at least once a month when discussing policies with the owner of the business and put them into effect.

Well we will just have to disagree on whether Mike is a part of the decision or not. If he was trying to exclude himself from the decision I don't see how it works in his favor. I was also a manager for many years.

 

[JacobInFlorida]

It's no coincidence how the Packers and Redskins have dealt with their respective quarterbacks injuries in the past year, and how the teams have had success under their current management.

If the bone hasn't fully healed and we send him back out there against the Steelers and he gets sacked on that same shoulder by Lawrence Timmons there's a heightened risk he re-injures that collar bone and we go from him being nearly back to throwing all off-season preparation out the window for the upcoming season and hope he can rehab and come back week one.

I'll bring it back to the Redskins, look how Robert Griffin looked when he was put under that same scenario. He still looked injured, and he didn't get any better in the off-season. Talk about disaster scenario.

I want Rodgers back as much as the next guy, but it's about risk management.

You're comparing a torn ACL to a collarbone? To me it was never realistic for RG3 to come back in less than a year and be the same. Even a clean break of the collarbone would be an issue but not something that we'd have to worry about him being back for training camp or week 1. Not only that, but Rodgers doesn't need as much prep in the offseason. He's a veteran and knows the system backwards and forwards.

Also, there's absolutely no reason to think that we'll be past the issue just because Rodgers sits out the rest of the season to "manage the risk". Charles Woodson broke his collarbone in the Superbowl Feb of 2011 and then broke it again in Oct of 2012. Once you break em, they're just not the same.

I just don't feel like the positive of keeping him out outweighs the risk of letting him play. Just my .02 though.

 

[TJV]

IMO it's as easy as this: As soon as Dr. McKenzie clears him to play, he plays. I don't see Thompson overruling the doc and sitting him.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Yep, the organization just might be McKenzie right now. None of us know what the decision process was.