Is Marshall Too Hurt to Play? (Poll)

[NightTrainLayne]

Simple yes or no question. Is Marshall too hurt to play in the game Sunday?

[MasterShake]

Only two questions. Are the playoffs still possible and can he walk?

[getlynched47]

Well, Spencer Larsen pulled his hamstring during practice last week and didn't suit up for the game @ Philadelphia. I didn't see anybody bitching about him missing the game.

As far as for the question, he could probably play but he doesn't trust the medical staff saying that it's okay to play with, since it's the same medical staff that told him his hip had no problems.

[MasterShake]

Well, Spencer Larsen pulled his hamstring during practice last week and didn't suit up for the game @ Philadelphia. I didn't see anybody bitching about him missing the game.

As far as for the question, he could probably play but he doesn't trust the medical staff saying that it's okay to play with, since it's the same medical staff that told him his hip had no problems.

To be fair, Spencer Larsen doesn't have 100 catches for over a thousand yards.

[Northman]

Yes, Marshall is too injured to play. He's made of glass.

[BroncoWave]

STRAIGHT from the horse's mouth:

"I wouldn't say pulled my hamstring-it's definitely not that bad."

/thread

[HORSEPOWER 56]

I'm a Marshall supporter, but I think he could probably play. Do I think he should? HELL NO. It's one game for the Broncos, it's Brandon's health that hangs in the balance. I wouldn't push myself and risk further injury if I knew I couldn't give 100% either - especially in a potential contract year. This game guarantees nothing. It's not like if we beat KC we're in the playoffs. Do we need to win to have a chance? Sure. Is Marshall risking further injury worth McD's pride and a potential playoff berth? No.

That's all this is. Rather than just gameplan around an injured player that probably could go, he'd rather have a tantrum about not getting his way and make a media stink out of it to discredit Marshall (because McD is so trustworthy :rolleyes:).

[Nomad]

STRAIGHT from the horse's mouth:

"I wouldn't say pulled my hamstring-it's definitely not that bad."

/thread

That's too bad, hamstring injury is nothing to joke about but faking is really sad!!

[Northman]

(because McD is so trustworthy :rolleyes:).

Bwhahahahahahah! yea, Burger King wrapper. nuff said. :lol:

[LordTrychon]

Doesn't matter. He's benched.

[getlynched47]

Bwhahahahahahah! yea, Burger King wrapper. nuff said. :lol:

McDonalds wrapper. Get it right ;)

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I certainly hope someone can answer this question, as I know I can't:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/nfl/01/01/marshall.ap/index.html

Marshall suggested he couldn't have played anyway after pulling his right hamstring at practice this week.

[turftoad]

Doesn't matter, McD inactivated him.

[Benetto]

Injured or not, BM can be on the field as a decoy...See Terrell Davis Migraine.

He doesn't have a torn hammy, or illness keeping him off the field. So he should suit up and give it his 50% he claims to have...At least as a decoy.



Marshall and McDaniels are both at fault here, and both are proving their immaturity..Marshall is crying about a hammy problem when nothing is showing up on MRI...Obviously he thinks his days are done in Denver, and doesn't want to aggravate a small inconvenience in his hammy...Who will pay top dollar for BM if he really hurts himself? As for McDaniels....He made a REAL stupid move by talking to the media about BM, when simply could've listed B as questionable or day to day. Isn't the Patriot way to keep quiet and solve problems in house? Both are freakin MORONS!

[dogfish]

c'mon, man!

where's the "how the **** are WE supposed to know??" option?

seriously, what's the point of just engaging in blatant speculation? i don't believe that anyone besides brandon marshall truly knows the answer to that question. . . even a doctor can't measure how much pain he's in or give a definitive answer as to just how much it's going to restrict his movement. . . guys play through hamstring sprains all the time-- and guys are out for weeks at a time with hamstring sprains just as frequently. . . you can't compare one to another-- there are three different big muscles that make up the hamstring group, which makes possible a huge range of different sprains, depending on which fibers are effected, how many and in what location, and how extensive the trauma is. . . even an MRI is only so conclusive when you're looking at a gigantic cluster of muscle fibers. . .

naturally, it's easy to believe that brandon is just milking it, given his extensive history of misbehavior and immaturity-- and i wouldn't be shocked at all to learn that that's exactly the case, although i'm really not sure what his motive would be. . . keeping himself healthy for the next contract? maybe, but it's not like he can do much further damage that's going to linger into the offfseason short of completely tearing the muscle, which isn't all that likely. . .

and it's worth remembering that shanahan had to prod him back into action in TC a few years back when he said that marshall didn't want to play through an injury. . .

OTOH, it's also worth pointing out that brandon not only played but played very well through a hip injury and the nerve damage in his arm. . . aside from that TC incident, he doesn't have a history of missing games due to injury, but he has established that he'll go out and play hurt. . .

the other factor that hasn't been mentioned which needs to be is the new england culture that mcD comes from. . . bill B is notorious for playing games with the injury report, and last year former pats LB ted johnson claimed that he was forced to play through post-concussion symptoms. . . belly has zero loyalty or concern for his players-- ask richard seymour or lawyer milloy! in new england, all individual concerns are sacrificed to the system-- that's the way it is. . .

i can absolutely see the truth going either way, but we'll never know for sure, and anyone who thinks they do is just guessing based on their perceptions of either marshall or mcD. . . .

[NightTrainLayne]

c'mon, man!

where's the "how the **** are WE supposed to know??" option?

seriously, what's the point of just engaging in blatant speculation? i don't believe that anyone besides brandon marshall truly knows the answer to that question. . . even a doctor can't measure how much pain he's in or give a definitive answer as to just how much it's going to restrict his movement. . . guys play through hamstring sprains all the time-- and guys are out for weeks at a time with hamstring sprains just as frequently. . . you can't compare one to another-- there are three different big muscles that make up the hamstring group, which makes possible a huge range of different sprains, depending on which fibers are effected, how many and in what location, and how extensive the trauma is. . . even an MRI is only so conclusive when you're looking at a gigantic cluster of muscle fibers. . .

naturally, it's easy to believe that brandon is just milking it, given his extensive history of misbehavior and immaturity-- and i wouldn't be shocked at all to learn that that's exactly the case, although i'm really not sure what his motive would be. . . keeping himself healthy for the next contract? maybe, but it's not like he can do much further damage that's going to linger into the offfseason short of completely tearing the muscle, which isn't all that likely. . .

and it's worth remembering that shanahan had to prod him back into action in TC a few years back when he said that marshall didn't want to play through an injury. . .

OTOH, it's also worth pointing out that brandon not only played but played very well through a hip injury and the nerve damage in his arm. . . aside from that TC incident, he doesn't have a history of missing games due to injury, but he has established that he'll go out and play hurt. . .

the other factor that hasn't been mentioned which needs to be is the new england culture that mcD comes from. . . bill B is notorious for playing games with the injury report, and last year former pats LB ted johnson claimed that he was forced to play through post-concussion symptoms. . . belly has zero loyalty or concern for his players-- ask richard seymour or lawyer milloy! in new england, all individual concerns are sacrificed to the system-- that's the way it is. . .

i can absolutely see the truth going either way, but we'll never know for sure, and anyone who thinks they do is just guessing based on their perceptions of either marshall or mcD. . . .

Great post, and I think you hashed out the issue from both points of view pretty well.

I'm surprised at the responses so far along the lines of, "Who cares, McD de-activated him anyway." That's a cop-out in my opinion.

Either he's healthy enough to play and he's acting out, or he's not healthy enough to play and McD is in the wrong.

Either way the result is the same. He's not playing Sunday. If he's too hurt to play, then he wouldn't be playing no matter what McDaniels actions are. If he's healthy enough to play, and sand-bagging then he's not playing because McD feels he's not a team player.

The only issue that matters is whether or not his injury is severe enough to keep him out of the game even on a limited basis or not. McD's actions to deactivate him are a response to his report of his injury.

The penultimate issue is whether or not he's really injured seriously or not. That has to be answered first, and that's why the "who cares" response above are totally off-base. Without knowing that, we can't possibly answer whether or not McD's actions are appropriate.

But. .. that being said, we come back to this conundrum. If Marshall really is hurt, then he wouldn't be playing no matter what. The issue becomes McD running down his player unecessarily. If he can play, and is milking it then the blame falls on Marshall's shoulders.

I too have thought back more than once on Marshall's actions before the 2007 season in which he missed a ton of training camp with a hamstring injury and was called out by Shanahan. Eventually Rod Smith prodded him onto the practice field, and lo and behold. . .Marshall "learned" that he could practice with a hamstring tweak or pull afterall.

A lot of folks have taken the tack that if it is on Marshall who is just dogging it, then that McD still made a tactical error in calling him out in the press conference because it hurts Marshall's trade value.

That may be, but I have a hard time faulting someone for being honest. If that's what happened and McD just simply told us the truth about it? Well, I really can't complain. That's why we have press conferences afterall, is to learn the truth about what's going on behind the scenes. And I'm not sure that it really hurts his trade value all that much anyways. With his production there's always a team somewhere who will think that they can fix him, especially if his off-the-field issues are in the past.

But let's keep this in perspective. No matter which side is right or wrong, Brandon would not be playing this weekend. There's no way that it can be logically argued that if McDaniels had handled it differently that Marshall would be out on the field. Marshall's comment yesterday was that as soon as it happened on Wednesday that he knew he'd be out on Sunday. . . .well, if he's that hurt, then he's not playing.

If he's that hurt, it really is a problem that McD is making up stories about his work ethic. That would be one of the lowest, down-right dirtiest things I've ever seen a coach do to a player.

If he's not that hurt, and McD is just telling us the truth? Well, then I can't really fault him. In my book you hardly ever go wrong telling the truth. Sometimes it's hard to do, and sometimes it seems as though you pay a price for being honest, but in the long-run it works out for the best.

Let's just keep it in perspective. Either way, Brandon would not be playing on Sunday. Eddie Royal was scratched today too. .. because he's legitimately hurt as he was last week.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Great post, and I think you hashed out the issue from both points of view pretty well.

I'm surprised at the responses so far along the lines of, "Who cares, McD de-activated him anyway." That's a cop-out in my opinion.

Either he's healthy enough to play and he's acting out, or he's not healthy enough to play and McD is in the wrong.

Either way the result is the same. He's not playing Sunday. If he's too hurt to play, then he wouldn't be playing no matter what McDaniels actions are. If he's healthy enough to play, and sand-bagging then he's not playing because McD feels he's not a team player.

The only issue that matters is whether or not his injury is severe enough to keep him out of the game even on a limited basis or not. McD's actions to deactivate him are a response to his report of his injury.

The penultimate issue is whether or not he's really injured seriously or not. That has to be answered first, and that's why the "who cares" response above are totally off-base. Without knowing that, we can't possibly answer whether or not McD's actions are appropriate.

But. .. that being said, we come back to this conundrum. If Marshall really is hurt, then he wouldn't be playing no matter what. The issue becomes McD running down his player unecessarily. If he can play, and is milking it then the blame falls on Marshall's shoulders.

I too have thought back more than once on Marshall's actions before the 2007 season in which he missed a ton of training camp with a hamstring injury and was called out by Shanahan. Eventually Rod Smith prodded him onto the practice field, and lo and behold. . .Marshall "learned" that he could practice with a hamstring tweak or pull afterall.

A lot of folks have taken the tack that if it is on Marshall who is just dogging it, then that McD still made a tactical error in calling him out in the press conference because it hurts Marshall's trade value.

That may be, but I have a hard time faulting someone for being honest. If that's what happened and McD just simply told us the truth about it? Well, I really can't complain. That's why we have press conferences afterall, is to learn the truth about what's going on behind the scenes. And I'm not sure that it really hurts his trade value all that much anyways. With his production there's always a team somewhere who will think that they can fix him, especially if his off-the-field issues are in the past.

But let's keep this in perspective. No matter which side is right or wrong, Brandon would not be playing this weekend. There's no way that it can be logically argued that if McDaniels had handled it differently that Marshall would be out on the field. Marshall's comment yesterday was that as soon as it happened on Wednesday that he knew he'd be out on Sunday. . . .well, if he's that hurt, then he's not playing.

If he's that hurt, it really is a problem that McD is making up stories about his work ethic. That would be one of the lowest, down-right dirtiest things I've ever seen a coach do to a player.

If he's not that hurt, and McD is just telling us the truth? Well, then I can't really fault him. In my book you hardly ever go wrong telling the truth. Sometimes it's hard to do, and sometimes it seems as though you pay a price for being honest, but in the long-run it works out for the best.

Let's just keep it in perspective. Either way, Brandon would not be playing on Sunday. Eddie Royal was scratched today too. .. because he's legitimately hurt as he was last week.

Good post NTL, but I believe the last injury (the one that required prodding) was a Quad bruise.

[LordTrychon]

Great post, and I think you hashed out the issue from both points of view pretty well.

I'm surprised at the responses so far along the lines of, "Who cares, McD de-activated him anyway." That's a cop-out in my opinion.


I was being sarcastic... in my defense. My point was that if there was even any chance he could play, it's gone now.

If Brandon needed to be slapped down again, so be it... but I don't really like the way it went down. He could have simply been deactivated without being called out.

I don't think necessarily that Marshall is in the right in all this... but McDaniels did not handle it right whether or not that is the case. That's my view on it. It would bother me less if it was the first time.