Monday, June 1, 2009

Follow-up On the Injury Report Shenanigans

In response to my post about the Packer injury report shenanigans, Brian at RBC writes:

It's tough to say if the Packers are at fault. I can also recall many times where they list even the most minor of injuries on the report as well.

Here is the key from Bedard's story:

Even when he was placed on injured reserve Dec. 18, the reason stated in the team's press release was a shoulder injury.

Eight days later he had ankle surgery in Charlotte, N.C.

That is more that a little fishy, and it leads me to believe that there is something to this story.

Now, Brian is technically correct that the Packers did list even minor injuries, but they are listing minor injuries instead of the more significant injuries. Technically speaking, I'm sure that Bigby did, in fact, have a shoulder injury, but I seriously doubt that was what kept him on the sidelines. In sum, the Packers are telling half-truths.

It would have created a much different impression if the Packers would have reported that Bigby was hobbled by the same serious ankle injury all season instead of reporting that Bigby suffered two different ankle injuries, a hamstring injury, a bicep injury, and a shoulder injury.

No comments:

Post a Comment