Per Irsay: AR OUT for SEASON

[csmopar]

Per nfl dot com, Irsay says AR out for season

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/colts-owner-jim-irsay-qb-anthony-richardson-will-probably-have-season-ending-sho

 

will be probably be having surgery 

 

figured this warranted it’s own thread

[DougDew]

As he should, IMO.  Long term health is more important than one season.  It was going to be a yawner to begin with.

 

But I like how Irsay played it out for two weeks like its a reasonable football decision and not about continuing a throw away season.

[Colts1324]

It’s unfortunate, but I’m glad he is getting it out of the way now. Our focus shifts to more of a development year imo. 
 

But, here is another example of how the Colts always seem to hide the truth. I doubt it took 9 days to figure out that he would likely need surgery. It started at 4 weeks. Then, 6 weeks. Then, it could be the entire season. 

& I’m not sure why Irsay has to be the one to tell the media when you’d think Ballard or Steichen would give the media that info. 

[csmopar]

22 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

It’s unfortunate, but I’m glad he is getting it out of the way now. Our focus shifts to more of a development year imo. 
 

But, here is another example of how the Colts always seem to hide the truth. I doubt it took 9 days to figure out that he would likely need surgery. It started at 4 weeks. Then, 6 weeks. Then, it could be the entire season. 

& I’m not sure why Irsay has to be the one to tell the media when you’d think Ballard or Steichen would give the media that info. 

Well I can see the timeline if they wanted multiple opinions. I mean, it can take 2-4 days just to get a contrast MRI back. And sometimes, doctors have varying opinions so I can understand the timeline put forward. 

[Pelt]

I hope his arm gets back to 100%. It's a nice ability to just effortlessly flick a ball 70 yards.

[Btown_Colt]

31 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

It’s unfortunate, but I’m glad he is getting it out of the way now. Our focus shifts to more of a development year imo. 
 

But, here is another example of how the Colts always seem to hide the truth. I doubt it took 9 days to figure out that he would likely need surgery. It started at 4 weeks. Then, 6 weeks. Then, it could be the entire season. 

& I’m not sure why Irsay has to be the one to tell the media when you’d think Ballard or Steichen would give the media that info. 

Wait, you think the Colts are trying to hide the truth because they took a whopping 9 days to decide on surgery or not? 
 

Oh good gravy.

[ADnum1]

What bad news !!!

[DougDew]

33 minutes ago, Btown_Colt said:

Wait, you think the Colts are trying to hide the truth because they took a whopping 9 days to decide on surgery or not? 
 

Oh good gravy.

No.  We think that Irsay knew there was a good possibility of AR being out for the season with surgery when they were saying 4 weeks (and not saying OR possibly a season ending injury)

 

He could have said initially, "either 4 weeks OR season ending depending upon how our evaluation process goes".  Pretty simple.  But he left out the last part, initially, IIRC.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, Colts1324 said:

& I’m not sure why Irsay has to be the one to tell the media when you’d think Ballard or Steichen would give the media that info. 

Yeah.  I would think that the HC talks about player availability.  He does from week to week, so I don't know why he would not be the one communicating all injuries of players to the media.

 

Irsay doing it makes it sound like he decided it.  Meddled. I'm not saying that he did meddle, but its a weird way to communicate to the media, IMO.

[lollygagger8]

[Btown_Colt]

29 minutes ago, DougDew said:

No.  We think that Irsay knew there was a good possibility of AR being out for the season with surgery when they were saying 4 weeks (and not saying OR possibly a season ending injury)

 

He could have said initially, "either 4 weeks OR season ending depending upon how our evaluation process goes".  Pretty simple.  But he left out the last part, initially, IIRC.

I think anyone who saw the injury and heard the reports understood there was a possibility of season ending surgery….unless you’re DougDew or purposely trying to find reasons to criticize.

 

 

[Creekside]

2 hours ago, csmopar said:

Per nfl dot com, Irsay says AR out for season

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/colts-owner-jim-irsay-qb-anthony-richardson-will-probably-have-season-ending-sho

 

will be probably be having surgery 

 

figured this warranted it’s own thread

 

This article states that Jim Irsay said, " I mean, it's not definite"..........

 

This article does not say that AR is out for the season...(I know he probably WILL be)...But this report is not exactly the final word on the matter...

 

"probably"..."in all likelyhood"..."not definite"....Did anyone read the article?

[Indyfan4life]

1 minute ago, Btown_Colt said:

I think anyone who saw the injury and heard the reports understood there was a possibility of season ending surgery….unless you’re DougDew or purposely trying to find reasons to criticize.

 

 

[RollerColt]

First there were rumors that the Colts were trying to force Anthony to play this season still and get him hurt worse. Now there's the idea that Irsay is deciding for Anthony that he needs surgery? 

 

...

[Peter Nova]

45 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

What bad news !!!

 

2024 can't get here fast enough. 

 

 

 

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, Btown_Colt said:

I think anyone who saw the injury and heard the reports understood there was a possibility of season ending surgery….unless you’re DougDew or purposely trying to find reasons to criticize.

 

 

Yes, they understood that only because they were smart enough to not believe the words spoken by the Colts at the time.  The Colts did not entertain the possibility of him being out for the season when they spoke about 4 weeks....at least it may have been a very remote possibility (like a fine-print disclosure)

 

Speaking realistically often sounds like criticisms to others. 

[#12.]

It's a golden era to be a Colts fan.  What a time to be alive.  

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Colts1324 said:

But, here is another example of how the Colts always seem to hide the truth. I doubt it took 9 days to figure out that he would likely need surgery. It started at 4 weeks. Then, 6 weeks. Then, it could be the entire season. 

 

You would probably do well to separate what the Colts have said from what others have speculated.

 

The Colts haven't given any timeline on Richardson. Before Irsay's comments, the only person from the Colts to speak about Richardson's injury has been Steichen, and he has declined to give any kind of timeline or projection of how long Richardson would be out, or what the course of action would be. He's been entirely noncommittal the entire time.

 

Now, eight days after the injury, Irsay is saying it's 'probably' going to be surgery, which would mean Richardson is out of for the year. 

 

So where did the projections come from? Media has been speculating that he'd be out at least 4-6 weeks, unless he has surgery, in which case he'd be out for the year. How is that an example the Colts hiding the truth? And why would you conclude that eight days is an unreasonable amount of time to determine whether he'd have surgery?

[shakedownstreet]

2 hours ago, Creekside said:

"probably"..."in all likelyhood"..."not definite"....Did anyone read the article?

 

but it's like double probably 

[shakedownstreet]

Is Uncle Rico available?

 

 

[John Waylon]

 

Aw jeez

[shakedownstreet]

So all we really know is he might be back for the Frankfort game or he may never play again

[IinD]

Just now, shakedownstreet said:

So all we really know is he might be back for the Frankfort game or he may never play again

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, #12. said:

It's a golden era to be a Colts fan.  What a time to be alive.  

It's GOLD all right 

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Yeah.  I would think that the HC talks about player availability.  He does from week to week, so I don't know why he would not be the one communicating all injuries of players to the media.

 

Irsay doing it makes it sound like he decided it.  Meddled. I'm not saying that he did meddle, but its a weird way to communicate to the media, IMO.

 

 You come up with some sick dodoo Doug.

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

You would probably do well to separate what the Colts have said from what others have speculated.

 

The Colts haven't given any timeline on Richardson. Before Irsay's comments, the only person from the Colts to speak about Richardson's injury has been Steichen, and he has declined to give any kind of timeline or projection of how long Richardson would be out, or what the course of action would be. He's been entirely noncommittal the entire time.

 

Now, eight days after the injury, Irsay is saying it's 'probably' going to be surgery, which would mean Richardson is out of for the year. 

 

So where did the projections come from? Media has been speculating that he'd be out at least 4-6 weeks, unless he has surgery, in which case he'd be out for the year. How is that an example the Colts hiding the truth? And why would you conclude that eight days is an unreasonable amount of time to determine whether he'd have surgery?

 

  People in search of a chance to smear with their foul ideas and general negativity post here.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

People in search of a chance to smear with their foul ideas and general negativity post here.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 You come up with some sick dodoo Doug.

Or the media not being a reliable source when 4 weeks is mentioned.....so the Colts have to give their message outside of media.  Which is weird.  

 

The more media there is, the more everybody ignores it.  Makes you wonder how it can survive.  Teams and fans just bypass the media and message directly.   And ESPN wants how much for a subscription for the opportunity to watch its shows 24/7?  LOL.

 

I'm certainly not a media/news junkie.  If before  I'm  going to spend my time reading a bunch of stuff only to weed it down to 5%, I guess I'll need work extra hard and devote more hours of my life learning my media/twitter celebrities. 

[Colts1324]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

You would probably do well to separate what the Colts have said from what others have speculated.

 

The Colts haven't given any timeline on Richardson. Before Irsay's comments, the only person from the Colts to speak about Richardson's injury has been Steichen, and he has declined to give any kind of timeline or projection of how long Richardson would be out, or what the course of action would be. He's been entirely noncommittal the entire time.

 

Now, eight days after the injury, Irsay is saying it's 'probably' going to be surgery, which would mean Richardson is out of for the year. 

 

So where did the projections come from? Media has been speculating that he'd be out at least 4-6 weeks, unless he has surgery, in which case he'd be out for the year. How is that an example the Colts hiding the truth? And why would you conclude that eight days is an unreasonable amount of time to determine whether he'd have surgery?

Yeah, I may have jumped the gun going off of reports vs the Colts statements themselves.
 

My comment stems more from frustration of the injury & the past connection with the Colts franchise & injuries.
 

The Colts & the players themselves always seemed to be a little suspicious on injuries & the timeline it takes to release it to the media vs. other teams. 
 

In my opinion, we just communicate things in a very odd way when things like this come up.  
 

Peyton Manning’s neck injury, all of Andrew Luck’s injuries, Jonathan Taylor’s ankle injury, Darius Leonard’s back, etc 
 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Or the media not being a reliable source when 4 weeks is mentioned.....so the Colts have to give their message outside of media.  Which is weird.  

 

The more media there is, the more everybody ignores it.  Makes you wonder how it can survive.  Teams and fans just bypass the media and message directly.   And ESPN wants how much for a subscription for the opportunity to watch its shows 24/7?  LOL.

 

I'm certainly not a media/news junkie ....a junkie who's up the * of media people and kiss their feet, knowing who they are.  If I'm  going to spend my time reading a bunch of stuff only to weed it down to 5%, I guess I'll need work extra hard and devote more hours of my life learning my media/twitter celebrities. 

 

So as a person who has been following the Colts for several years, are you not familiar with people like Adam Schefter, Ian Rapoport, etc.? Is it necessary to be a media/news junkie to know who they are, and read what they report?

 

And do you not see a difference between the reports from third parties like Schefter, Rapoport, etc., and a direct quote from the team owner? Does a person have to be a junkie to know the difference between a media person saying 'this might be a 4-6 week injury, but they're considering surgery,' vs the owner later saying 'he's probably going to have surgery in the next week'? 

 

It's also important to note that no one in the media has even said 'the Colts expect Richardson to come back in 4-6 weeks.' Everything the media has stated has been speculative and open-ended.

 

And are you not acknowledging that the only team rep who has said anything about Richardson's injury before yesterday was the HC, who openly stated there was no timeline, and that no decisions had been made about how the injury would be managed? 

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

So as a person who has been following the Colts for several years, are you not familiar with people like Adam Schefter, Ian Rapoport, etc.? Is it necessary to be a media/news junkie to know who they are, and read what they report?

 

And do you not see a difference between the reports from third parties like Schefter, Rapoport, etc., and a direct quote from the team owner? Does a person have to be a junkie to know the difference between a media person saying 'this might be a 4-6 week injury, but they're considering surgery,' vs the owner later saying 'he's probably going to have surgery in the next week'? 

 

It's also important to note that no one in the media has even said 'the Colts expect Richardson to come back in 4-6 weeks.' Everything the media has stated has been speculative and open-ended.

 

And are you not acknowledging that the only team rep who has said anything about Richardson's injury before yesterday was the HC, who openly stated there was no timeline, and that no decisions had been made about how the injury would be managed? 

Schefter typically reports speculation whenever I watch him.  He talks a lot and says nothing.  Maybe he should wear a hat with a neon sign that says "for the next 90% I'll have airtime, I'm speculating rumors"  then the other 10% of his reports he can go hatless and be the news guy.  Since he doesn't do that, I'm not going to spend the time to read everything he reports only to weed out the good stuff.  He's a Sports "inside scoop celebrity" that ESPN allocates air time for.

 

I assume that the Colts wouldn't need to engage directly if they thought guys like Schefter didn't get in the way.  

 

I assume I'd have to weed through Rappaport's stuff too. 

 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

Yeah, I may have jumped the gun going off of reports vs the Colts statements themselves.
 

My comment stems more from frustration of the injury & the past connection with the Colts franchise & injuries.
 

The Colts & the players themselves always seemed to be a little suspicious on injuries & the timeline it takes to release it to the media vs. other teams. 
 

In my opinion, we just communicate things in a very odd way when things like this come up.  
 

Peyton Manning’s neck injury, all of Andrew Luck’s injuries, Jonathan Taylor’s ankle injury, Darius Leonard’s back, etc 
 

 

Yeah, people have said that about the Colts for a long time. I typically disagree with this criticism of the team. I think one instance where it might have been valid was the Marvin Harrison injury in 2007.

 

Even if we say that things were unclear with Manning, Luck, JT (obviously a ploy by the player, IMO), Leonard, that has not been the case now with Richardson. The HC said 'we don't have a timeframe, we're still getting information and determining what to do.' All the noise came from third parties. And now the owner has given a meaningful update, eight days later.

[DougDew]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

It's also important to note that no one in the media has even said 'the Colts expect Richardson to come back in 4-6 weeks.' Everything the media has stated has been speculative and open-ended.

 

And are you not acknowledging that the only team rep who has said anything about Richardson's injury before yesterday was the HC, who openly stated there was no timeline, and that no decisions had been made about how the injury would be managed? 

Yes.  I didn't engage in the JT thread much because what both the Colts said and JT said was fairly benign, with most of the intense stuff being media speculation.  

 

So I must have misinterpreted the 4 week timeline for AR originally stated as a team media release when it was not.

 

But the idea that SS would be the person speaking about the (non) timeline, then Irsay gives a timeline, is something that confuses the situation. 

 

I expect the HC to be the spokesperson for player availability.   Obviously, when the issue is contract than somebody higher than the HC would speak.  But injury and who he's going to play, the HC should be the media source even when its a season ending procedure, IMO.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Yes.  I didn't engage in the JT thread much because what both the Colts said and JT said was fairly benign, with most of the intense stuff being media speculation.  

 

So I must have misinterpreted the 4 week timeline for AR originally stated as a team media release when it was not.

 

But the idea that SS would be the person speaking about the (non) timeline, then Irsay gives a timeline, is something that confuses the situation. 

 

I expect the HC to be the spokesperson for player availability.   Obviously, when the issue is contract than somebody higher than the HC would speak.  But injury and who he's going to play, the HC should be the media source even when its a season ending procedure, IMO.

 

That's a reasonable expectation. But when the HC isn't giving anything, and the owner is quoted making a fairly clear statement, I don't see where there's any confusion. The fact that you would have expected this information to come from the HC instead of the owner doesn't change the quality of the information. And there's nothing to interpret in what Irsay said. 

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38675826/colts-anthony-richardson-probably-done-season-irsay-says

Quote

 

The Colts have spent the week-plus since the injury obtaining numerous medical opinions on how to proceed. Irsay said evaluations are pointing in one particular direction.

 

"The most likelihood is he's probably going to be gone for the year," Irsay said. "I mean, it's not definite but [he] probably misses this year and we're going to have to contend with that factor."

 

Among the associated decisions is whether Richardson's injury needs to be surgically repaired or whether continued rehab would be sufficient to fix the problem. Irsay said surgery seems likelier.

 

"There's debate going, but it's probably going to lead toward surgery in the next week or so," Irsay said. "We're just trying to figure out exactly how and when and what we want to do and what Anthony wants to do."

 

 

I'm very critical of Colts media, I think they generally do a poor job. This isn't one of those times. Holder got a direct quote from the person at the top of the organization, on the record. It does not contradict anything the team has previously said. And although he strongly suggests that Richardson is going to have surgery, he leaves the door open for a different outcome.

[indyagent17]

Well our season turned into a 5-7 win 

[Colts1324]

16 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

So as a person who has been following the Colts for several years, are you not familiar with people like Adam Schefter, Ian Rapoport, etc.? Is it necessary to be a media/news junkie to know who they are, and read what they report?

 

And do you not see a difference between the reports from third parties like Schefter, Rapoport, etc., and a direct quote from the team owner? Does a person have to be a junkie to know the difference between a media person saying 'this might be a 4-6 week injury, but they're considering surgery,' vs the owner later saying 'he's probably going to have surgery in the next week'? 

 

It's also important to note that no one in the media has even said 'the Colts expect Richardson to come back in 4-6 weeks.' Everything the media has stated has been speculative and open-ended.

 

And are you not acknowledging that the only team rep who has said anything about Richardson's injury before yesterday was the HC, who openly stated there was no timeline, and that no decisions had been made about how the injury would be managed? 

A lot of loaded questions there!
 

I follow the national & the local reporters as much as anybody. Rapoport, Schefter, Stephen Holder, Kevin Bowen, Destin Adams, JMV, etc 
 

I’m very aware of what’s speculation & what’s not. The original reports were that Richardson had a grade 3 AC sprain. 4-6 weeks was the initial timeline for a return. 
 

It quickly became 4-8 weeks. Then, surgery became an option. Now, surgery is the option. 
 

Dianna Russini did, in fact, report the colts organization was bracing for Richardson to be out 4-6 weeks. Other reporters quickly followed that sentiment. 
 

Regardless, Richardson is likely out for the year & Indiana’s bad injury luck continues!

 

Cheers to Sunday! 

 

 

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

A lot of loaded questions there!
 

I follow the national & the local reporters as much as anybody. Rapoport, Schefter, Stephen Holder, Kevin Bowen, Destin Adams, JMV, etc 
 

I’m very aware of what’s speculation & what’s not. The original reports were that Richardson had a grade 3 AC sprain. 4-6 weeks was the initial timeline for a return. 
 

It quickly became 4-8 weeks. Then, surgery became an option. Now, surgery is the option. 
 

Dianna Russini did, in fact, report the colts organization was bracing for Richardson to be out 4-6 weeks. Other reporters quickly followed that sentiment. 
 

Regardless, Richardson is likely out for the year & Indiana’s bad injury luck continues!

 

Cheers to Sunday! 

 

Definitely loaded questions, meant for a specific poster, according to whom the bolded line above makes you a media junkie who is up the * of media celebrities, kissing their feet. Not my words...

 

As for Russini's tweet, or any other media reports, Steichen has said multiple times that there is no timeline for Richardson's return. He said they haven't made any decisions on how to proceed, and before they put him on IR Steichen only said that Richardson would be out against Jacksonville. Any timelines, any expectations, weren't coming from the team, which is why I don't think it's appropriate to accuse the team of 'hiding the truth' about the situation.

 

Edit: I should also mention that many of those reports over the last few days have allowed for the possibility of season ending surgery. I think some people kind of chose to block that part out. And I use the word "reports" loosely, because a lot of the discourse about Richardson's injury has been about the typical recovery for a Grade 3 sprain, and not specific discussion about Richardson's diagnosis. 

[DougDew]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's a reasonable expectation. But when the HC isn't giving anything, and the owner is quoted making a fairly clear statement, I don't see where there's any confusion. The fact that you would have expected this information to come from the HC instead of the owner doesn't change the quality of the information. And there's nothing to interpret in what Irsay said. 

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38675826/colts-anthony-richardson-probably-done-season-irsay-says

 

I'm very critical of Colts media, I think they generally do a poor job. This isn't one of those times. Holder got a direct quote from the person at the top of the organization, on the record. It does not contradict anything the team has previously said. And although he strongly suggests that Richardson is going to have surgery, he leaves the door open for a different outcome.

It was my mistake.  I'm not questioning Irsay over what he just said.  I don't think the Colts are playing loose with words to their advantage.

 

I assume the Colts acknowledge the grade 3 MRI sprain diagnosis.  And that degree does not require surgery.  So the grade 3 MRI result gives an aura of the Colts being the source of the 4-6 week speculation, and not just media types rumoring.    I think its not unreasonable for many fans to be confused when there were facts supporting the 4-6 week statement, no matter who said it.   

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

above makes you a media junkie who is up the * of media celebrities, kissing their feet. Not my words...

Those words in the post were edited out after a few minutes.  So they are nobody's words.

[coach kline]

Why all the lies after MRI? Sprains don't require surgery. 

[HOZER]

3 hours ago, shakedownstreet said:

Is Uncle Rico available?

 

 

We already have him…come to find out, he can’t throw a football over them mountains after all☹️