Dan Gross Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 I comlpetely agree... But why do you think Mike has not been on the injury report? 510422[/snapback] Do you mean why don't we list "Mike Williams: Probable (ankle)" like the Pats have listed "Tom Brady: Probable (shoulder)" for the past three years? I would guess it's that the injury report lists the probability that an injury would cause a player to not play. While Mike is "dinged up" he's suiting up every week, it's just this weekend he suited up as the backup LG rather than the backup/starting RT...if that makes sense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 The way I've seen it, when Mike is in there at right tackle, he doesn't show the mobility he showed last year when he was playing well. It also seems, in those rare occasions that we can put drives together, he limps back to the huddle. Not that cute hobble-like waddle that Sam Adams has done just about every day since he arrived, but put-as-little-weight-as-possible-on-the-ankle limp-step. It seems that .75 of MW > 1.00 of Jerman (pointless after Jerman got injured too). With both MW and Jerman injured, they needed to play Peters at tackle for the New England game. It had seemed, after the NE game, that .75 MW < 1.00 Peters, but it was likely more the level of the player across from Peters than a great performance by Peters. My conjecture, not having talked with anyone in the Bills organization (unlike many of you that seem to have "inside knowledge" as to what the players and coaches think), is that during the bye week they started the MW as guard experiment thinking that .75MW would likely be > 1.00Anderson (who was clearly a waste of $$), and that the contained movement of the guard position would reduce the amount of "flare-up" in the ankle, and allow MW to contribute (and also allow Mouse to play MW at the position he openly lobbied to have him at last year). It hasn't worked...yet, and not surprising, as a player who has played one position his whole career is not going to immediately be able to pick up a new position, especially moving from outside to inside the line. 510354[/snapback] Great post, and I think you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 Do you mean why don't we list "Mike Williams: Probable (ankle)" like the Pats have listed "Tom Brady: Probable (shoulder)" for the past three years? I would guess it's that the injury report lists the probability that an injury would cause a player to not play. While Mike is "dinged up" he's suiting up every week, it's just this weekend he suited up as the backup LG rather than the backup/starting RT...if that makes sense... 510439[/snapback] That is what I meant. I guess I've had the sense that a number of organizations play around with the injury report, most notably the Patriots, (listing a lot of people so it's hard to tell who is really hurt). The Bills, on the other hand seem to always report injuries very matter-of-factly with no obfuscation. This is the one case I remember where a player's health does not seem to jive with what is on the report. I do get your point though. Maybe he has a hang nail, so there is no chance he won't be able to play, yet we see him limping because damn it hurts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts