Sit Clay?

[GoPGo]

Looks like Clay has a minor groin injury but is expected to play on Sunday. Should he sit out against the Vikings to make sure it doesn't become a major groin injury? If I was coach, I would dress him but sit him and keep him available in case he was needed but I don't know if I'd start him. How would you handle it?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Looks like Clay has a minor groin injury but is expected to play on Sunday. Should he sit out against the Vikings to make sure it doesn't become a major groin injury? If I was coach, I would dress him but sit him and keep him available in case he was needed but I don't know if I'd start him. How would you handle it?

McCarthy has said repeatedly that he won't rest guys being able to play for later in the season so Matthews will start if the groin injury doesn't keep him out for Sunday.

 

[GoPGo]

McCarthy has said repeatedly that he won't rest guys being able to play for later in the season so Matthews will start if the groin injury doesn't keep him out for Sunday.

Yeah, I know what he says, but when a risk analysis is done, sometimes those things change under certain circumstances.

 

[Carl]

If he's healthy enough to play, let him play.

 

[ivo610]

I would sit him but dont have an issue with playing him. They know the medical report better than we do

 

[adambr2]

If he's healthy enough to play, let him play.

This. Never take an opponent for granted thinking you can win this one with backups. If he would play against Seattle, he plays against Minnesota.

Only exception would be the last game of the season if you had nothing to play for, then go ahead and let him rest it.

I'll leave the risk analysis to the medical professionals. I would trust that they wouldn't let Clay play if he were at significant risk of aggravating his injury. They were very cautious with Rodgers last year.

 

[Powarun]

This. Never take an opponent for granted thinking you can win this one with backups. If he would play against Seattle, he plays against Minnesota.

Only exception would be the last game of the season if you had nothing to play for, then go ahead and let him rest it.

I'll leave the risk analysis to the medical professionals. I would trust that they wouldn't let Clay play if he were at significant risk of aggravating his injury. They were very cautious with Rodgers last year.

Gotta agree with this. Never doubt a divisional opponent. They'll sneak up and would love to destroy any hopes to getting to the playoffs.

 

[longtimefan]

Matthews first injured his groin in the fourth quarter of the Week 4 game at the Detroit Lions and did not play late in the game. However, he played the next week against the Chicago Bears and did not appear to have any issues with it going forward.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/150480/clay-matthews-groin-injury-not-a-concern

 

[Forget Favre]

As a coach:
I would either play him for a few snaps but maybe not consecutively if that helps him heal.
Or else only put him in during crucial downs or if it's a close game.

As a trainer:
Pump him full of pain killers and get him out there!

As a lay person:
What do I really know?
I'll trust in the Packers staff to do what's best since they are the pros.

 

[searmh]

the playoffs are not locked up so we have to play our best players

 

[JBlood]

If I were the coach, I'd go with whatever the medical staff advised on a player's availability. And that would include games after clinching a playoff spot or home field, if that occurs. I suspect MM learned something from "resting" Rogers in the last game against Detroit in 2011. Aaron had an uncharacteristically poor outing against the Giants in the playoffs, having not played in 2 weeks. Maybe just happenstance, but I suspect MM won't do it again.

 

[Half Empty]

Which, of course, would be fine with the fan base unless AR gets hurt, in which case...

 

[Sunshinepacker]

This. Never take an opponent for granted thinking you can win this one with backups. If he would play against Seattle, he plays against Minnesota.

Only exception would be the last game of the season if you had nothing to play for, then go ahead and let him rest it.

I'll leave the risk analysis to the medical professionals. I would trust that they wouldn't let Clay play if he were at significant risk of aggravating his injury. They were very cautious with Rodgers last year.

You're not taking an opponent for granted, you're weighing if the increased chance of a loss is worse than potentially losing Matthews for multiple weeks. Personally, I'd rather have a healthy Matthews and be the six seed than be the two seed without Matthews.

 

[JBlood]

Which, of course, would be fine with the fan base unless AR gets hurt, in which case...

Yes, that's true; but if Rogers gets seriously hurt, the season is likely over in any scenario. I have no problem with him taking a seat during a laugh-er, like the last 2 games. But he needs to start every game, especially when he's on a roll. Same with every other starter that's cleared medically.

 

[Half Empty]

Understand. Just saying try to say it'd be impossible to explain that process if he's injured on the first play of his 'warm-up' game.

 

[adambr2]

You're not taking an opponent for granted, you're weighing if the increased chance of a loss is worse than potentially losing Matthews for multiple weeks. Personally, I'd rather have a healthy Matthews and be the six seed than be the two seed without Matthews.

And that's a decision that should be weighed by our medical professionals. And he shouldn't play regardless of opponent if that is the case.

This is an inherently dangerous sport where there is a risk of injury to any player on any week. None of us are qualified to determine the level of additional injury risk to Clay, if any, that he assumes by playing this weekend.

 

[El Guapo]

This kind of reminds me of last season when I started a thread about sitting Lacy to let his injuries heal for the playoffs. I was roundly ridiculed for that, but I don't mind it.

I'll buck the trend and say they should sit Matthews IF the medical staff thinks his groin isn't back to 100%. We are talking about our best defensive player who just sparked a major defensive turnaround, who has a history of lowever body injuries, specifically to his hamstring and now groin. He's also got a history of re-injuring himself (hamstring and thumb). If this injury has been nagging him since Week 3 and it's now worsened to the point where he is missing practice, it leads me to a prescription of rest.

Depending on what the medical staff says, my inclination as coach would be to dress him and use him only if needed for that defensive spark. There's no reason to believe that our defense can't shut down Minnesota even without Matthews.

 

[adambr2]

This kind of reminds me of last season when I started a thread about sitting Lacy to let his injuries heal for the playoffs. I was roundly ridiculed for that, but I don't mind it.

I'll buck the trend and say they should sit Matthews IF the medical staff thinks his groin isn't back to 100%. We are talking about our best defensive player who just sparked a major defensive turnaround, who has a history of lowever body injuries, specifically to his hamstring and now groin. He's also got a history of re-injuring himself (hamstring and thumb). If this injury has been nagging him since Week 3 and it's now worsened to the point where he is missing practice, it leads me to a prescription of rest.

Depending on what the medical staff says, my inclination as coach would be to dress him and use him only if needed for that defensive spark. There's no reason to believe that our defense can't shut down Minnesota even without Matthews.

Well for one thing you didn't suggest shutting down Lacy so he could get healthy for the playoffs. You wanted to shut him down in Week 17 vs the Bears for the NFC North title because you said that playoffs for any North team were a joke, we had basically no shot anyway so even if we made the playoffs it was meaningless, etc. etc. Nowhere did you suggest that we wanted to get Lacy healthy for January to try to make a run.

I'm not concerned if Matthews is at 100%. How many people on this team are really 100% right now at this point in the season? Sitton isn't 100%. Lang isn't 100%. Jordy isn't 100%. These are also important players. Do we need to shut these guys down too until they're 100%?

My main concern is that the medical team is comfortable with him playing, which it seems that they are. Beyond that, this is the NFL. You don't have all your guys running around at 100% all season. Can we just trust our medical staff and not need to tinker beyond that? This was a medical staff that wouldn't clear Rodgers well beyond his expected date of return last year with the division on the line seemingly every week. They're not going to be reckless with Clay, I assure you.

 

[El Guapo]

Sorry that I cared more about the player than the playoffs. My mistake.

As for the current discussion, if Perry doesn't play then that may well influence McCarthy's decision.

 

[adambr2]

Sorry that I cared more about the player than the playoffs. My mistake.

As for the current discussion, if Perry doesn't play then that may well influence McCarthy's decision.

I'm just saying you misrepresented what that thread was all about by saying you wanted to rest him for the playoffs. Had that been the case the discussion probably would have went a lot differently.

I'm not sure how trusting the medical staff to do their job is caring about the playoffs more than the player, but okay.

I just don't understand how every time a key player has a small injury, we become armchair coaches and medical staff and assume we know what kind of rest and treatment they need and whether or not the team can get by without them for awhile. Our team pays people to evaluate that and I completely trust that they aren't going to endanger anyone's health or career. If they're able to play they'll play. If not they'll sit. Simple.

 

[El Guapo]

That's a simplistic answer for a seemingly simple situation. However, I would argue that it's not. The NFL is involved in a massive lawsuit regarding concussions, because teams (as well as the players themselves) encouraged players to get back in the game. These aren't independent medical staffs making a call. It's the team-paid doctors saying whether they can go back on the field, not whether they should. I've heard that Doc McKenzie is a great person, but that said one shouldn't forget who's providing his paycheck. Coaching staffs are there to win, not to think much past this season and certainly not to think about players lives post-football.

As for my statement about the old thread, you're right. I thought that the Packers should shut him down for the season and let his ankle (injured 3 times) heal for the next season. I still stand by that statement.

 

[adambr2]

That's a simplistic answer for a seemingly simple situation. However, I would argue that it's not. The NFL is involved in a massive lawsuit regarding concussions, because teams (as well as the players themselves) encouraged players to get back in the game. These aren't independent medical staffs making a call. It's the team-paid doctors saying whether they can go back on the field, not whether they should. I've heard that Doc McKenzie is a great person, but that said one shouldn't forget who's providing his paycheck. Coaching staffs are there to win, not to think much past this season and certainly not to think about players lives post-football.

As for my statement about the old thread, you're right. I thought that the Packers should shut him down for the season and let his ankle (injured 3 times) heal for the next season. I still stand by that statement.

And has Lacy's ankle been an issue whatsoever this season? No. So perhaps the medical professionals on our team knew what they were doing in not suggesting that he be shut down in Week 17 and the playoffs? Maybe they knew that there was little chance of this becoming a prolonged recurring injury?

Just because the NFL had some issues in the past with allowing players to play injured, that is not related in any way to the judgment and professionalism of our own medical staff. In fact, you could just as easily argue that in this day and age, it is those very lawsuits and potential negative publicity that will cause medical staffs to err on the side of caution.

I just don't know where you want to draw the line. Why on Matthews? Heck, Sitton has a torn ligament in his toe. He's an All-Pro lineman. Should we shut him down for the year just to be safe? Do we want to let Lang's ankle fully heal before we line him up again? Should Rodgers have sat out that last game against the Eagles just to be absolutely sure of his hamstring? Guys are going to have small nagging injuries all the time. If you're going to let them all sit until they're 100% every time, you're not going to be able to field a full team on Sunday.

Coach McCarthy said that Matthews looked good and that he's not concerned about him missing time. Our head coach, who certainly cares about his players, and certainly is well aware of the "big picture" of needing him for the playoffs, is not worried about him playing in Minnesota. Why would we assume that we know better than him?

 

[El Guapo]

Great points

 

[longtimefan]

hese aren't independent medical staffs making a call. It's the team-paid doctors saying whether they can go back on the field, not whether they should. I've heard that Doc McKenzie is a great person, but that said one shouldn't forget who's providing his paycheck.

Coaching staffs are there to win, not to think much past this season and certainly not to think about players lives post-football.
.

When Brett had his 1st physical after being traded to the Packers the Dr then wanted to fail him based on a hip thing like Bo Jackson had?? Ron Wolf TOLD the Dr Brett WILL pass...

That wouldnt fly now, as we have a new era..I think a lot of players will try to still play, but doctors wont allow it

 

[longtimefan]

I see people here all the time get mad that they dont know what is wrong with a player..That MM doesnt explain fully what the problem is..

That player has every right to say I do not want my injury to be public knowledge and Mm is just going by what that player wants