What Does Jordy Nelson's Injury Mean for Fantasy Owners, Packers?
Nelson, already dealing with a lingering hamstring injury, left Sunday's game in the first half with an ankle injury. The ankle got turned over while Nelson was attempting to make a catch on a low throw from quarterback Aaron Rodgers in the first quarter.
He limped off the field in obvious pain and didn't return.
However, Nelson now has 14 days before the Packers play again (Nov. 18 at Detroit), so there should be necessary healing time available. Green Bay's bye comes in Week 10.
If we can assume the hamstring injury is mostly in the rear view mirror (Nelson started Sunday) and the ankle injury isn't anything serious long-term, Nelson should be ready to return in Week 11.
In a postgame radio interview with Larry McCarren on the Packers Radio Network, head coach Mike McCarthy wasn't able to give a timeline on Nelson's injury. He did confirm, however, that Nelson sprained the ankle.
Recovery timelines vary on ankle sprains depending on severity and the individual.
The injury-plagued Packers haven't had Nelson for the majority of the last two games.
After tweaking his hamstring in practice during the lead up to Green Bay's Week 8 matchup with the Jacksonville Jaguars, Nelson worked out the injury but decided against playing. He didn't practice at all last week, but a pre-game workout Sunday allowed Nelson to be active and start against the Cardinals.
Nelson leads the Packers with 532 receiving yards this season.
If Nelson does miss another week coming out of the bye, expect similar roles for Randall Cobb (played 90 percent of the total snaps the past two weeks) and James Jones, with veteran Donald Driver and undrafted free agent Jarrett Boykin playing in four-receiver sets. Greg Jennings (groin) isn't likely to be ready out of the bye.
Fantasy owners should have another receiving option in mind for Week 11 just in case, but the two weeks should be enough for Nelson to get close enough to 100 percent.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?