Inactive Raji = Stupid HC!!· Page 2

porky88
Veteran Member

15 years ago

I think the Packers felt they could beat the Bengals pretty handily and didn't want to use Raji right now because they didn't think they needed them. Obviously they did. Now I'm not a doctor and this is just a theory, but it seems odd that he didn't play this week.

http://www.row12.com/

Brettizzle
Registered

15 years ago

#12

I really hope the coaches feel that he is ready go next Sunday. As someone else stated I think he needs game time before he plays in the "more important" game against the Vikings. Obviously he shouldn't play if they think he will further injure himself but I'm anxious to see what he can do.

Jermichael Finley

We will be in Indianapolis

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#13

"porky88" wrote:

Having soreness with a limp doesn't seem to odd of a reason to hold him out against a team you feel you could beat without him.

I think it's time some should really get off the ban wagon that Raji is 100% healthy and was still inactive for the game. That theory really holds no ground once so ever.

TheEngineer
Registered

15 years ago

#14

If he's limping, yes keep him out.

I didn't buy into the notion that we didn't need Raji then against the Bengals and I don't buy into the notion that we don't need Raji now against the Rams.

If it's a legitimate injury concern, then by all means do what you can to ensure Raji's long term health/success. If it's arrogance in trying to field a team, then no, I don't agree with that. It seems like the former so I'm happy with the decision.

blank

porky88
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#15

I don't disagree that he's probably not a 100% healthy, but in the NFL, you go at 75% if you can. That's just the way it is. Whether or not Raji would have an impact or not is probably irrelevant because chances are GB still loses, but holding him out because you think you can win is a mistake in my view. You play to win the game regardless of the opponent. You don't play safe.

That's what I think happened. They played safe. I don't have any proof, but I think the Packers are taking it easy on him hoping he can have an impact down the road. It's not a bad decision, but I don't like to think ahead. I play one game at a time.

I'm trying to get into McCarthy's head. Perhaps he looks at Steven Jackson and Adrian Peterson as bigger tests than Cedric Benson. I'm sure he did. He probably felt they could get away without Raji this week so they can have him against arguably the two best backs in the NFC.

http://www.row12.com/

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#16

I don't disagree that he's probably not a 100% healthy, but in the NFL, you go at 75% if you can. That's just the way it is.

"porky88" wrote:

No question about it. I'm under the belief that they felt he'd damage his ankle more by playing on it, since he was limping on it and it was still sore. Do you want to risk losing him for the year in game two or keep him inactive for a few games hoping he heals up fine and can be good to good for the majority of the season including the playoffs?

It seems like a smart decision to not play him UNDER that belief.

If his ankle can NOT be injured further, yes, he should have played and played through the pain.

No one wins the super bowl in week two. No one.

sfalim
Registered

15 years ago

#17

I agree with you Zero, all the while I had the impression that Raji was good to go last week just because he was participating in practice every day, and seemed really eager to start his first NFL game. Then I watched McCarthy's press conference and he said that he did have a talk with Raji before Sunday's game and asked him if he's ready to see the field because he was still limping all over the place. After hearing that, I'd have to say I'm glad he didn't play. I'd much rather wait til he's 100% than force things and risk the injury becoming bigger than what it is, or making it worse than what it is and nag him for the rest of his playing career.

Another thing I was concerned about was that Raji might get pissed off that he's not being allowed to play but I guess that's now unfounded. He, out of everyone else, should be the first to understand where the coaching staff is coming from.

blank

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#18

Raji is not happy that he's not active. At least, from his comments that is what I took from it. He say's he feels ready, but said something like apparently I don't make that decision.

longtimefan
Registered

15 years ago

#19

That's what I think happened. They played safe. I don't have any proof, but I think the Packers are taking it easy on him hoping he can have an impact down the road.

I'm trying to get into McCarthy's head. Perhaps he looks at Steven Jackson and Adrian Peterson as bigger tests than Cedric Benson. I'm sure he did.

He probably felt they could get away without Raji this week so they can have him against arguably the two best backs in the NFC.

"porky88" wrote:

I had those same exact thoughts once I found out he was inactive.

Pack93z
Select Member

15 years ago

#20

No one wins the super bowl in week two. No one.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

If this was a playoff game or a more in comparison a week 17 game to decide our entry into the playoffs... would he play.

Hell yes he would play.

The myth that early season games mean less is overplayed extremely in my book.

At the end of the day, you have 16 chances to impact the postseason.. each one carries a heavy importance.

Granted this was a non conference game so it carries less weight.. but regardless the win is the same.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Martha Careful (20h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me

Martha Careful (20h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not

Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!

beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious

beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere

beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.

beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.

beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...

beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered

wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.

wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.

wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet

beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury

beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State

beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22