(09-16-2016, 03:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But that estimate was made based on guesses by doctors that did not know the details of the surgery.

When they first said he would miss the opener I figured he would miss 2 or 3 games.  Now they say he is a "few weeks away" I am guessing he will be back for game 5 (Oct 9 at Dal).  That is still 2 games quicker than we could have gotten him off of PUP.

I am really concerned by Eifert.  When he is healthy he is one of the best TEs in the league.  His numbers are a little lower than some other elite TEs because the Bengals had such good WRs, but Eifert is as skilled as any of the elite TEs.  But he is fragile.  Doesn't mean he is soft, just for some reason some players are more injury prone than others.

I still cannot concede that Eifert is injury prone, all of his injuries seem to be accidental...

The broken arm, the concussion by Mike Mitchell and now this Probowl ankle injury.

Gronk has missed tons of games as well and nobody calls him injury prone.

(09-16-2016, 03:53 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I still cannot concede that Eifert is injury prone, all of his injuries seem to be accidental...

The broken arm, the concussion by Mike Mitchell and now this Probowl ankle injury.

Gronk has missed tons of games as well and nobody calls him injury prone.

Lol not sure what you mean by this Nate, aren't all injuries accidental?

I think you mean freak accidents. The elbow one was for sure, man, I just remember thinking "done for the season" when I saw that moon crater.

(09-16-2016, 03:56 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Lol not sure what you mean by this Nate, aren't all injuries accidental?

I think you mean freak accidents. The elbow one was for sure, man, I just remember thinking "done for the season" when I saw that moon crater.

Thats what i mean, freak accidents, except the intentional targeting dirty Mitchell hit.

(09-16-2016, 03:53 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I still cannot concede that Eifert is injury prone, all of his injuries seem to be accidental...

The broken arm, the concussion by Mike Mitchell and now this Probowl ankle injury.

Gronk has missed tons of games as well and nobody calls him injury prone.

You really cannot compare Gronk and Eifert.  Eifert is entering his fourth NFL season and has missed 20 games, with at least 2-3 more to come.  Gronk is entering his seventh NFL season and has missed 17.  Gronk has three more seasons and has missed less games.

(09-16-2016, 03:53 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I still cannot concede that Eifert is injury prone, all of his injuries seem to be accidental...

The broken arm, the concussion by Mike Mitchell and now this Probowl ankle injury.

Gronk has missed tons of games as well and nobody calls him injury prone.

(09-16-2016, 04:26 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: You really cannot compare Gronk and Eifert.  Eifert is entering his fourth NFL season and has missed 20 games, with at least 2-3 more to come.  Gronk is entering his seventh NFL season and has missed 17.  Gronk has three more seasons and has missed less games.

Yup, Gronk actually played the first 42 games of his career without missing one. Eifert is almost guaranteed to not even play 42 games in his first four years.

You missed a couple of injuries though, Nate. In 2014 he was actually already injured before he dislocated his elbow. He had a shoulder injury that he planned on trying to play through and just get surgery in the offseason for, but had missed preseason stuff because of. When the elbow injury happened, he went ahead and got surgery on both the elbow and the shoulder.

People also forget that he had just come back from a neck injury that made him miss a week when he got concussed in that Steelers game.


So... Shoulder, Elbow, Neck, Concussion, Ankle.

Plus I believe some kind of knee issue that made him miss a game his rookie year. Or was it another neck thing? Don't recall, but he missed a game injured that year too.

That's injury prone, man. He's the TE version of Chris Perry or Bob Sanders.

We will be fine without him. On a related note the entire Steelers offense is going to crumble without Heaff Miller. Book it!

(09-16-2016, 02:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You and others do realize if Eifert comes back even in week 6, the Bengals made the right move. 1 week is better than none. 2 weeks is much better than 1 week.

The only bad decision would be if he can't play until 7th game. Let's give it time, we have just played 1 game. Just thought I would add some more public school math into the equation.

AKA Common Core math

(09-16-2016, 03:37 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Just a reminder... if he misses 6 games this year, he ties Bob Sanders for games missed at this point in their careers.

Key difference is Eifert is getting hit, instead of getting hurt trying to hit someone.

(09-15-2016, 12:38 PM)coachmcneil71 Wrote: Agree. I will say that it's a little frustrating that he waited so long to address an injury that happened in the PB. CJ played well against the Jets.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(09-15-2016, 10:08 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Boy, im telling you, this injury is going to linger.

Wait, did you just say that an injury that hasn't healed in the past 8 months is going to linger?  The thing with Eifert isn't just how often he is injured, but now he's shown the amazing ability to have a narrative where his injury has been "no big deal" for about as long as it takes players to rehab from having body parts destroyed.  Wacky.  Only in my most negative and bitter quips could I have predicted a sprained ankle in the Pro Bowl would threaten half of the next regular season.

(09-17-2016, 01:38 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Wait, did you just say that an injury that hasn't healed in the past 8 months is going to linger?  The thing with Eifert isn't just how often he is injured, but now he's shown the amazing ability to have a narrative where his injury has been "no big deal" for about as long as it takes players to rehab from having body parts destroyed.  Wacky.  Only in my most negative and bitter quips could I have predicted a sprained ankle in the Pro Bowl would threaten half of the next regular season.

If I had to guess, the reason for crap like that would probably be that telling your fan base that your all pro tight end will miss half of the next year doesn't exactly help ticket sales.

You know, IMHO, you can't really talk about this whole situation without addressing the elephant in the room. How the hell do you wait 5 months after the initial injury before deciding to have surgery? How did that happen, and whose call was it, or what doctors and advisors were involved in the decision to delay it?

He was injured in January. January 31st to be exact. He had the surgery at the end of May. What gives?

Now, I'm not saying it was the team doctor(s) that made the call. Nor am I saying the decision was more in the hands of the organization. For all I know, it was Tyler's decision and/or he sought advice from people outside the franchise. Maybe a specialist, that he himself hired, was the one to recommend trying to go without going under the knife. But someone, or maybe a collective group of people, decided that he shouldn't have surgery. Either he didn't need it, or that it could wait. I'd like to know what went into that thought process. And I would also like to know what exactly it took 5 months before they could determine that it wasn't working.

And on top of that, the recovery time reported when he had the surgery was 3 months. They initially gave him a projected time-table of 3 months, which put back in pads by August. Obviously that hasn't happened either. And it's looking more and more like September is out of the question to.

It all just seems so strange. Had he had the surgery earlier, even a couple a months after the injury, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Someone dropped the ball here big time. I mean, yeah I know you can't predict how injuries heal, and how players respond, but waiting 5 months just seems beyond ridiculous.

Oh well, I hope he's back soon.

(09-15-2016, 10:50 AM)Antares Wrote: BTW. is there a waiting required before a new member can begin a thread (no I did not read all the rules) Thanks.

Try to start one and fire away if it lets you.  I think we can always use some new voices.  And I don't think being new precludes from having something interesting to say, that is deserving of it's own thread.  And on the flip side, I don't having a million posts prevents you from posting nonsense either.  Hell, I started a new thread three days in a row about trading for Bigfoot, and things of the sort, just to mock another member. (Just to clarify, some idiot kept starting stupid threads about trading for OSU players)

Welcome aboard!  

I amreally encouraged to hear 15 more pounds of muscle=less injuries

(09-17-2016, 07:57 AM)Jpoore Wrote: I amreally encouraged to hear 15 more pounds of muscle=less injuries

But is this weight new muscle, or bringing him back to the size he already was?

I've seen the report, and it really doesn't specify.  He had a long layoff, so he definitely wasn't working out the same as he was before the injury.  This could very well be him getting back to playing weight.  (Think of Kaepernick and how much mass he has lost in his injury downtime).

(09-15-2016, 10:50 AM)Antares Wrote: I'm brand spanking new here. First reply.

Eiffert is a great player. But typically a player who begins his career constantly, hurt is usually out of the league within a few years. I don't expect to se him around much longer. Hope for the best. We shall see.

BTW. is there a waiting required before a new member can begin a thread (no I did not read all the rules) Thanks.

No big deal to me if you post new threads or even become a mod on day one. I don't necessarily agree with your assessment of Eifert but you're entitled to your opinion.
TE's seem to be injured about the same rate as running backs. It's just one of those positions that put bodies at risk, blocking, catching passes, etc.
Think about it..They're receivers that double as offensive linemen. Try to imagine most receivers blocking beside Wittworth.. Easy to get injured if you ask me. (not that anyone is asking)
Anyway, welcome to the jungle..

(09-15-2016, 10:50 AM)Antares Wrote: I'm brand spanking new here. First reply.

Eiffert is a great player. But typically a player who begins his career constantly, hurt is usually out of the league within a few years. I don't expect to se him around much longer. Hope for the best. We shall see.

BTW. is there a waiting required before a new member can begin a thread (no I did not read all the rules) Thanks.

Sharpen your writing skills first, before people start thinking your a steelers fan.

The main thing about the Eifert injury that is scoff-worthy involves the incremental pushing back of his return date and/or the severity of the injury. It reminds me of that one friend we all know that you lent some small amount of money and he keeps reminding how he's TOTALLY going to be 10000% set to pay you back next week and then next week comes and there is some SUPER SURPRISING SETBACK dude and he's TOTALLY going to be 1000000000% ready to pay you next week.

Eventually it goes on until you don't want to hear any more of these amazing details and stories and excuses and you write it off as a loss until the money is actually in your hand. I realize Eifert is going to play football again some day, but after this "totally no big deal" injury in January kept him out of training camp activities I decided to believe nothing until I see him on the field.

(09-17-2016, 03:00 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: You know, IMHO, you can't really talk about this whole situation without addressing the elephant in the room. How the hell do you wait 5 months after the initial injury before deciding to have surgery? How did that happen, and whose call was it, or what doctors and advisors were involved in the decision to delay it?

He was injured in January. January 31st to be exact. He had the surgery at the end of May. What gives?

Now, I'm not saying it was the team doctor(s) that made the call. Nor am I saying the decision was more in the hands of the organization. For all I know, it was Tyler's decision and/or he sought advice from people outside the franchise. Maybe a specialist, that he himself hired, was the one to recommend trying to go without going under the knife. But someone, or maybe a collective group of people, decided that he shouldn't have surgery. Either he didn't need it, or that it could wait. I'd like to know what went into that thought process. And I would also like to know what exactly it took 5 months before they could determine that it wasn't working.

And on top of that, the recovery time reported when he had the surgery was 3 months. They initially gave him a projected time-table of 3 months, which put back in pads by August. Obviously that hasn't happened either. And it's looking more and more like September is out of the question to.

It all just seems so strange. Had he had the surgery earlier, even a couple a months after the injury, we wouldn't even be talking about this. Someone dropped the ball here big time. I mean, yeah I know you can't predict how injuries heal, and how players respond, but waiting 5 months just seems beyond ridiculous.

Oh well, I hope he's back soon.

This was addressed back in August, the team is not to blame.

(09-17-2016, 12:16 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: This was addressed back in August, the team is not to blame.

No.  Eifert and whoever is counseling him on his healthcare decisions.   The calendar is an easy reference point for deciding when to cave for surgery.  You do the math based upon when you want to be up and playing.   He was at least 3 weeks to a month too late.

Sure no one wants to have an unnecessary surgery.  But he had plenty of time to gauge how things were going.

Poor decision.  They only thing that will make it worse is rushing him back too soon.