Although it was reported that the IR move was a mutual decision, Spikes' agent disagrees with that assessment, "The team's decision to place Brandon on injured reserve was not a mutual decision, nor need it be," Gary Uberstine said in a statement."Brandon had every intention to keep playing throughout the playoffs, despite the pain he was experiencing throughout the season."
Spikes was placed on injured reserve with a bad knee, but he said it was an injury he could have played with, "That was just from the labor throughout the season, man. It was just -- you know how it is -- it's a tough 16 games. All I needed was rest and rehab," Spikes said.
Ralphwiggum said:
What's the controversy?
Ralphwiggum said:
I suppose I kind of get the Talib thing, if his hip really wasn't injured and the Pats reported it as a hip (although I agree with Ed above that requiring teams to disclose specific injuries is kind of dumb).
But based on the quotes above, where is the story on the Spikes stuff? He agrees his knee was injured, he claims he could have kept on playing but his agent even admits that the decision to put a player on IR does not have to be mutual. What's the controversy?
Ralphwiggum said:
I suppose I kind of get the Talib thing, if his hip really wasn't injured and the Pats reported it as a hip (although I agree with Ed above that requiring teams to disclose specific injuries is kind of dumb).
But based on the quotes above, where is the story on the Spikes stuff? He agrees his knee was injured, he claims he could have kept on playing but his agent even admits that the decision to put a player on IR does not have to be mutual. What's the controversy?
Dogman2 said:The Patriots may have done Spikes a favor by placing him on IR. We all know he had a knee injury at the end of the regular season and, as the article states, Spikes admits he did. Spikes also admits he needed rest and rehab. The Patriots felt rest and rehab wouldn't have healed him enough to contribute in the playoffs so they placed him on IR and he didn't like it. I remember the story of him missing a meeting and could have been suspended. Instead, they placed him on IR.
The favor I'm talking about is the IR placement may very well saved Spikes from further injuring his knee and being unable to sign with another team.
YTF said:
The thing with Talib is that the misrepresentation of his injury COULD affect the interest and offers made to him on the FA market. Not saying that the Pats had this in mind, but reporting the injury as a bad hip might potentially scare off suitors and give the Pats a better shot at signing Talib at their price.
Ralphwiggum said:
But based on the quotes above, where is the story on the Spikes stuff? He agrees his knee was injured, he claims he could have kept on playing but his agent even admits that the decision to put a player on IR does not have to be mutual. What's the controversy?
Kenny F'ing Powers said:Nobody cares.
Fans on other teams don't care.
The NFL doesn't care.
The Patriots don't care.
There are people in this thread that are already riled up that "people are out to make the Patriots look like cheaterzz!"
There will be plenty of real situations where we can feel sleighted by the media. We don't need to conjure one up here.
Besides, letting this guy get your goat is your own fault. Type in "John Breech, Patriots" into google and the top 10 searches include:
3 of the remaining 4 hits are tweets about Browner, Ryan Allen, and Desean Jackson.
- Him picking Miami over New England
- Him picking Denver over New England in the regular season
- Him picking Cinci over New England
- Him tweeting "These Patriots AFC title t-shirts might be kind of tough to sell now: http://t.co/rJ8LpCsNmQ"
- Him picking the Colts over New England in the playoffs
- Him picking Denver over New England in the playoffs
We don't need to find every negative piece that some schmuck posts online and work ourselves into a lather over it.
(1 of 3) Bob, I have a strong opinion on this story. I think it's ridiculous and reflects the need for more context. I honestly don't believe Aqib Talib was taking a shot at the Patriots. He was asked about the condition of his hip by a Denver reporter, and said something like, "Oh, my hip is fine. Hasn't been an issue since Tampa. It was actually my quad, but that's the way they list things there." It was immediately concluded that it was a shot at the Patriots, even though there was no follow-up. If there was a follow-up, here's what I think Talib's response would be, "Oh man, no big deal. I loved my time there. They were just trying to protect me so an opponent couldn't come after me." ...
Mike
(11:26 AM)
(2 of 3) ... The whole purpose of the injury report is to disclose any players who might be in jeopardy of missing that week's game. It goes back to 1947 because then commissioner Bert Bell felt it threatened the integrity of the game when a player unexpectedly didn't suit up one week. In the case of Talib and Spikes, the Patriots were well within the rules because they disclosed the possibility those players might not be available. In Talib's case, they did what many teams do -- they were evasive on the specifics of the injury to protect the player so the opponent couldn't target him. SO THEY WERE ACTUALLY TRYING TO HELP TALIB. A more egregious violation of NFL rules would be not putting players on the report at all, which we've seen other teams do. But when that happens, it doesn't seem to get the same media-based traction it does when the Patriots are in the cross-hairs. That goes back to my theory that the Patriots are an easy target.
Mike
(11:30 AM)
(3 of 3) As for Spikes, if we're all Patriots followers here, we watched every game in 2013. How could anyone, in their right mind, think he wasn't hurt? His knee was abolsutely an issue. I think back to the regular-season finale and remember him getting up slowly after missing a tackle. He was a gamer playing through it. Spikes could have played through it in the playoffs but that wasn't the only issue -- he also blew off a practice in the bye week when it was snowing. So you take the injury, and couple it with a player missing a practice, and I think that's what led the Patriots to the conclusion of placing him on IR. That is well within their rights and it happens all the time -- players land on IR even if they think they can play/return at some point. It comes down how a team decides its best to manage their roster. When you listen to Spikes' remarks, what exactly is he contesting? He acknowledges he was injured. I TRULY BELIEVE HE WAS CONTESTING THE REPORT THAT IT WAS A MUTUAL DECISION TO HAVE HIM PLACED ON IR. That is a completely different issue but it's being lumped in with Talib. What a mess.
tims4wins said:
You may be right, but the level-headed Mike Reiss of all people went into a long rant on this today in his chat
rodderick said:
Isn't that why teams have the player take a physical? If Talib is going around saying his injury was misreported, what impact does that really have? Aside from that, is it really that much better to say, "oh, I've had a history of hip injuries, but with the Patriots I've only missed games because of quad problems!"? Yeah, so now you have two parts of your body that worry potential suitors.
I also love how the dipshits all come out of the woodwork with "cheating again! Cheaters!! LOL LOL LOL!". Can anyone explain to me how this would provide the Patriots with a better chance of winning a football game? Yeah, maybe now your dirty fucking players are confused as to which part of a guy's body to target in order to injure him further, but apart from that, what changes exactly?
YTF said:
I believe there is history of prior hip issues with Tampa and the Pats so IF misrepresented now, whether the hip checks out or not it COULD result in some teams balking or or offering lesser deals which COULD be in the Patriots favor. Again, I'm not proposing that this is how all of this went down, simply presenting an example of how it COULD have been in the Pats interest to misrepresent the injury.
Reverend said:If Talib is telling the truth, then that means going back to 2010, he has on separate occasions injured his calf, hamstring, quad and hip-flexor.
What's his guaranteed money look like again? I mean, that's, like, pretty much everypartmuscle of the human leg that is used in football right?
Danny Amendola and his adductor would like to have a talk with you.soxfan121 said:Plantar fasciitis?
Paging Doctor Ten Dollars, $10 to the red courtesy phone.
The greatest question in football for the next few decades will be what kind of career Brady could have had if he hadn't been injured the ENTIRE time.Stitch01 said:Next thing you'll tell me Brady's shoulder really wasn't injured for five years straight.
Gash Prex said:Also, we apparently enslaved Mr. Spikes for 4 years.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10756726/brandon-spikes-buffalo-bills-takes-shots-new-england-patriots-twitter
AlNipper49 said:
What does this have to do with falsifying injury reports?
Apparently they had him manacled to mediocrity, the fiends!uncannymanny said:Oh yeah, making millions of dollars playing professional sports is totally analagous to slavery.