Injury Report: Vikings at Packers
by Brandon on Oct 23, 2010 11:09 AM CDT
in Green Bay Packers News
Email
PrintThe latest injury news for the Green Bay Packers, according to the Journal-Sentinel, is that rookie 2nd round DE Mike Neal is probably out for the season with a shoulder injury. Neal is not someone I've read having a history of injuries (unlike DE Justin Harrell). The above linked article also brought up LB Brady Poppinga, who is the latest Packer to have surgery, but it was arthroscopic (less invasive) and they could reasonable expect him back later this season.
The complete injury report from Packers.com is listed after the jump. As far as I've read, everyone listed as probable will play on Sunday.
LB Brandon Chillar and LB Clay Matthews are both listed as questionable, but the latest word from Mike McCarthy was that both will play on Sunday, barring any setback this weekend. The same appears to hold true for DE Ryan Pickett, though (very) big guys and ankle injuries often take a while to heal. RT Mark Tauscher could play, but he appears to be having trouble adjusting to playing with a shoulder harness.
The last player listed is rookie OL Marshall Newhouse, who was injured during practice this week. He hasn't been active roster all season, so is absence shouldn't cause any problem on Sunday.
For the Vikings, they've got 12 players listed, but the only player out is starting S Husain Abdullah, who is out with a concussion. The Vikings are expected to give 2nd year S Jamarca Sanford his 2nd career start, but I don't know if that's someone the Packers can beat. They previously lost CB Cedric Griffin for the season with a torn ACL after their game against the Jets, so their secondary has had a bad couple of weeks.
| Player | Pos. | Injury | Friday Participation | Friday Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chillar, Brandon | LB | Shoulder | Full Participation | Questionable |
| Clifton, Chad | T | Knee | Did Not Participate | Probable |
| Collins, Nick | S | Knee | Full Participation | Probable |
| Driver, Donald | WR | Quadricep | Limited Participation | Probable |
| Hawk, A.J. | LB | Groin | Limited Participation | Probable |
| Jenkins, Cullen | DE | Hand | Full Participation | Probable |
| Matthews, Clay | LB | Hamstring | Limited Participation | Questionable |
| Neal, Mike | DE | Shoulder | Out | Out |
| Newhouse, Marshall | G/T | Back | Did Not Participate | Doubtful |
| Pickett, Ryan | DE/NT | Ankle | Limited Participation | Questionable |
| Poppinga, Brady | LB | Knee | Out | Out |
| Tauscher, Mark | T | Shoulder | Limited Participation | Questionable |
| Woodson, Charles | CB | Toe | Did Not Participate | Probable |
33 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Man...
slams head on keyboard akseriutskgdfja;snlkxcjhjgitsf. Another season-ender. Sheesh.
Mike Neal. The kid looked so promising.
All the best to him and see him next year.
Thank goodness this team isn't a horse
or they’d shoot it.
It’s really disappointing to have injuries to the young players. It can really hurt their development. Our poor D-line is gonna be so run down by the end of the year.
Also, it’s too bad they don’t offer compensatory draft picks for injuries.
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 23, 2010 11:52 AM CDT reply actions
Well, that blows.
The only good thing to be said is that none of our starters have had season-enders. [knock, knock] In ‘08, we had 2 (off the top of my head) of the main guys that we were counting on (Jenkins & KGB) go down. …after which we couldn’t stop the run at all in the 4th quarter.
In our current case, we’ve lost practically all of our depth. But, if we get guys who are just warm bodies to spell Jenkins, Raji and Pickett to keep them fresh for the end of the game, we could still be okay. …not good, of course, but it might not leave the glaring hole that a rash of D-line injuries often does. That is, a GM can find something close to a Mike Neal on the wire or on somebody else’s practice squad, whereas you can’t find a Raji or a Jenkins.
Barnett? Burnett? Finley?
Aren’t they considered starters?
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 23, 2010 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, I was talking specifically about the d-line.
But, if you want to talk about those other guys… I think MLB is where the biggest dropoff will be. Bishop should be fine against the run, but won’t have Barnett’s value against the pass. We can scheme to make up for that, though. …at least somewhat.
As for Burnett… Is there really much of a dropoff between him and the newly-aquired Smith? They’re both ball-hawks who would have lapses when it comes to fitting into the defense as a whole (Burnett because he was a rookie, Smith because that’s just who he is).
Finley is the biggest dropoff over his replacement. But, a couple points there…
a) You could easily make the argument that the offense was revolving around him too much, so that Jennings especially was getting hidden. Not that you’d ever choose to take a guy with Finley’s talents off the field, but just saying that there’s also an upside to this turn of events.
b) We came into the season with 4 pretty good TEs. Between Quarless, Crabtree, and eventually Donald Lee (who can take all the time he needs to come back strong, since we have plenty of depth and therefore don’t need to rush him), I think we’ll be fine at that position. Maybe we won’t have the star-power to strike fear into opposing defensive coordinators on Saturday nights, but that’s okay. Sometimes it’s better to fly under the radar.
The other big injury(s) are our offensive tackles. Again, we’d have plenty of depth to get by at those positions if the coaching staff would pull their heads out of their collective ace. They should be using Bulaga exclusively at LT, spelling Clifton and keeping him fresh (or just pulling him and giving him weeks off when he starts to break down), and use Lang to replace Tausch as long as he’s hurt.
It drives me absolutely nuts that they’re musical-chairing Bulaga. (GRR!) I could go on a 4-page rant here, but I’ll save my spleen. …except to say that the only conceivable reason I can think of for moving Bulaga to the right side the way they did is that they’re trying to showcase their 1st-round pick, thereby making themselves look good. I know that I, for one, would be alot more impressed if they were to put him (and the team) in the best position to succeed. …which would be the opposite of what they’re currently doing.
by Curly Lambeau on Oct 23, 2010 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Save your spleen!
I don’t want to upset your humours and turn you all bilious . . .
As long as Finley doesn’t have any permanent loss of speed/power/agility/quickness I agree, his injury is probably the least disconcerting. I think Quarless has a lot of potential and we could have a great 2 TE attack next year.
However, I think Burnett is a big loss because his development could really be derailed by this injury, besides the potential of losing something in his physical talents. Safeties need playing time to improve. We all remember how Sharper’s and Collins’ struggles when they were developing. I think he probably would have improved each week and he definitely had the big-play potential to negate some errors.
Thus far, Bishop has looked all right in Barnett’s absence. Another guy who can make some big plays but might need time to become more consistent.
I really think Neal’s injury will hurt, though. We’re already lacking depth on the line and you need to keep those guys fresh. I think that has probably been a factor in their 4th quarter struggles.
Like the idea of getting Lang more PT, but hasn’t he been slowed by that wrist injury? The Packers need to make quicker decisions on their talent: lots of the guys they’ve drafted have potential, but if they’re not showing marked improvement after a year or two they need to move on (Barbre, Colledge).
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 23, 2010 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions
EXACTLY!!!!!
I agree 100%. I also agree with the Bulaga/Lang comments. Keep them at the positons they belong at, the positions that they had in OTA’s, training camp and now practice. That is the future for our entire O-line.
MM stated at the beginning of the year that their focus this year would be to leave players at the positions they practiced at, NO MORE MUSICAL CHAIRS!!!
Besides, Lang played very well at RT as an injury replacement last year. Put the future in place now, the injuries warrant it.
by muskyhunter66 on Oct 23, 2010 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Lang
Missed the entire offseason of training and conditioning, not to mention all the technique work that goes on and helps the rookies soo much going into their 2nd season! You just can’t underestimate how much that set Langs development back!!! Bulaga is leaps and bounds ahead of Lang right now in both talent and technique! So tired of people crying that the backups have to play multiple positions! THats the way it is on gameday. Backups MUST be able to play multiple positions!
Its a positive in Bulagas development that he is getting playing time!! I know everything is flip-flopped by switching sides, but Bulaga needs experience to get better at picking up stunts and twists! Just flipping the sides isn’t a big deal!! Get over it already!!!
You've been Stroh'd!!!
If Bulaga had to go into a game out-of-position because he was the only backup at that position, your argument might hold water. But he started the last game at RT. …and, anyway, Lang was an active backup on both days that Bulaga played at RT.
And if Lang isn’t playing because of injury, then why’s he filling in on the d-line? Why is he active at all? Fact is, they’re just in a rush to get Bulaga on the field no matter what position it’s at.
MM has bemoaned the necessity of playing musical chairs with the o-line for years now, and he’s had excuses why he had to do it in the past. But now we’ve got capable backups at each of the three positions that they’ve had Bulaga prepping for.
by Curly Lambeau on Oct 23, 2010 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions
I understand he started
Clearly the Packers feel that Bulaga is a much better option than Lang, who as I mentioned lost alot of really valuable teaching by missing all the OTA’s and mini-camps! Bulaga is just much better than Lang and the flip to RT isn’t going to hurt his development as a LT nearly as much as the experience of playing is going to help him!
Pretty easy when you look at facts instead of complaining ad nuaseum…
You've been Stroh'd!!!
I got a fact for you to look at.
If Lang is so lacking in value, then why has he been active every game? You can’t have it both ways. He’s either hurt or he isn’t.
The purpose of having game-day active o-linemen is to have a couple guys who back up multiple positions. I understand that. But you tell me, what position is Lang backing up right now? The fact is that they’ve got Bulaga backing up at least three o-line positions, and those are the exact same positions that Lang has played in the past! …and I don’t care how much development Lang has lost in your little imagination there (I mean, you talk about it as if you know something), but you can’t tell me that Lang would do worse than Bulaga did last game at RT. So, imaginary development losses aside, the flipping around is CLEARLY hurting the team.
And if flipping out of the position that one has played since forever is so easy, then I hereby ask you to switch to being a commenter who doesn’t insult people needlessly and make stupid points.
by Curly Lambeau on Oct 23, 2010 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions
Like I said...
Clearly the Packers feel Bulaga is a much better option than Lang! Even if Lang has played them in the past! If thats the case then I want my best players on the field, rather than a lesser option even if its on a different side! And if it gets Bulaga experience he needs to take over at LT next year instead of the year after… So be it.
I don’t know where Lang has been practicing either. Do you? Last I heard he’s been practicing at OG not OT. If Lang were the best option at RT he would be playing there right now. No questions asked! But he’s NOT, telling me that Bulaga is just flat out a better player! Whether its LT, LG or RT, I don’t care… Better player plays!
You've been Stroh'd!!!
Not so fast...
This is the same coaching staff that thought they had something in Allen Barbre. They seem to stick with their high draft picks a lot longer (save face?).
I’m not sure that Lang would have been any better against Cameron Wake, a really is a good young OLB. But if Ray Edwards starts abusing Bulaga, I bet Lang comes in. Otherise Rodgers rhythm will be screwed up and we’ll be screwed.
Lang and Bulaga
It’s to my understanding that Bulaga has been getting the majority if not all reps at RT lately, as Lang has been playing OG. Not to mention the extensive time Lang has missed. Bulaga is the better OT. That much is clear. He has a lot of work to do, and I feel he’s better at LT, but at RT, I prefer Bulaga over Lang.
Yes, the team does value higher draft picks over lower ones. What team doesn’t? I like Lang, but because Bulaga has been working at RT more than Lang lately, I want Bulaga to play. I want the best players on the field. Not to mention that Bulaga holds more value in our future compared to Lang, I want Bulaga to be ready when he becomes our starting LT.
I agree with you though, if Bulaga struggles against Edwards, we should pull him in favor of Lang. I hope McCarthy feels the same way about that. Our most prized offensive lineman should not be sitting on the bench though when he has a chance to play.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Well stated...
I agree with this, and that, and this and this!
Even though he struggled, Bulaga ain’t no Barbre. When he came in for Clifton in the Buffalo game (?), at his natural LT position, he did real well. Last game he struggled, but he’ll be a good one.
by PackFaninFL on Oct 24, 2010 12:07 AM CDT up reply actions
Save face?
I don’t think they try to save face at all. I think they give them every opportunity to succeed. Last year they didn’t have many other options until Tauscher came back. Could have went to Lang, but he was a rookie and Barbre was a 3rd year player. In hindsight that might have been better, but its always a stretch that a rookie 4th rd pick is going to be better than a 3rd yr 4th rd pick.
You've been Stroh'd!!!
9 sentences in a row ending in exclamation points. 15 total exclamation points in the 9 sentences. You are truly the Joe DiMaggio of exclamation points. Thank you for not typing in all caps.
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 23, 2010 8:08 PM CDT up reply actions
no, thats you
a troll. flagged
4 hours 5 minutes? Is that all? Buehrle coulda pitched three CGs and the bottom of the 14th in Houston by then. FTMFYITA! - RWShow
geez...
the football gods have frowned upon Green Bay Packers fans this fall. WHAT THE…?!
Was it all the pre-season gloating? The necessity of the ancilliary fan base to have thier otherwise-unloyal fans keep the faith? FREEMASONS?!?!?! MAYANS?!?!?!
My kingdom for a consecutive three weeks without season ending injuries this season.
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi
For that to happen
you might need to include the bye week.
And maybe hope the Packers don’t practice that week either.
by I voted for Kodos on Oct 23, 2010 8:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Injuries
The loss of Mike Neal hurts. At least we know what Neal is capable of. I feel comfortable starting Neal next year if Jenkins doesn’t want to resign with GB. I really like Neal. He is so explosive off the line and very strong. Once he gains more experience, I think he’ll eventually be one of the best 3-4 DE’s in the NFL. That’s how confident I am in him. It may not be anytime soon, but eventually. I just hope he has a speedy recovery and will be ready to go next year without any problems.
The loss of Nick Barnett obviously hurts a lot. At least we get more looks on Desmond Bishop. He seems to be improving in pass coverage and we know what he’s capable of in stopping the run. It’s getting clear that he is quickly becoming a better player than AJ Hawk. By the end of the season, we will know for sure. Bishop’s improvement in pass coverage must continue though. It’s nice to know Chillar will be back to help in the Nickel Package, and I prefer Bishop in there over Hawk as the other ILB.
We need Quarless to keep improving. I’m not sure if he has been improving or not. I just hope he plays to his potential, because the combination of him and Finley next year could be frightening to opponents! That of course is in assumption that Quarless improves every week.
The plus side is we have seen them play. Hopefully for the ones still on the field, they can continue to get better with the extra reps. It’s just too bad we have had so many injuries.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
well that blows
Oz on Swish HR celeb: "That's the way he is. Good for him, enjoy it. I wish he could do it for me, he was a very horseshit player for me.''
Offensive Line
I won’t pretend to know who should be starting at RT with Tauscher out but it does seem like the OL has been mismanaged under MM, lots of saying one thing and doing another.
It has surprised me how well the D has played with all the injuries I give Dom a lot of credit having the backups ready to play. Hopefully at least one of the backup DL can step up and contribute in a significant way.
what about harris and bigby?
have you heard if they are going to play?
See my post
They weren’t activated, no roster changes were made by the close of league business yesterday.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
Related FanShots on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Juron Criner, WR, Oakland Raiders
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Gino Gradkowski, C/G, Baltimore Ravens
- Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring sold for $230K; Osi Umenyiora was not the buyer
- Tanier’s Team Reviews: The Kansas City Chiefs, via Todd Haley
- Video: Calvin Johnson hits it out of the park during Tigers batting practice
