I do think its pretty funny they suffered an important injury in a blowout game after the years of running up the score for no reason.

But, this conversation kinda blows. They probably don't have people ready to handle the duties like they do other things. I just wish it woulda happened in a normal play where the starters have no business being in the game.

of course they have someone who can handle the duties. if gronk had gotten hurt in the second quarter would they have been kicking XPs with ten guys? probably not, so put that guy in

many of the backups are on and off the travel squad. so teams can either:

continually work backups in on punt/FG/kickoff/kickoff return teams, so they can do special teams substitutions, and continually bring the 9th lineman up to speed on what to do on PATs and the 2nd linebacker off the scout team on what to do on kick return, etc

or

have set special teams and hope to not be the 1 in 1,000,000 time that a top player gets injured. It just basically never happens and the risk isn't worth the hassle. I will say that it is worth subbing out good WR/RB who actually field the punts/kickoffs, have seen #1 WR catching kickoffs while up 40 points and that is dumb, b/c the risk is higher and the assignment simpler.

Should they carry a backup kicker/punter as well? What if Lawrence Tynes blows his knee out kicking a PAT up 40 for the Giants? What if a top punter is punting up 35-7 and gets roughed and is out for the year? OMG!!

EDIT TO ADD: and who's to say Gronk is even the most meaningful, esp since NE has Hernandez? Maybe they are better off getting their LG or LT or whatever off the PAT team since there is a bigger dropoff from the starter to the backup there. But those guys aren't on fantasy football or known to average fans, so no one would care.

oh cool more bad posting. there are punters and kickers out there who played in the league within the last year or two that could show up for a tryout and be ready to play in your next game with minimal dropoff, not to mention the backup would be unable to do anything else during the game

there is no one who could give you a third of what gronkowski does that isnt already on a team

The risk for injury on PAT is pretty much nil. I would argue if Gronk is so irreplaceable and this is such a disaster, then maybe Gronk shouldn't be on the PAT team at all. Would there be this outrage if he got hurt on the first PAT of the day? Actually, given the love of results-oriented thinking, maybe.

I can't emphasize this enough: it's a Point after touchdown. It is, by a magnitude of 20x or more, the safest play in all of gridiron football. There's probably more risk of injury to taking a knee if your opposing coach is gonna go all Schiano and actually play with 5 minutes left. Moreover, if you sub-in someone who's unfamiliar with blocking, you're risking Gostkowski or Mesko getting injured if someone gets around the corner.

I mean, just by googling for injuries during celebrations, I find Gus Frerotte, Bill Gramatica, some college players (James Potts, Ted Ginn Jr.) etc. who all seriously injured themselves by celebrating. I cannot, for the life of me, find a single instance of a player being injured during a PAT except for Gronk this week. Honest, please help me and find even one other instance.

Are you going to tell your players they can't celebrate if they score? That they can't jump orioles-style (3 guys colliding mid-air)? I've seen coaches slap a player on the helmet as praise which is riskier than this. There are injury possibilities nearly as high-risk from Gronk standing on the sideline and celebrating as there are with him playing the PAT.

If you're so terrified of Gronk getting injured you do far far more for your longterm equity by benching him when you're 17 pt faves at home to start the game than you do by benching him in PATs. This seems crazy though and Pats fans would riot.

Btw the market opened with New England as 7 pt favorites at NYJ right as the Indy game ended. When it was announced Gronk would be out, the line plummeted all the way to NE -6. Such a horrible loss for the Pats, how could they take such a risk?

any added risk to a player who is worth a full point on the spread to gain absolutely nothing is silly

and it is a pretty good argument that your second most valuable player should not be on the pat team unless for some reason you know you convert at a higher rate with him in there

Yah except like nobody ever has been to a DMB concert and hated it AFAIK. Reason why they are the highest grossing tour of the past decade.

Gronk playing PATs in a blowout is pretty clearly stupid, taking him out for a random scrub safety is worth like what, .000000000001 points of equity? Gotta be less than injury equity.

I'd be excited just knowing I didn't have to go, and I could stay home to watch Gronk in team apparel on the sideline. JK I try not to watch the Patriots.

this is an argument against Gronk playing PATs, not playing PATs in blowouts.

Equity in blowouts on a player playing in a play is much less than a close game. The equity difference might even be in favor of him blocking PATs if other team is trying to tie it.

This is the 'obviously stupid' thread, not the 'something that no one ever gave a second of thought to until a freak injury happened' thread.

Jesus you should be banned for such nittery.

We should just be able to call games. Put mercy rules in place.

Lol @ chim getting butthurt bout running it up. Why did John Fox leave Peyton in up 30 in the 4th vs Oakland? Gahhh I wish injuries upon such fools!

Not even butthurt.. I don't have any issue with it.

It'd just be really hilarious if someone got a serious injury because of it.

And Peyton being in the game up 30 in the 4th is absolutely ******ed. I said that then too.

In fact, Peyton being in the game at his importance/age/after his injury is far more ******ed than pretty much any other decision in regards to blowouts.

The biggest mistake coaches make is not pulling star players in blowouts. I criticized Harbaugh a few weeks back for having Frank Gore still in late game in a blowout in the decline safety game. He's like 50 in running back years. What the hell was he still doing in the game?

I'm not going to ruin the thread by posting every time a coach does this, because it happens every week, by every team and it's out of control. It's better to post it when a player is injured because of it to limit the number of posts itt in relation to this epidemic.

The league is worried about player safety especially with it's quarterbacks. Why is Tom Brady still in up 20+ vs the Bills with 5 minutes left? That is inexcusable. Take the stat incentives out of player contracts and just pay them the bonus if that has something to do with this. When I'm ****ting in diapers when I'm 90, I'm not going to say Tom Brady was the best because he had 598 touchdown passes. I'll know he was the best because I watched him play.

Runningback's would average more than 6 seasons if they weren't run into the grave in meaningless spots in which the game is over or the team's season is over

I was talking more about having starters on the PAT team specifically and the lengthy back and forth over it. There's only 46 spots on the gameday roster in the NFL, it's not like there's tons of extra bodies just floating around to play tight end just for those situations

Oh. Yeah I don't blame BB for that. Such a fluke injury, but it's still a good time to point out him having key players in late in a blowout prior to that

Its extremely unlikely that leaving star players in too long is "the biggest mistake coaches make."

Bingo. I doubt there were three people total anywhere who had a single thing to say about starters still being in the game PRIOR to the injury. Nobody was sitting on their couch yelling at the TV "HEY WHY IS GRONK STILL IN, HE COULD GET HURT AND THE GAME IS ALREADY IN HAND, GET HIM OUT". Entire thing is nothing but a classic second-guess.

Saints won games in 2011 by 55, 29, 28, 25, and 22.

Chase Daniel 5 passing attempts the entire season.

Where was the outrage over Brees being in these games late?

I'd guess all over the Saints team threads, probably frequent but less so in the gameday threads

Just like when Pats went 18-1, there were probably 20-30 posts a week rooting for a 4th Q injury to punish BB for running up score and leaving starters in way too long

It really weakens your point when these posts and complaints actually ARE MADE ALL THE TIME

This whole argument is terrible since it's just a debate over whether you can round a marginal amount of EV to 0, but calling the complaining "results-oriented thinking" might be the worst posting of the bunch. It's really obvious that people arguing against Gronk being in would also be against Brees being in that situation. "Where was the outrage"? Do you want them to get pitchforks and storm on the Capitol?