Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
The Colts were downplaying the calf issue as "week to week" but this is also a team who downplayed a shoulder issue that cost him a year of his career the same way. Insider reports that I saw from various sources had him missing the first four games of the season minimum and soft tissue injuries like that are notorious for flaring up again and being difficult to manage.
Go read Gronk's speech from the other day where he talks about how the thigh bruise he suffered in the Super Bowl this year was basically the reason he retired. This is a guy who's come back from various back surgeries, etc., but at some point it just wears you down. I don't think it's really appropriate for armchair QBs like us to tell a player when he's given enough of his body or how much pain is an acceptable amount to endure before they do what's best for themselves.
|
I'm not gonna defend the Colts training staff because it really sounds like they've buggered up Luck's injuries in the past. Wouldn't blame him for being frustrated with them or this injury. And I did see Gronk's statement and I feel for that guy too and would have done what he did as well. He's another guy who's got other stuff to do besides football, and looking at the risk/reward calculus for someone who's 30 of continued punishment with increased risk of bad injury vs money in the bank I'd do the same thing. The difference is he retired in March. He knew he was done and he called it, and he's not as important as QB. I can agree and sympathize with Lucks reasoning in all of this but the timing is whack, and yeah I'd be disappointed if I was Colts management or a fan.