Deshaun Watson tore his ACL in practice today, apparently

[1ke]

Well that's the beauty of wild speculation, we are both free to believe what we want. I am sure some meatballs would make noise but meatballs always make noise. I think most people would be happy if Watson showed the skills he has shown but you are free to believe whatever you want. It's a pretty pointless thing to worry about either way.

It is a pointless argument. But you know what this place is like.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

 

[TarHeelBear]

It's still 2 years apart which is all I said.

That's not a lot of time for 3 major knee injuries. That's only 4 years in all.

 

[remydat]

That's not a lot of time for 3 major knee injuries. That's only 4 years in all.

The knee injury in high school was not serious. He got injured in the state semifinals, put a brace on that shit and then finished the game. There was simply no point him playing the All Star game rather than rest the knee as he already had his scholarship to Clemson.

https://www.gainesvilletimes.com/sp...ch-season-ending-knee-injury-breaks-my-heart/

 

[TarHeelBear]

The knee injury in high school was not serious. He got injured in the state semifinals, put a brace on that shit and then finished the game. There was simply no point him playing the All Star game rather than rest the knee as he already had his scholarship to Clemson.

https://www.gainesvilletimes.com/sp...ch-season-ending-knee-injury-breaks-my-heart/

It was much more serious than you're stating as the All-American was played in January. Also, he put a brace 'on that shit' and finished the game when he tore his ACL in college as well.

You can downplay it all your want. 3 out of his last 5 seasons have ended in a knee injury.

 

[Probie2429]

Off topic, but my wild speculation is that Tiger will win another major. People make fun of me for thinking that, but his talent when healthy is better than anyone. If his back is fixed, he will be awesome in stretches.

Maybe on the senior tour. Tiger's skill set is no longer relevant when younger players can hit the ball just as far or further than him at the same age. The thing is that Tiger isn't 25, he's gonna be 42. I don't think people realize how old he really is.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

Maybe on the senior tour. Tiger's skill set is no longer relevant when younger players can hit the ball just as far or further than him at the same age. The thing is that Tiger isn't 25, he's gonna be 42. I don't think people realize how old he really is.

Vijay played his best golf in his 40s. Ernie and Phil won multiple times in their 40s also. The thing about Tiger that people forget is that when he was winning majors, he was absolutely money around the greens and putting inside 10 feet. Once he got the lead, he would just play tee to green and then watch everyone around him crumble.

 

[Probie2429]

Vijay played his best golf in his 40s. Ernie and Phil won multiple times in their 40s also. The thing about Tiger that people forget is that when he was winning majors, he was absolutely money around the greens and putting inside 10 feet. Once he got the lead, he would just play tee to green and then watch everyone around him crumble.

It's true those players did, but the game has changed. The younger players are so much better than they have been at any point in golf history. Remember when Tiger broke onto the scene is was unheard of a player at that age being so good. Now there are many players in that age bracket performing well. Tiger's problem is steroid abuse has broken his body down completely.

 

[satchice]

Well that's the beauty of wild speculation, we are both free to believe what we want. I am sure some meatballs would make noise but meatballs always make noise. I think most people would be happy if Watson showed the skills he has shown but you are free to believe whatever you want. It's a pretty pointless thing to worry about either way.

If he would of put up the number Mitch has in this offense and then went out for the season, would you still fell that way? I don't think Watson would have looked any better then Mitch has in this offense on this team, do you??

 

[Bearly]

As far as his play goes I'm not too worried. As far as his risk for re-injury go I'd be VERY concerned.

Usually not a big deal if surgically repaired. It's those that are treated more conservatively that have greater risk. Obviously his risk is greater than someone without an injury history but there's no reason to assume him a different player when he returns or significantly more likely to be injured. An injury like this could be the result of an earlier instance that was treated with a brace or rest. Once they go in, it will be fixed correctly.

The issue here is that we don't know about collateral damage and there usually is some. Even minor tearing of other ligaments or meniscus damage could be a predictor of something in the future but that could be said of most NFL players. They've all had 'sprains'. The only difference here is that we 'know' the knee has been stressed to that extent so it's a bit more likely but at least for me, not a big deal. I look at Tommy John surgery and once successful, the elbow is as good as new. For me, it's the complexity of the knee joint that's the issue, not a ligament that's been surgically repaired.

 

[iueyedoc]

Watson was technically outside the 24 month period covered by the study in terms of reinjury as he tore the first ACL as a Freshman.

Never really heard of someone tearing their ACL 3 times so who knows what the risk is.

Are you suggesting that once he gets outside that 24 months his increased risk just went away? Seems logical.
As far as triple tears Thomas Davis came back from it but likely you don't here about guys tearing them a third time is they don't make it back to form after the second, so not the best news for Watson.

I wanted healthy WRs in camp. Could have done without all the injury prone guys because well they are likely to get injured. White, Cruz, Wheaton, Randle are all injury risks. Wright per Loggains himself is not a full time WR. So we really shot ourselves in the foot by having so many WRs likely to get injured that once the one healthy guy (Meredith) got hurt, the dominoes started to fall.

So Wheatons shoulder injury was predictive of his appendectomy, scratched cornea and groin strain and Whites lower leg injuries were predictive of his shoulder injury, but Watson's torn ACL, which in a study was statistically proven to raise risk of re-injury or contralateral injury in the 2 years post original injury, didn't because he was past the 2 year mark of the study?

Lucky for him they didn't extend the study to 4 years post initial injury or he might have still been at higher risk.

Since you are OK with a preinjured Watson since he was in the clear being 24+ months healthy and no study proved him to be at higher risk at that magic moment and you want to slam Pace for the pre injured WR's, can you provide the studies that link appendectomies and corneal abrasions to shoulder injuries. I would find those intriguing. I mean you surely have good reason to give one a pass and not the others.

 

[Bearly]

If he would of put up the number Mitch has in this offense and then went out for the season, would you still fell that way? I don't think Watson would have looked any better then Mitch has in this offense on this team, do you??

Depends on how the coaches treated it. If they setup the O for Watson or were headstrong about learning to playing in system and more worried about mistakes.

 

[bearmick]

If he would of put up the number Mitch has in this offense and then went out for the season, would you still fell that way? I don't think Watson would have looked any better then Mitch has in this offense on this team, do you??

Yes, because he's a better player. He wouldn't have had the ridiculous numbers he did in Houston but I would be pretty confident it would be a lot better than what we've gotten from Glennon or Trubisky so far.

 

[satchice]

Yes, because he's a better player. He wouldn't have had the ridiculous numbers he did in Houston but I would be pretty confident it would be a lot better than what we've gotten from Glennon or Trubisky so far.

Why? Do you think the coaches would of changed the system for him? If he only had 7 pass attempts in a game how would he done a lot better? Do you think Trubisky is playing poorly, and the WR would be better off if Watson was throwing the ball? That doesn't make any sense to me. If anything he would be doing the same or worse then Mitch, because he is not as good of a passer. Mitch's problems are the sister and the receivers. Watson would also inherit those same problems.

 

[satchice]

Depends on how the coaches treated it. If they setup the O for Watson or were headstrong about learning to playing in system and more worried about mistakes.

Lets say they treated the situation exact as they have did with Mitch.

 

[Midway Fields]

Welp, I was on the Deshaun Watson no matter what bandwagon but I am glad the Bears went with Trubisky. I love Watson but ACL's torn on both knees the last dew years. Not good.

My Bears psyche could not take a season ending injury to our rookie hopeful franchise QB.

The suicide watch on this board alone would be overwhelming if Watson was a Bear.

 

[bearmick]

Why? Do you think the coaches would of changed the system for him? If he only had 7 pass attempts in a game how would he done a lot better? Do you think Trubisky is playing poorly, and the WR would be better off if Watson was throwing the ball? That doesn't make any sense to me. If anything he would be doing the same or worse then Mitch, because he is not as good of a passer. Mitch's problems are the sister and the receivers. Watson would also inherit those same problems.

I think Glennon being so atrocious caused the coaches to play Trubisky before he was ready, and I think that's a large part of the reason for both his play and presence in the pocket, and the limitations in the game plan. Watson was more NFL ready, obviously, and would not have had these issues to the same degree, if at all.

You say you think Watson would likely be doing worse than Mitch is if he were here. Does that mean you think Trubisky would be doing better in Houston than Watson's record breaking performance and he would be the best rookie QB in the last decade? If you do, I can't help you, because you're just too deep in the homerism to be rational.

Regardless of what you think about accuracy or radar guns, Watson is better than Trubisky on the field because he's a more naturally capable playmaker than Mitch is. His instincts are off the charts. The assertion by you and others that all of Watson's success has been about his teammates carrying him and all of Trubisky's mediocrity has been about his teammates letting him down, and that neither of them are individually responsible for any of it, is just nonsense. I can guarantee you that if Trubisky were having the MVP-level rookie season and Watson was struggling, you would say the opposite.

This insistence by some posters that every issue with Mitch is to do with the receivers, game plan, coaches and everything else other than him, is beginning to have a rather familiar ring to it.

 

[SugarWalls]

Usually not a big deal if surgically repaired. It's those that are treated more conservatively that have greater risk. Obviously his risk is greater than someone without an injury history but there's no reason to assume him a different player when he returns or significantly more likely to be injured. An injury like this could be the result of an earlier instance that was treated with a brace or rest. Once they go in, it will be fixed correctly.

The issue here is that we don't know about collateral damage and there usually is some. Even minor tearing of other ligaments or meniscus damage could be a predictor of something in the future but that could be said of most NFL players. They've all had 'sprains'. The only difference here is that we 'know' the knee has been stressed to that extent so it's a bit more likely but at least for me, not a big deal. I look at Tommy John surgery and once successful, the elbow is as good as new. For me, it's the complexity of the knee joint that's the issue, not a ligament that's been surgically repaired.

The Tommy John surgery is a bit different in that the elbow actually benefits from the replacement, it is not quite the same with the knee. From my standpoint as a PT... it is never a good thing to need surgery on your leg, and especially not the knee. The ACL is NEVER the same after it is replaced. That isn't to say that Watson won't be able to come back and play at a high level, but especially considering he has now had this done twice... re-injury is definitely a concern.

Also, ACL injuries are not treated with a brace as they wont actually heal. The MCL is really the only major ligament of the knee that gets treated with a brace because that typically will heal without surgical intervention.

 

[NFCnB]

Tough luck for Houston, Watson was playing lights out. One thing to remember is....its not how a young QB plays when he comes into the league. His career will be defined by how he responds to adversity, when he struggles for a season or a string of games - which happens to all young QBs. Second ACL for a mobile QB is concerning and can seriously impact his career. Glad we got Mitch or this board would be on fire, with get rid of Pace type threads

 

[Bearly]

Lets say they treated the situation exact as they have did with Mitch.

Hard to say but likely not great.

 

[Bearly]

I think Glennon being so atrocious caused the coaches to play Trubisky before he was ready, and I think that's a large part of the reason for both his play and presence in the pocket, and the limitations in the game plan. Watson was more NFL ready, obviously, and would not have had these issues to the same degree, if at all.

You say you think Watson would likely be doing worse than Mitch is if he were here. Does that mean you think Trubisky would be doing better in Houston than Watson's record breaking performance and he would be the best rookie QB in the last decade? If you do, I can't help you, because you're just too deep in the homerism to be rational.

Regardless of what you think about accuracy or radar guns, Watson is better than Trubisky on the field because he's a more naturally capable playmaker than Mitch is. His instincts are off the charts. The assertion by you and others that all of Watson's success has been about his teammates carrying him and all of Trubisky's mediocrity has been about his teammates letting him down, and that neither of them are individually responsible for any of it, is just nonsense. I can guarantee you that if Trubisky were having the MVP-level rookie season and Watson was struggling, you would say the opposite.

This insistence by some posters that every issue with Mitch is to do with the receivers, game plan, coaches and everything else other than him, is beginning to have a rather familiar ring to it.

The radar gun thing is overrated. It's arbitrarily taken while they are in drills and isn't necessarily representative of their max velocity or ball speed when not iable to set perfectly. He looked very accurate and strong enough at the combine and Pro days. He was top dog at the combine with the other 2 of the top 3 close. Mitchell looks to me like he wants to do this in what the coaches think is the right way and is willing to go through those growing pains... to grow properly. Hopefully it's working but we won't be sure for a while.