Quote: @purplefaithful said:
GB practicing yesterday was a good sign - but the Vikings are waiting to see how he feels this morning and tomorrow before deciding if he's ready to go on Sunday (according to Doogie)
Wise. I'd rather the Vikings go with Reed than a not fully healthy Bradbury.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
I am happy that he is recovering and appears ready to go, but he has missed about the last 1/3 of the season, are we better off rolling with a guy that has been working out, practicing and playing for the last month and a half, or putting a guy in that has been rehabbing a very painful injury that has likely limited him in about every aspect of the game except mental?
I don't think the Vikings are that stupid. If Bradbury is still limited by a very painful injury, or he's not fully conditioned because of it, he will not play.
Not what I said, I am saying he may be full go play wise, but his game has been on the shelf for 5 weeks, will his experience be enough to overcome any lack of reps, conditioning, and strength he's likely lost by taking off the time to recover, or would the team be better off rolling with the guys thats been playing and working out all along?
Do you think this about every player returning from injury? Just curious, because I would think you would want your best players out there in the playoffs, provided they are healthy and fully conditioned. Because, like I said, if he's not either of those, he won't play.
Is it possible he re-tweaks the back? Or that he's a little rusty? Of course, but isn't that the case with every player returning from injury? And if that happens isn't it possible to pull him and put in Reed, grateful that he's gotten some reps the last few weeks?
Yes, especially ones that are marginal players on their best days. Bradbury has never really stood out as a guy that we must have to be successful to me. On his best days he good enough, but isn't a road grader or a stout pass protector, he is serviceable but thats it IMO.
I thought that might be it. Just takes you a while to get there. :-)
why wouldnt his ability play into the decision to start him over his replacement? if you got JJ @ 80% vs the number 4 receiver, yeah you march out JJ @ 80% because even at 80% he is still going to be better than a lower tier player, but does GB at 85-90% of his normal level of play good enough to outplay Reed if he is 100%? I dont know, but that was the question I was asking, and even if GB is pain free, after 5 weeks down time will he be able to play at 100%, I find it highly unlikely. I dont know where you think I am heading and why, but not everything has an ulterior motive for me... maybe just try reading what I am typing and not trying to look for ways to twist words to fit a preconceived notion that you may have.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
I am happy that he is recovering and appears ready to go, but he has missed about the last 1/3 of the season, are we better off rolling with a guy that has been working out, practicing and playing for the last month and a half, or putting a guy in that has been rehabbing a very painful injury that has likely limited him in about every aspect of the game except mental?
The problem I see with this train of thought is that Reed hasn’t been playing the whole time Bradbury has been out. Only the last 2 games.
He did an alright job against a team looking to score the number 1 overall pick in the draft. So, maybe his performance against Green Bay is what we should look at, not the Bears.
I’ll take a healthy Bradbury over a healthy Reed at center.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
I am happy that he is recovering and appears ready to go, but he has missed about the last 1/3 of the season, are we better off rolling with a guy that has been working out, practicing and playing for the last month and a half, or putting a guy in that has been rehabbing a very painful injury that has likely limited him in about every aspect of the game except mental?
I don't think the Vikings are that stupid. If Bradbury is still limited by a very painful injury, or he's not fully conditioned because of it, he will not play.
Not what I said, I am saying he may be full go play wise, but his game has been on the shelf for 5 weeks, will his experience be enough to overcome any lack of reps, conditioning, and strength he's likely lost by taking off the time to recover, or would the team be better off rolling with the guys thats been playing and working out all along?
2 Questions;
1. Is he likely to reinjure because of his time off/lack of use? Easy decision then.
2. If healthy, but rusty, is he not better than the 3rd stringer with limited reps that started last week?
Quote: @Riphawkins said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
I am happy that he is recovering and appears ready to go, but he has missed about the last 1/3 of the season, are we better off rolling with a guy that has been working out, practicing and playing for the last month and a half, or putting a guy in that has been rehabbing a very painful injury that has likely limited him in about every aspect of the game except mental?
The problem I see with this train of thought is that Reed hasn’t been playing the whole time Bradbury has been out. Only the last 2 games.
He did an alright job against a team looking to score the number 1 overall pick in the draft. So, maybe his performance against Green Bay is what we should look at, not the Bears.
I’ll take a healthy Bradbury over a healthy Reed at center.
I can see that, I had heard his snaps against GBay were his first live snaps at C, so its not like he has a ton of experience to go off either, but that was my question originally was what is the bigger risk here, Bradbury at 80% ( due to lack of recent play and conditioning) or Reed at 100% but not nearly the the experience. would 1 more week off help Bradbury get back closer to 100%? or is he as good as he's gonna be? I think back to Sullivan and his back issues and once those started he was never the same C again for us. I honestly dont care who starts, but I know how hesitant coaches are to mess with their OL and if they put GB out there and he struggles, will they pull him for Reed, or just roll with him hoping it gets better?
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
I am happy that he is recovering and appears ready to go, but he has missed about the last 1/3 of the season, are we better off rolling with a guy that has been working out, practicing and playing for the last month and a half, or putting a guy in that has been rehabbing a very painful injury that has likely limited him in about every aspect of the game except mental?
I don't think the Vikings are that stupid. If Bradbury is still limited by a very painful injury, or he's not fully conditioned because of it, he will not play.
Not what I said, I am saying he may be full go play wise, but his game has been on the shelf for 5 weeks, will his experience be enough to overcome any lack of reps, conditioning, and strength he's likely lost by taking off the time to recover, or would the team be better off rolling with the guys thats been playing and working out all along?
2 Questions;
1. Is he likely to reinjure because of his time off/lack of use? Easy decision then.
2. If healthy, but rusty, is he not better than the 3rd stringer with limited reps that started last week?
I think #2 is based on how good you believe he was prior to his injury, or does his play just look better since he is no longer the weakest member of the OL so its taken the focus off him? I agree he has improved, just not as much as some say he has.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
So he better than average?
B)
Trust the plan. KOC has been keeping Bradbury on the shelf so he can unleash him for the playoff run.
He's our secret weapon that the East Coast Bias Sports Media continues to ignore.
|
