Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

oldunclemark

Injuries...did we lose Redding?

Recommended Posts

Colts LE Cory Redding was forced from Indianapolis' Week 11 game against the Patriots with a hip injury, and will not return.

Redding had to be helped off the field in the fourth quarter. He notched two tackles before departing. Redding miss time with a knee injury earlier this season.

Source: Mike Chappell on Twitter

That's all I can find so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Avery's out with concussion, Redding was injured (hip), but there's no clarification on how bad his injury is. Hilton was limping off the field as well, but he is not listed as injured.

Sorry, I don't have more accurate info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Avery's out with concussion, Redding was injured (hip), but there's no clarification on how bad his injury is. Hilton was limping off the field as well, but he is not listed as injured.

Sorry, I don't have more accurate info.

Thanks...I didnt know about Avery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we did knock out gronkowski.... my theory is if you cant beat them, then BEAT them. and the PAtriots deserve to lose him after keeping their starters in with under 5 minutes to play when up 4 touchdowns. that is my feeling on it.

hopefully we dont lose redding for the year, and hope avery can come back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we did knock out gronkowski.... my theory is if you cant beat them, then BEAT them. and the PAtriots deserve to lose him after keeping their starters in with under 5 minutes to play when up 4 touchdowns. that is my feeling on it.

The football game doesn't stop just because one team is beating the other. I would find it disrespectful, if they stopped playing altogether, just because they were ahead with a huge margin. You play football for 4 quarters, and as such, your so-called "theory" about "beating" them is ludicrous. The fact that you seem to think Gronk deserves his injury for playing a game he's paid to play is even more dumbfounded.

I'll add this, even if I don't fully agree with what was written here:

Coaches have 45 active players each game. They don't have a "second team'' of the point-after-try unit. The PAT is one of the most risk-free plays in football. Rodney Harrison, the former Patriots safety now in the NBC studio with me on Sunday nights, didn't get taken off the kickoff team in routs. And Tony Dungy, who coached the Colts and Bucs, told me: "Jeff Saturday was my right guard on the PAT team, and I'd never think of taking him off. All my years in football, I never heard anyone, never heard Chuck Noll saying, 'Well, we better get Jack Ham off the PAT team.' It's not something I'd question."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The football game doesn't stop just because one team is beating the other. I would find it disrespectful, if they stopped playing altogether, just because they were ahead with a huge margin. You play football for 4 quarters, and as such, your so-called "theory" about "beating" them is ludicrous. The fact that you seem to think Gronk deserves his injury for playing a game he's paid to play is even more dumbfounded.

I'll add this, even if I don't fully agree with what was written here:

I would never wish injury upon any player. Am I happy if someone sits out a play to rest up? Of course. Hoping someone gets injured or more though is just asinine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems redding limps off the field every other game he plays....unfortunately. not a shot at cr, just an observation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redding posted this on twitter: "Thank you everyone last night for the thoughts and prayers! Good news is I'm gonna live! Lol. 310lbs landing on a hip doesn't feel good... at all. Rest and treatment and I will be back on the field. Putting this game behind us today and looking forward to the Bills on Sun!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Richards@PhilRichards6

For all GM Ryan Grigson's activism, #Colts CBs have been a sorry lot. Jury still out on Darius Butler and Vontae Davis, who may return Sun.

Phil Richards@PhilRichards6

@kyler11 X-rays were clear. Won't know more until Wednesday. Redding was having big trouble walking in locker room after game.

Janoris Jenkins in round 2 (Rams), Josh Norman in round 5 (Panthers who are top 5 in pass D), Alfonso Dennard in round 7 (Patriots) - yes, 2 of those had off field issues in Jenkins and Dennard but all those 3 are playing well for their teams at CB - it was not like Grigson did not have ample chances to draft a few CBs.

Personally, I felt Darius Butler played well enough when he was matched up in man vs Welker, who had 80 yards but did not kill us nearly as much as Gronk and Edelman, IMO.

Redding missing time will be a huge blow vs the run heavy Bills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Janoris Jenkins in round 2 (Rams), Josh Norman in round 5 (Panthers who are top 5 in pass D), Alfonso Dennard in round 7 (Patriots) - yes, 2 of those had off field issues in Jenkins and Dennard but all those 3 are playing well for their teams at CB - it was not like Grigson did not have ample chances to draft a few CBs.

Dennard went ten spots after Tim Fugger, who went six spots after Justin Anderson.

We could have gotten more impact from our 7th round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dennard went ten spots after Tim Fugger, who went six spots after Justin Anderson.

We could have gotten more impact from our 7th round.

Definitely agree. The 2 players I was probably most disappointed in us not drafting were Billy Wynn and Dennard. I know Dennard had late off field issues but still would have been worth a chance in the 7th. Though at the same time there's no way Grigson could have anticipated Fugger's injury. I was ticked when Cleveland took Wynn one pick before us. I have no idea if Grigson would have taken him or still taken Brazill, but my preference would have been for Wynn. He has been a starter all year, I believe, for the Browns and has played well. I think he could have been a great 3-tech/5-tech player for us. Granted we had quite a few players for those roles already, but that's one of those situations where, imo, talent would trump need. It would have helped in the long run injury with the time missed so far by Redding, Moala and now Nevis being on IR. I still think we had a very good draft, much better than what I felt about it immediately afterwards I will admit. lol.

As a side note, I hadn't heard anything about Fugger in a while. I know the Colts seemed like him quite a bit. He's currently sitting on the Cardinal's practice squad so we could still snake him back if he got healthy and they wanted to free up a roster spot for him. I'm sure they'd have to know about his health first though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard Arians say x-rays were clear, but that he was in pain.

If I had to guess is he'll miss sometime, probably. :dunno:

X-rays mostly show bony abnormalities, not most soft tissue injuries. That's what MRI / CT Scan / and Scopes do. If they're not ordering any of those, they were likely just ruling out a fracture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely agree. The 2 players I was probably most disappointed in us not drafting were Billy Wynn and Dennard. I know Dennard had late off field issues but still would have been worth a chance in the 7th. Though at the same time there's no way Grigson could have anticipated Fugger's injury. I was ticked when Cleveland took Wynn one pick before us. I have no idea if Grigson would have taken him or still taken Brazill, but my preference would have been for Wynn. He has been a starter all year, I believe, for the Browns and has played well. I think he could have been a great 3-tech/5-tech player for us. Granted we had quite a few players for those roles already, but that's one of those situations where, imo, talent would trump need. It would have helped in the long run injury with the time missed so far by Redding, Moala and now Nevis being on IR. I still think we had a very good draft, much better than what I felt about it immediately afterwards I will admit. lol.

As a side note, I hadn't heard anything about Fugger in a while. I know the Colts seemed like him quite a bit. He's currently sitting on the Cardinal's practice squad so we could still snake him back if he got healthy and they wanted to free up a roster spot for him. I'm sure they'd have to know about his health first though.

To be fair on Dennard, there was no chance Grigson was going to draft him, and probably wouldn't have signed him if he'd gone undrafted. He punched a cop a week before the draft. Teams were already kind of worried about him because he had a reputation for being feisty, and that showed itself when he got ejected from his team's bowl game. Then he showed the worst judgment he possibly could have by getting into a physical altercation with a public offiicial, right before the draft. It was just plain stupid. It doesn't get much stupider.

So, yeah, I didn't want us to draft Dennard, and didn't get my hopes up that it would happen. But none of our 7th rounders have played for us this season, while other teams have 7th rounders contributing at a high level. If anyone needed playmakers, it was us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair on Dennard, there was no chance Grigson was going to draft him, and probably wouldn't have signed him if he'd gone undrafted. He punched a cop a week before the draft. Teams were already kind of worried about him because he had a reputation for being feisty, and that showed itself when he got ejected from his team's bowl game. Then he showed the worst judgment he possibly could have by getting into a physical altercation with a public offiicial, right before the draft. It was just plain stupid. It doesn't get much stupider.

So, yeah, I didn't want us to draft Dennard, and didn't get my hopes up that it would happen. But none of our 7th rounders have played for us this season, while other teams have 7th rounders contributing at a high level. If anyone needed playmakers, it was us.

I agree, especially playmakers in the secondary..that's why I thought it was at least worth a chance to bring in Dennard. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't surprised by us not taking him but felt it was worth a shot to see if he could mature in the right circumstances (which so far it seems he has, but the jury is definitely still out) especially with only having to use a 7th rounder on him. Like I said, I was disappointed but not surprised. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom James@TribStarTJames

Arians Monday presser: no news on injuries. Will know more by Wednesday. Hopefully will have Davis and Fleener back.

Phillip B Wilson@pwilson24

#Colts' Bruce Arians says no injury updates today. Says CB Vontae Davis (knee), TE Coby Fleener (shoulder) hopeful for Sunday.

Phil Richards@PhilRichards6

#Colts G Joe Reitz had pronounced limp in locker room Sun. night. Bet rookie G Justin Anderson is up because Reitz is down for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The football game doesn't stop just because one team is beating the other. I would find it disrespectful, if they stopped playing altogether, just because they were ahead with a huge margin. You play football for 4 quarters, and as such, your so-called "theory" about "beating" them is ludicrous. The fact that you seem to think Gronk deserves his injury for playing a game he's paid to play is even more dumbfounded.

I'll add this, even if I don't fully agree with what was written here:

Thats the 2nd time you have quoted this, I disagree. You can still keep playing WITHOUT your key starters!! Do you think taking Gronk out with 5 minutes left in game & up 4 TD's is going to make a f=difference with that O?? They also have A.Hernandez out 2 so imo it was STUPID to keep Gronk in, esp for an EXTRA POINT! I agree you play the game for 60 minutes, I will never argue that but I do question keeping KEY players on the field in that situation. Knowing BB he thought he was being cool running up the score! They got what they deserved imo.

P.S. I have no problem with the other team scoring if you can't stop them. Just think it's hilarious that the pats lose the best TE in football over this lmao!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the 2nd time you have quoted this, I disagree. You can still keep playing WITHOUT your key starters!! Do you think taking Gronk out with 5 minutes left in game & up 4 TD's is going to make a f=difference with that O?? They also have A.Hernandez out 2 so imo it was STUPID to keep Gronk in, esp for an EXTRA POINT! I agree you play the game for 60 minutes, I will never argue that but I do question keeping KEY players on the field in that situation. Knowing BB he thought he was being cool running up the score! They got what they deserved imo.

P.S. I have no problem with the other team scoring if you can't stop them. Just think it's hilarious that the pats lose the best TE in football over this lmao!!!!!

No I don't mean to take out your whole starting lineup either but you can def sit some of your primary weapons in a game like that. No you dont do it in the 3rd quarter on anything like that either. I'm saying in this particular situation Gronk had NO business being on the field. Injury or not I stand by that statement. That's not giving up nor is that what I'm implying, its called being smart & looking at the WHOLE/BIG picture. Just my 2 cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I don't mean to take out your whole starting lineup either but you can def sit some of your primary weapons in a game like that. No you dont do it in the 3rd quarter on anything like that either. I'm saying in this particular situation Gronk had NO business being on the field. Injury or not I stand by that statement. That's not giving up nor is that what I'm implying, its called being smart & looking at the WHOLE/BIG picture. Just my 2 cents

Correct me if Im wrong, feel free to cause I have been wrong plenty before......But are you debating with yourself? Least thats what that looks like, maybe I am reading it wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if Im wrong, feel free to cause I have been wrong plenty before......But are you debating with yourself? Least thats what that looks like, maybe I am reading it wrong

No I was adding more to my original post lol...sorry for the confusion:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the 2nd time you have quoted this, I disagree. You can still keep playing WITHOUT your key starters!! Do you think taking Gronk out with 5 minutes left in game & up 4 TD's is going to make a f=difference with that O?? They also have A.Hernandez out 2 so imo it was STUPID to keep Gronk in, esp for an EXTRA POINT! I agree you play the game for 60 minutes, I will never argue that but I do question keeping KEY players on the field in that situation. Knowing BB he thought he was being cool running up the score! They got what they deserved imo.

P.S. I have no problem with the other team scoring if you can't stop them. Just think it's hilarious that the pats lose the best TE in football over this lmao!!!!!

Second time? 1 + 0 doesn't equal 2, FYI.

Gronk deserved to be injured? Ridiculous.

From a tactical view point, no, it's not stupid. Keep in mind his injury happened on a PAT which probably is the safest play in the NFL. If you start switching around, getting players in who don't usually play those specific plays, the risk of injury would become even greater, as one guy failing his job, could lead to another guy losing his head.

If we're speaking about whether players should be pulled in general when one team looks to have won, then sure, keeping key players in could be viewed as careless and irrelevant. However, you - at the very least - play the game until there's zero percent chance of the game being able to turn. Mallett came in once that happened, and I somewhat support that decision. However, football is a spectator's game. We don't pay money to see backups play - even if the game seems unlikely to turn.

There's also the psychological aspect of winning, and winning by a large margin. I will always support any team's decision to blow out another opponent whenever that opportunity arises. The boost in confidence is invaluable - a "winning" mentality doesn't just come out of nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I was adding more to my original post lol...sorry for the confusion:)

:thmup: Ah I see carry on then, nothing to see here thats a cause for concern :funny:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second time? 1 + 0 doesn't equal 2, FYI.

Gronk deserved to be injured? Ridiculous.

From a tactical view point, no, it's not stupid. Keep in mind his injury happened on a PAT which probably is the safest play in the NFL. If you start switching around, getting players in who don't usually play those specific plays, the risk of injury would become even greater, as one guy failing his job, could lead to another guy losing his head.

If we're speaking about whether players should be pulled in general when one team looks to have won, then sure, keeping key players in could be viewed as careless and irrelevant. However, you - at the very least - play the game until there's zero percent chance of the game being able to turn. Mallett came in once that happened, and I somewhat support that decision. However, football is a spectator's game. We don't pay money to see backups play - even if the game seems unlikely to turn.

There's also the psychological aspect of winning, and winning by a large margin. I will always support any team's decision to blow out another opponent whenever that opportunity arises. The boost in confidence is invaluable - a "winning" mentality doesn't just come out of nowhere.

Those are all very good points but I like to use "common sense". The Pats "knew" they had won that game at the time of injury & I'm pretty sure they already have enough of the "winning" mentatlity. Were not talking about the Chiefs here (no offense Chief fans), the Pats know what they need to do.

If I'm @ HOME and blowing a team out by 28-35 points with 4 minutes left, I'm not thinking "hmmmm I wonder if the fans got what they paid for?", I'm thinking "Heck of a game boys! Now take a much deserved seat on the bench." Yes I agree it's a spectator sport but as a owner/coach I'm more worried about keeping guys healthy for the next week, post season etc..You know having healthy players & getting to the post season will most likely draw fans:) Also hard to keep fans coming if your STAR players are hurt!

What tactical view is there on "that" PAT? Say they did switch people & missed the extra point? Ok, so they only win by 34 instead of 35? I guess the extra point attempt isnt the safest play in the NFL.

I never said "Gronk" got what he deserved, I said "They". I never wish injury upon anybody, even pats players lol! But BB is known for doing what he did Sunday & it backfired plain & simple. Hence my got what they deserve comment. I also said more than once that "you play the game for 60 minutes, hard!"

Did you even read my comments? Go Colts :blueshoe:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TMP, I also never knew that 1+1=3 lmao

Gavin I am responding again :rock: lol! I do talk to myself but as long as I don't answer myself I think I'm good :D bwhahahaha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TMP, I also never knew that 1+1=3 lmao

Gavin I am responding again :rock: lol! I do talk to myself but as long as I don't answer myself I think I'm good :D bwhahahaha!

I hear there are 12 step programs for answering yourself now, I graduated early :goodluck:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Injuries are very costly, Although I think we could live without Avery.

He has played well but I would like to see more of Brazil and what he can do because he is a good WR.

Redding is a big part of the defense and when he is out, things go badly. We need help on both front lines, offensive and defensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are all very good points but I like to use "common sense". The Pats "knew" they had won that game at the time of injury & I'm pretty sure they already have enough of the "winning" mentatlity. Were not talking about the Chiefs here (no offense Chief fans), the Pats know what they need to do.

If I'm @ HOME and blowing a team out by 28-35 points with 4 minutes left, I'm not thinking "hmmmm I wonder if the fans got what they paid for?", I'm thinking "Heck of a game boys! Now take a much deserved seat on the bench." Yes I agree it's a spectator sport but as a owner/coach I'm more worried about keeping guys healthy for the next week, post season etc..You know having healthy players & getting to the post season will most likely draw fans:) Also hard to keep fans coming if your STAR players are hurt!

What tactical view is there on "that" PAT? Say they did switch people & missed the extra point? Ok, so they only win by 34 instead of 35? I guess the extra point attempt isnt the safest play in the NFL.

I never said "Gronk" got what he deserved, I said "They". I never wish injury upon anybody, even pats players lol! But BB is known for doing what he did Sunday & it backfired plain & simple. Hence my got what they deserve comment. I also said more than once that "you play the game for 60 minutes, hard!"

Did you even read my comments? Go Colts :blueshoe:

1. The injury happened on a freak accident. It may as well have happened from Gronkowski doing his victory dance after a touchdown, then tripping over his feet. Bad luck.

1a. As for the PAT itself, you seem to have missed: "If you start switching around, getting players in who don't usually play those specific plays, the risk of injury would become even greater, as one guy failing his job, could lead to another guy losing his head."

2. While I agree to a point about the common sense, I'd still say the psychological factors outweigh the risk of injury. It's not like they were using high-risk plays. Another factor could be to demotivate the team you're playing, as well as using the blowouts as a tactical advantage in other games (e.g.., teams know the Pats can score 60 points in a game - opposition teams will be severely demotivated when playing the Patriots, as their machine seems unstoppable, and they know it doesn't slow down at any point, ever). You can also never get enough of a "winning" mentality.

3. Even if they run up the score - the Patriots do not deserve injuries to happen, based on the points already given in this, as well as my previous posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would never wish injury upon any player. Am I happy if someone sits out a play to rest up? Of course. Hoping someone gets injured or more though is just asinine.

exactly I couldn't agree more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I get what you're driving at BLS. I just remember the nightmare known as Curtis Painter in 2011. Translation: Quality backups aren't that easy to find & there's no such thing as an elite 2nd stringer field general. They don't really exist meaning all backup QBs have flaws.    In layman's terms, when the face of your franchise goes down; you're basically screwed that calendar yr anyway because veterans off the street are injury prone with age & recovery issues & anybody worthy of your attention is locked down financially on other team rosters for the short term future. 
    • You can say that again WM. It's like some people think Jacoby will be great just because he was in the same room Brady was studying film a few times.    Look, I respect the hades out of Brady & his SB consistency. I also was amazed at how quickly Jacoby used wrist band numbers to execute our offense in short order. It just bothers me when players & coordinators under BB's coaching tree get all these job interview opportunities  & then when they leave Foxboro their clout fades too.    If anybody breaks this trend of leaving the Boston net & succeeding, Josh McDaniels will be the one to shatter this stigma IMO. [Yes, I think Josh will flourish in his 2nd HC gig too once that preferred vacancy becomes available. This happens a lot with your 2nd shot at the helm running a NFL program.]
    •   The owner of the company says 30 of 32 NFL teams use his service.       I'm sorry he didn't bring out the paper work to show it to you.     But typically,  unless there is reason to believe he's lying,  the man,  in this case,  Cris Collinsworth, gets the benefit of the doubt.   As opposed to you,   who doesn't like the service,  and just denies,  denies,  and denies.....   Oh,  and as for Chip Kelly......     Rich Dudes have lots of ways of making money.    They typically don't chose to make it by buying part of a company that, in the past,  they have openly said negative things about.      Goes to credibility.      They can invest their money elsewhere.   Kelly bought in because he likes what he sees.  
    •   None of those people talk in the 3rd person seriously.   If any of those three talk in the third perosn,   they are mocking themselves and others who do.   And having worked with on-air people who have huge talents,  I think I can say confidently that none of these three guys has an ego the way the current occupent of the White House does.     Not even close.     That man is in a league of his own.   Apologies for the political talk.    
    •     So far,  I confess I don't think of RG3 when I watch Brissett.      I think he's much more of a pocket passer than RG3 ever was.    I saw RG3 as an athlete who could play QB.      I see Brissett as a QB who has some athleticism.   Brissett is taller,  bigger,  heavier.     Not nearly the athlete but much more a physical presense.   6'4" 235 vs. 6'2" and 220.     I think Brissett is going through the normal young QB growth that most every young QB goes through.     I'd expect over time he makes fewer and fewer mistakes.       As for what we'd get for Brissett in a trade....    I don't know if you spend any time in the chat room during a game,  but this past Monday,  I spent some time there,  and when Brissett was good (1st half)  the Colts fans there had us gettng at least a 1st round draft pick for him,  and possibly even more!     I think a Day 2 pick is not far off,   he was taken in the 3rd round and demonstrated a good level of competence in a short amount of time.      I suppose it's possible he'd get only a 4,    but I don't see Brissett getting traded for a 5.     I think Ballard would much rather keep him than trade him for that.      
  • Members