Skip to content

Jonathan Vilma practices, Jimmy Graham doesn’t

File photo of Panthers' Newton being hit by Saints' Vilma during an NFL football game in Charlotte Reuters

We were told on Tuesday that Saints tight end Jimmy Graham should be able to play on Sunday despite an ankle injury suffered during a Week Five win over the Chargers.  While that may indeed be the case, Graham wasn’t well enough to practice on Wednesday.

Mike Triplette of the New Orleans Times-Picayune reports that Graham didn’t practice on Wednesday, and that he looks to be “very questionable” for Sunday at Tampa.  Double-interim head coach Aaron Kromer declined to say whether Graham has a low or high ankle sprain, mentioning only that Graham “looked good” and that he was “able to run around a little.”

One guy who did practice but who probably won’t play this weekend is linebacker Jonathan Vilma.  The veteran defensive leader exited the Physically Unable to Perform list with a lingering knee injury.  Kromer, per Triplett, also used the “looked good” label for Vilma.

So far the Saints haven’t looked good.  They’ll get a chance to look better against the Bucs.  Either way, interim coach Joe Vitt returns to the sideline next week after his six-game suspension ends.

Permalink 18 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: New Orleans Saints, Rumor Mill, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Top Stories
18 Responses to “Jonathan Vilma practices, Jimmy Graham doesn’t”
  1. crush1128 says: Oct 17, 2012 3:27 PM

    would love to see vilma play and piss goodell off

  2. wte1 says: Oct 17, 2012 3:34 PM

    Just wondering, could the NFL fine the Saints for letting Vilma practice when he’s technically suspended?

  3. johnmaddenslovechild says: Oct 17, 2012 3:46 PM

    Not many people realize this but its not like the saints destroy the bucs twice a year, every year. I’m no cosmetologist but pretty sure the bucs beat em the last couple of times they’ve played.

  4. vacman9100 says: Oct 17, 2012 3:51 PM

    Vilma is suspended ….. however he has filed an appeal…. until his appeal is denied the suspension is put on a delay.
    He has also filed a court case to block the suspension. The court will probably help Vilma until he decides to “retire”.
    Then like many criminals he will “get away” without punishment.

  5. frojo112963 says: Oct 17, 2012 3:56 PM

    wte1 says: Oct 17, 2012 3:34 PM

    Just wondering, could the NFL fine the Saints for letting Vilma practice when he’s technically suspended?

    Just like anyone else who gets suspended, it is on hold until the appeals process is done. That is why Will Smith has been able to practice and play even though he is “suspended”. No different for Vilma.

  6. phreakin says: Oct 17, 2012 3:56 PM

    He’s “technically” not suspended until the appeal is heard

  7. goodolebaghead says: Oct 17, 2012 4:01 PM

    As a Saints fan, I would rather see Jimmy sit for a game or two and get that ankle fully healed. We can manage a game without him, and it’s not like the season matters anymore anyway. Keep the guy healthy!

  8. wte1 says: Oct 17, 2012 4:03 PM

    Thanks guys. Just confused. He’s suspended, not suspended, suspended again, still suing.

  9. silentcount says: Oct 17, 2012 4:47 PM

    There’s no way Vilma did anything to deserve a year’s suspension. Therefore, he should play. Also, Sean Payton should be coaching, because he did nothing to deserve a year’s suspension, either.

  10. goodolebaghead says: Oct 17, 2012 4:51 PM

    johnmaddenslovechild says:
    Oct 17, 2012 3:46 PM
    Not many people realize this but its not like the saints destroy the bucs twice a year, every year. I’m no cosmetologist but pretty sure the bucs beat em the last couple of times they’ve played.
    **************************************
    Not to be confused with Cosmology.

  11. hehateme2 says: Oct 17, 2012 5:53 PM

    There is a little something called the truth that is getting in the way there silentcount…

  12. hor2012 says: Oct 17, 2012 5:59 PM

    Just for the record the saints swept to bucks last year

  13. bathroomben7 says: Oct 17, 2012 6:18 PM

    I don’t know why Vilma even wants to come back, besides that he thinks he’s somehow sticking it to people by returning. But he has to know that every player in league is probably going to try to cheap shot him, punch his balls in a pile or take him out. That and the fact that he was mediocre at best in his “prime” and on a team where you could be a standout defensive player simply by not being horrible.

  14. gtodriver says: Oct 17, 2012 8:03 PM

    hor2012 says:

    Just for the record the saints swept to bucks last year

    ________________________

    Um, earth to hor2012…

    Last year, 2011, the Saints lost to the Bucs on January 2nd and October 16th.

    The Saints did win the game on Nobember 6th.

    So for the calendar year 2011 – the Saints had a losing record to the Bucs.

  15. gtodriver says: Oct 17, 2012 8:15 PM

    “One guy who did practice but who probably won’t play this weekend is linebacker Jonathan Vilma.”

    It will be too funny to see him off the PUP list and still not in uniform…

    Then next week his suspension appeal is turned down.

    Judge Berrigan has already stated that Vilma has admitted to her that he participated in a bounty program.

    Goodell has reduced Vilma’s suspension.

    So I expect that the Honorable Judge Berrigan will quickly dismiss Vilma’s case and we can finally be done with his theatrics…

  16. williambrasky says: Oct 17, 2012 8:50 PM

    Judge Berrigan never said such a thing. That is complete nonsense. There was an admittance to a pay for performance program, but that is nothing new. No one has denied that.

  17. williambrasky says: Oct 17, 2012 10:53 PM

    In review of the discussion from the July 10th hearing, there was an instance where Judge Berrigan mentioned that she felt that “cart offs” were bounties, allowing the lawyers to discuss. Shortly after hearing Ginsberg’s comments, she tells Vilma that she would like to rule in his favor, but tells him that he has to exhaust all appeals. Berrigan has never released a formal decision on the meaning of “cart off,” but only stated her pre-discussion opinion of the meaning. She never alluded back to the topic.

    It’s quite a stretch to say that “stated that Vilma has admitted to her that he participated in a bounty program” when there was never even a mention of PFP or whether it defines as a “bounty.”

    If take a quotation out of context, change key wording, and add assumptions, you can easily reverse the meaning of someone’s words. You’ve posted this fallacious argument numerous times, so let the real facts be known. Honestly, you could probably throw this point out one, maybe, two more times and possibly fool a few more people. Your disregard for the truth is disturbing, but who can knock the solid effort?

  18. shaunypoo says: Oct 18, 2012 2:24 PM

    williambrasky says:
    Oct 17, 2012 10:53 PM

    If take a quotation out of context, change key wording, and add assumptions, you can easily reverse the meaning of someone’s words. You’ve posted this fallacious argument numerous times, so let the real facts be known. Honestly, you could probably throw this point out one, maybe, two more times and possibly fool a few more people. Your disregard for the truth is disturbing, but who can knock the solid effort?

    ————————————————

    Sounds like politics to me.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!