Krauser Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 The report wasn't that he would be activated off PUP, but that he was cleared to practice. Maybe you don't trust Boser but he again today is saying that the surgeon cleared Teddy even if the team still hasn't activated him: https://twitter.com/Ryan_Boser/status/900771108839870464 If Teddy's been given medical clearance to practice, it'll be hard to justify keeping him on PUP for 2 more months. Even if that report is inaccurate, the movement skills Teddy is showing in drills suggests he will in fact be "able to perform football activities" in the near future. (edit: how do we get tweets to embed?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CriminalMind Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 26 minutes ago, Krauser said: The report wasn't that he would be activated off PUP, but that he was cleared to practice. Maybe you don't trust Boser but he again today is saying that the surgeon cleared Teddy even if the team still hasn't activated him: https://twitter.com/Ryan_Boser/status/900771108839870464 If Teddy's been given medical clearance to practice, it'll be hard to justify keeping him on PUP for 2 more months. Even if that report is inaccurate, the movement skills Teddy is showing in drills suggests he will in fact be "able to perform football activities" in the near future. (edit: how do we get tweets to embed?) If Teddy indeed has been given medical clearance, placing him on the PUP is going to be met with a challenge from the Teddy camp. Teddy rightfully should ask for a release, if they in fact decide to try him on the PUP. It does him no favors to go on PUP list, and potentially have his contract toll. Hence under this scenario, I think Vikings get ahead of it, and just take him off the PUP, place him on the 53, and keep everyone happy (for now), good PR, keep the option of a compensatory selection if he signs elsewhere etc. Other thing is of note to figure out: cleared by the surgeon is different (?) then cleared by team doctors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 34 minutes ago, Krauser said: The report wasn't that he would be activated off PUP, but that he was cleared to practice. Maybe you don't trust Boser but he again today is saying that the surgeon cleared Teddy even if the team still hasn't activated him: https://twitter.com/Ryan_Boser/status/900771108839870464 If Teddy's been given medical clearance to practice, it'll be hard to justify keeping him on PUP for 2 more months. Even if that report is inaccurate, the movement skills Teddy is showing in drills suggests he will in fact be "able to perform football activities" in the near future. (edit: how do we get tweets to embed?) Again, you're still using a source that has shown time and time again to be less than unreliable. Boser has never been a credible source. Whether it was saying that a deal between Michael Vick and the Vikings was a done deal, or that it was a done deal that the Vikings had re-signed Matt Kalil. Two reports that we know for a fact are untrue No one is questioning Bridgewater's progress. Anyone with eyes can see that he's closer to returning than not. What we're questioning is the legitimacy of the "this week" report, especially from Twitter posters like Boser. Note* to embed tweets, select the down arrow in the upper right hand corner of the tweet, select share, select copy direct link, then paste the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplexing Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 20 hours ago, Klomp said: That's not analysis. Sure it is. It's analysis of POSTERS BIAS; i.e. making claims without justification. The analysis result (after I posed my question for support for claims on TB or other QBs becoming the QBOTF) is that no one has verifiable medical reports upon which the NFL must rely for all transactions involving TB this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplexing Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 1 hour ago, SemperFeist said: Again, you're still using a source that has shown time and time again to be less than unreliable. Boser has never been a credible source. Whether it was saying that a deal between Michael Vick and the Vikings was a done deal, or that it was a done deal that the Vikings had re-signed Matt Kalil. Two reports that we know for a fact are untrue No one is questioning Bridgewater's progress. Anyone with eyes can see that he's closer to returning than not. What we're questioning is the legitimacy of the "this week" report, especially from Twitter posters like Boser. Note* to embed tweets, select the down arrow in the upper right hand corner of the tweet, select share, select copy direct link, then paste the link. This reinforces my claim that NO ONE yet has medical reports that are public knowledge, thus all claims about what will happen are biased according to prejudgement of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 If someone breaks there leg, and two months later you see them walking and running around without a cast, you don't need medical records to see that they are healing, therefore progressing, from their injury. In the case of Bridgewater, after someone dislocates their knee with multiple ligament tears, and then is seen running, cutting, and taking dropbacks a year later, you don't need medical records to see that significant progress in his healing has been made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 3 hours ago, Purplexing said: Sure it is. It's analysis of POSTERS BIAS; i.e. making claims without justification. The analysis result (after I posed my question for support for claims on TB or other QBs becoming the QBOTF) is that no one has verifiable medical reports upon which the NFL must rely for all transactions involving TB this season. Great sleuthing, Sherlock. Give it a rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 It doesn't matter whether a surgeon has cleared Teddy to practice, as he doesn't have the necessary qualifications to determine whether Teddy can actually resume football activities...and he doesn't work for the organization. The only ones that can officially clear Teddy to resume football activities are the teams' doctors and training staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 1 hour ago, disaacs said: It doesn't matter whether a surgeon has cleared Teddy to practice, as he doesn't have the necessary qualifications to determine whether Teddy can actually resume football activities...and he doesn't work for the organization. The only ones that can officially clear Teddy to resume football activities are the teams' doctors and training staff. A Not sure on that. The Vikings have been deferring to Bridgewater's surgeon. There was a report from before training camp that said Bridgewater met with his surgeon, who cleared him for dropbacks and passing drills. If the same surgeon clears Teddy to resume practice, it's going o be hard to refute that opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 It was actually during OTAs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CriminalMind Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 20 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: A Not sure on that. The Vikings have been deferring to Bridgewater's surgeon. There was a report from before training camp that said Bridgewater met with his surgeon, who cleared him for dropbacks and passing drills. If the same surgeon clears Teddy to resume practice, it's going o be hard to refute that opinion. I think deferring to a surgeon is one thing that is fine. But being given the all go for on field, likely rest with tan doctors. Has Teddy requested or had that official check from team doctors no body knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 37 minutes ago, CriminalMind said: I think deferring to a surgeon is one thing that is fine. But being given the all go for on field, likely rest with tan doctors. Has Teddy requested or had that official check from team doctors no body knows. Agreed. There's a huge difference between a surgeon clearing a guy to move physically to actually clearing him to practice/play football, since it involves a lot more than just simple movement. He may have given his okay to practice (as Teddy may be able to move around fully at this point), but he's not the decision-maker...the team doctors/training staff are. It's along the equivalence of being "in shape" and being "in football-shape". He's probably still got a ways to go physically before he could be considered to be in football shape...and then they can consider allowing him to begin practicing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CriminalMind Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 14 minutes ago, disaacs said: Agreed. There's a huge difference between a surgeon clearing a guy to move physically to actually clearing him to practice/play football, since it involves a lot more than just simple movement. He may have given his okay to practice (as Teddy may be able to move around fully at this point), but he's not the decision-maker...the team doctors/training staff are. It's along the equivalence of being "in shape" and being "in football-shape". He's probably still got a ways to go physically before he could be considered to be in football shape...and then they can consider allowing him to begin practicing. well being "in football shape" is a varying opinion. Being physically able to perform (the minimum) is all Teddy technically needs to demonstrate. Now if that is enough to get team doctors to "clear" him if he does have a physical check-in with team doctors, is one story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 Additionally, cleared for practice doesn't mean cleared for contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 3 minutes ago, Klomp said: Additionally, cleared for practice doesn't mean cleared for contact. Given the nature of football, I'm not sure a doctor would try and make a distinction between the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.