ShareThis Page
Steelers

Knee injuries could sideline Hampton, Scott for season

Jerry DiPaola
| Monday, Oct. 18, 2004

Pro Bowl nose tackle Casey Hampton and cornerback Chad Scott suffered right knee injuries that coach Bill Cowher said could force both players to miss the rest of the season.

"I don't have (all the information)," Cowher said. "But the prognosis does not look good."

Scott said, however, that he doesn't think his injury is as serious as Cowher indicated.

"I think I'm going to be OK," Scott said. "I'm getting an MRI to check it out, but I think I'm going to be all right."

Cowher is preparing for the worst.

"No one is going to sit around and feel sorry for you," he said. "Will they be missed• Absolutely. If we lose them for an extended time, they will be sorely missed. But we have to find a way to rally around the players that are in there and everybody else has to pick up their game. This is not the time to dwell in self-pity."

Hampton, who was injured in the fourth quarter, hobbled on crutches and a big brace and appeared distraught after the game. He was replaced by Chris Hoke.

"I have to step up," Hoke said. "That's what I have to do. That's what I'm going to do."

Scott was hurt in the second quarter and was out of the game while the Cowboys were converting two third-and-17 situations into first downs and field goals. He was replaced by rookie Ricardo Colclough, who left briefly with cramps, and veteran Willie Williams.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me