Packers Release TE Marty B ... Claimed by Patriots ... Placed on IR

[Norm]

3 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said:

 

[CWood21]

2 hours ago, lancerman said:

AGAIN.... Being cleared to play does not mean he is not injured and does not need surgery. A lot of players elect to play through injury for their team Terrell Owens and Rob Gronkowski both played injured in Super Bowls.

Nobody is making that argument.  What we are arguing is that if you're cleared to play by medical doctors, it's that they feel that you can play through that injury and you don't believe you risk injuring yourself further or suffering irreparable harm from playing with it.  Do you truly believe that the Packers AND Patriots FO would clear Bennett to play if they felt he could further injure himself or could suffer irreparable harm?  The Packers' medical staff cleared him to play, and when he didn't like what the Packers doctors told him McCarthy told him to seek out other opinions.  And given that he didn't get surgery shortly thereafter, you can probably safely assume that those independent doctors said similar to what the Packers doctors said.  And when he was eventually claimed by the Patriots, the medical doctors cleared him to play.  So that's likely three different sets of doctors who said it was safe for Bennett to play.  But no, somehow Bennett's opinion that surgery was absolutely needed then weighs more than three (or potentially more) medical doctors' professional opinion.

 

2 hours ago, lancerman said:

And no the stance isn't ridiculous. If you have no prospects of winning a Super Bowl or in the Browns and Niners case even making the playoffs and one of your best players get hurt and need surgery but can still play, you are stupid if you are forcing them to play out the remainder of the season in pain, delay their surgery, delay their recovery, and possibly aggravate their injury for absolutely nothing. It's pigheaded and it's a power thing. 

So what you're telling me is that you believe that any player who isn't feeling 100% and isn't a title contender should sit out of games?  You can't be so unhealthy that you can't play for one team, but you can for another team.  You have a contract which says you're supposed to play if you're capable of doing so.  It's literally an insane argument to make.  IF you don't risk further injuring himself (and at this point, there's nothing to indicate that's the case) he should absolutely play.

 

[lancerman]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Nobody is making that argument.  What we are arguing is that if you're cleared to play by medical doctors, it's that they feel that you can play through that injury and you don't believe you risk injuring yourself further or suffering irreparable harm from playing with it.  Do you truly believe that the Packers AND Patriots FO would clear Bennett to play if they felt he could further injure himself or could suffer irreparable harm?  The Packers' medical staff cleared him to play, and when he didn't like what the Packers doctors told him McCarthy told him to seek out other opinions.  And given that he didn't get surgery shortly thereafter, you can probably safely assume that those independent doctors said similar to what the Packers doctors said.  And when he was eventually claimed by the Patriots, the medical doctors cleared him to play.  So that's likely three different sets of doctors who said it was safe for Bennett to play.  But no, somehow Bennett's opinion that surgery was absolutely needed then weighs more than three (or potentially more) medical doctors' professional opinion.

 

So what you're telling me is that you believe that any player who isn't feeling 100% and isn't a title contender should sit out of games?  You can't be so unhealthy that you can't play for one team, but you can for another team.  You have a contract which says you're supposed to play if you're capable of doing so.  It's literally an insane argument to make.  IF you don't risk further injuring himself (and at this point, there's nothing to indicate that's the case) he should absolutely play.

 

Being cleared to play through an injury still means you are injured. It still means you are in pain throughout the duration of your injury. It still means your body isn't working the way it is intended to. It still means at some point you need surgery to correct it. At that point playing through that is a sacrafice that a player has the right to decide if he wants to play through or have surgery. It's Bennett's body. Not the Packers. You don't know how much pain he is in. And you don't get to tell him to put up with an injury if he doesn't want. The circumstances can change whether he wants to put up with it or not. Like having a lost season or a potential championship season. 

And yeah that's exactly what I'm telling you. This isn't a player who isn't feeling 100%. This is a player who thinks he's injured and will need surgery at some point. And yeah I think at that point it's his right to decide what circumstances make it acceptable to live with an injury and what circumstances don't. If tomorrow you broke your collarbone and you knew you would need surgey at some point to fix it but you could still function at your job, and your boss said "hey we'd really like you to wait until the holiday break to get this surgery because it will take you out for awhile" and you are weighing whether to wait a month and live with your injury or put off your surgery until you are incapacitated during your break... it would depend entirely on the circumstances if you wanted to do it. If nothing was going on at work and it was a dead season you might say "nah I'm in way too much pain, I'd rather have surgery and start recovering to get this over with sooner". If it were a busy season or a big promotion was coming up maybe you decide to make the sacrifice and listen to your boss. But it's on you. 

Unless you think Bennett is owned by the Packers and his opinion on when he wants to get surgery shouldn't matter because he signed a contract that the Packers clearly cared so much about that they voided when they cut him. It's just insane. I would never not take a players side in this. The only thing I have an issue with Bennett about on this issue is him taking shots at the doctor and doing talking about his retirement to make waves. 

[Pugger]

18 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said:

and...? that was said in the article, hes not saying when hes healthy he'll come back, hes saying when hes healthy, IF it makes sense he'll come back. considering the very strong stance youve taken on bennett, you shoild be sharpening the pitchfirk. shouldve known you cant be objective though.

Bennett is not on IR and Rodgers is.  Bennett has been cleared to play by multiple doctors and Rodgers cannot play so your comparison isn't a valid one.  If GB isn't in the playoff hunt when Rodgers is eligible to return by week 15 they will do what EVERY OTHER TEAM IN A SIMILAR SITUATION WOULD DO here and not risk their franchise player and keep him on IR until the following season.

[CWood21]

15 hours ago, lancerman said:

Being cleared to play through an injury still means you are injured. It still means you are in pain throughout the duration of your injury. It still means your body isn't working the way it is intended to. It still means at some point you need surgery to correct it. At that point playing through that is a sacrafice that a player has the right to decide if he wants to play through or have surgery. It's Bennett's body. Not the Packers. You don't know how much pain he is in. And you don't get to tell him to put up with an injury if he doesn't want. The circumstances can change whether he wants to put up with it or not. Like having a lost season or a potential championship season.

Nobody is arguing that Bennett isn't injured.  What we're discussing is the extent of the injury.  IF multiple doctors clear you to play, they feel you're able to play through the current injury and aren't at risk to further injure yourself.  IF that injury that he suffered was too injured to play or risk injuring himself further when he played for the Packers, it should have been too injured to play for the Patriots.  And it wasn't just the Packers and Patriots medicals doctors either, McCarthy even said it himself that he told Martellus to go get an outside opinion and that likely gave the same opinion.  That he was capable of playing through the injury without risking anything.  You're telling me that you've got no issues with a player not playing even if they can play simply because they don't feel like that?  Man, you're going to lose a locker room real quickly if that's the case.

15 hours ago, lancerman said:

And yeah that's exactly what I'm telling you. This isn't a player who isn't feeling 100%. This is a player who thinks he's injured and will need surgery at some point. And yeah I think at that point it's his right to decide what circumstances make it acceptable to live with an injury and what circumstances don't. If tomorrow you broke your collarbone and you knew you would need surgey at some point to fix it but you could still function at your job, and your boss said "hey we'd really like you to wait until the holiday break to get this surgery because it will take you out for awhile" and you are weighing whether to wait a month and live with your injury or put off your surgery until you are incapacitated during your break... it would depend entirely on the circumstances if you wanted to do it. If nothing was going on at work and it was a dead season you might say "nah I'm in way too much pain, I'd rather have surgery and start recovering to get this over with sooner". If it were a busy season or a big promotion was coming up maybe you decide to make the sacrifice and listen to your boss. But it's on you. 

Unless you think Bennett is owned by the Packers and his opinion on when he wants to get surgery shouldn't matter because he signed a contract that the Packers clearly cared so much about that they voided when they cut him. It's just insane. I would never not take a players side in this. The only thing I have an issue with Bennett about on this issue is him taking shots at the doctor and doing talking about his retirement to make waves. 

No, I never said Bennett was owned by the Packers.  I said it was his duty to make an honest effort to be available every given Sunday.  That CLEARLY wasn't the case.  The contract doesn't stipulate that you play only if you feel like play, or if it suits you.  Once Rodgers went down with the season-ending injury, he had no desire to stay in Green Bay.  His actions prove that.

[lancerman]

21 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Nobody is arguing that Bennett isn't injured.  What we're discussing is the extent of the injury.  IF multiple doctors clear you to play, they feel you're able to play through the current injury and aren't at risk to further injure yourself.  IF that injury that he suffered was too injured to play or risk injuring himself further when he played for the Packers, it should have been too injured to play for the Patriots.  And it wasn't just the Packers and Patriots medicals doctors either, McCarthy even said it himself that he told Martellus to go get an outside opinion and that likely gave the same opinion.  That he was capable of playing through the injury without risking anything.  You're telling me that you've got no issues with a player not playing even if they can play simply because they don't feel like that?  Man, you're going to lose a locker room real quickly if that's the case.

No, I never said Bennett was owned by the Packers.  I said it was his duty to make an honest effort to be available every given Sunday.  That CLEARLY wasn't the case.  The contract doesn't stipulate that you play only if you feel like play, or if it suits you.  Once Rodgers went down with the season-ending injury, he had no desire to stay in Green Bay.  His actions prove that.

Your problem is that you keep using verbiage like "only play if you like play or if it suits you". He was injured and he needed a surgery. He COULD have elected to tough it out and delay the surgery. But the sacrifice vs the reward wasn't great anymore. 

No I have no issue with a reality based decision to elect to not play through an injury and to have a surgery sooner rather than later if the season is effectively over.

[TheOnlyThing]

23 hours ago, lancerman said:

Your problem is that you keep using verbiage like "only play if you like play or if it suits you". He was injured and he needed a surgery. He COULD have elected to tough it out and delay the surgery. But the sacrifice vs the reward wasn't great anymore. 

No I have no issue with a reality based decision to elect to not play through an injury and to have a surgery sooner rather than later if the season is effectively over.

Seems pretty clear that (1) Bennett quit on the Packers and (2) lied and threw the team doctor under the bus to cover his tracks.

There is nothing honorable about him.

However, the fact Bennett maneuvered himself to go play for the 8-2 Pats and has a real shot to win another Super Bowl instead of continuing to slog along with that dumpster fire (he obviously saw coming once Rodgers went down) in Green Bay, shows there is some genuine thought/logic behind his Machiavellian ways.

[lancerman]

Ok he's on IR now. So all the Packers fans who cried about him quitting and faking his injury can apoligize now. He ended up toughing it out for a whopping 3 weeks. 

Unless you know Bennett and the Patriots are just lying for no reason and no benefit to troll the Packers. 

[Packerraymond]

10 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Ok he's on IR now. So all the Packers fans who cried about him quitting and faking his injury can apoligize now. He ended up toughing it out for a whopping 3 weeks. 

Unless you know Bennett and the Patriots are just lying for no reason and no benefit to troll the Packers. 

He's just not good, you guys wasted time and a roster spot on him. In the coming days you'll be reaching an injury settlement with him and that will be the end of Martellus Bennett. You think if he had 100 yards and 2 TDs last week you'd be IRing him? No.

He quit on our team, multiple players in our locker room have said it, they know better than some guy on a message board.

[Lunch Pail]

I hear he didn't wanna suit up in a meaningless game against the Dolphins but BB don't play that game and told him to grow a pair in the offseason

[bucsfan333]

 

[areksoo]

Seems like his injuries were bad enough to put him on IR.  

[biggbrd]

Sounds as thought it's more his hamstring which has sidelined him rather than the shoulder, though he still plans to get that sorted.

[TheKillerNacho]

Didn't he say he was retiring after this year too? Or was that his brother?

[lancerman]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

He's just not good, you guys wasted time and a roster spot on him. In the coming days you'll be reaching an injury settlement with him and that will be the end of Martellus Bennett. You think if he had 100 yards and 2 TDs last week you'd be IRing him? No.

He quit on our team, multiple players in our locker room have said it, they know better than some guy on a message board.

Yeah he said he was too injured to play and needed surgery. Turns out he's too injured to play and couldn't make it through 3 games. But they were right about it... 

Packers have egg on their face. Needless burned a bridge for a guy who was never going to play. And you can't pull the "he quit on the Patriots too". If he wasn't going to play for a team with an MVP candidate at QB that is currently waiting to see if they will get first or second seed in the conference, he wasn't going to play for anybody.