Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=BrudLee]I'm all about personal freedoms. Helmet laws, like seat belt and some smoking laws, infringe upon personal choices. If you want to choose to risk your life and livelihood, by all means do so.

I don't wish injury on anyone - certainly not a guy like Roethlisberger, who by all accounts seems to be a swell guy. Just don't stay awake waiting for the get well soon card if your own foolishness contributed strongly to your injury.[/quote]

Sorry, I can't agree that it's all about personal freedom. When morons refuse to wear helmets or buckle up, and then get hurt in accidents, it affects us all in terms of higher insurance rates for everyone. The cost of surgery, medical care, rehab is covered by insurance and then passed along (in a fashion) to all policy holders by the insurance company. You don't honestly think that the premiums you pay would cover all of your medical expenses in a major car accident, do you? Because they won't and the insurance company recoups its costs by allocating their expenses to all of us.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

ouch owned by the laydaayy

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=RiggoRules]Look, I hate helmet laws (I think they interfere with natural selection). But I will put this in the same category as somebody who does stupid things to get themselves suspended from the league.

Why? Playing in the NFL is not a right. It is not something anyone other than very, very few get to do. What BRoth has done by getting on a motorcycle (with or without helmet) is to not take care of a special opportunity.

NFL QBs only have so many shots to the head they can take before they are done. Why lower that number by getting on a bike and not wearing a helmet.[/QUOTE]

That's why Terry Bradshaw suggested to him on more than one occasion that he should wait unti he retire's to ride Bikes. That Asphalt is undefeated.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=Longtimefan]That Asphalt is undefeated.[/QUOTE]

:laughing2 :laughing2 :laughing2

I want to feel bad for him because I like him...but it's his own damn fault and he should have known better.

Rothelsburger
 

is he going to be out for the whole season??? if he was wearing a helmet id have more sympathy but he had such a good future ahead... he screwed up

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=LadyT]Sorry, I can't agree that it's all about personal freedom. When morons refuse to wear helmets or buckle up, and then get hurt in accidents, it affects us all in terms of higher insurance rates for everyone. The cost of surgery, medical care, rehab is covered by insurance and then passed along (in a fashion) to all policy holders by the insurance company. You don't honestly think that the premiums you pay would cover all of your medical expenses in a major car accident, do you? Because they won't and the insurance company recoups its costs by allocating their expenses to all of us.[/quote]

Right. I'm all for personal freedoms as long as they don't infringe on other people right's (ex. smoking).

Re: Rothelsburger
 

[quote=NicknacK89]is he going to be out for the whole season??? if he was wearing a helmet id have more sympathy but he had such a good future ahead... he screwed up[/quote]

From what I heard this morning he should be ok for the season and possibly training camp.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

the stats might say that most of car-cycle accidents are caused by the car... whoever's fault it is, the biker still gets zipped up in the body bag...

it's like pedestrian laws... you may have the right of way, but if you get hit chances are you're still dead...

either way; you wont see me on a bike...

ya'll ain't killin' me!

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=LadyT]Sorry, I can't agree that it's all about personal freedom. When morons refuse to wear helmets or buckle up, and then get hurt in accidents, it affects us all in terms of higher insurance rates for everyone. The cost of surgery, medical care, rehab is covered by insurance and then passed along (in a fashion) to all policy holders by the insurance company. You don't honestly think that the premiums you pay would cover all of your medical expenses in a major car accident, do you? Because they won't and the insurance company recoups its costs by allocating their expenses to all of us.[/QUOTE]
My feeling is that governmentally, there is not a reason to force people to wear helmets. Common sensically (look it up, it's a word), one would be foolish not to.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=BrudLee]My feeling is that governmentally, there is not a reason to force people to wear helmets. Common sensically (look it up, it's a word), one would be foolish not to.[/quote]

I agree that it's a personal decision - it's stupid not to wear one, but it should be a personal freedom to make that decision. Do we let the government tell us what is good for us and make us do everything their way ? Where would the line be drawn ?

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=LadyT]Sorry, I can't agree that it's all about personal freedom. When morons refuse to wear helmets or buckle up, and then get hurt in accidents, it affects us all in terms of higher insurance rates for everyone. The cost of surgery, medical care, rehab is covered by insurance and then passed along (in a fashion) to all policy holders by the insurance company. You don't honestly think that the premiums you pay would cover all of your medical expenses in a major car accident, do you? Because they won't and the insurance company recoups its costs by allocating their expenses to all of us.[/quote]

I agree with this 100%. The financial burden is passed on to the rest of us who choose to use our friggin heads.

Of course, I find myself conflicted. When these morons get in crashes, there's a pretty good chance they're going to die. Dying would be doing us all a favor, so part of me says let them ride helmet free if they wish.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

By the way, since I haven't heard it mentioned:

To those who think that Ben will be ready in seven weeks (since that was the last estimate for his bones to heal), remember that will be seven weeks of a liquid diet. Them teeths ain't growin' back in that busted jaw overnight.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

I dunno, I managed to gain weight on my liquid diet in college. :)

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

a beer belly doesn't count

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=warriorzpath]I agree that it's a personal decision - it's stupid not to wear one, but it should be a personal freedom to make that decision. Do we let the government tell us what is good for us and make us do everything their way ? Where would the line be drawn ?[/quote]

+1

Oh, and can I remind everyone of the "he got what he deserved" ilk, that at this point it appears he was not at fault for the accident. I agree that he is an idiot for not wearing a helmet, but I thought that before he was in an accident. Don't blame the rider for something that was not his fault. He is the victim in this situation. Blame the asshat in the car that pulled in front of him illegally.

I don't remember hearing this "he got what he deserved" crap when Derrick Thomas (chiefs LB) died from a car crash in which he was not wearing a seat belt?!?!?!

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=LadyT]Sorry, I can't agree that it's all about personal freedom. When morons refuse to wear helmets or buckle up, and then get hurt in accidents, it affects us all in terms of higher insurance rates for everyone. The cost of surgery, medical care, rehab is covered by insurance and then passed along (in a fashion) to all policy holders by the insurance company. You don't honestly think that the premiums you pay would cover all of your medical expenses in a major car accident, do you? Because they won't and the insurance company recoups its costs by allocating their expenses to all of us.[/quote]

So it's just a financial issue, then?

If you've ever ridden a bike you'd know that you're far more aware when riding without a helmet. Obviously this can't take into account accidents caused (in this case) by some stupid old biddy who "just didn't see" the poor sod on the bike.

Motorcylcles are inherently dangerous vehicles but they are also made far more so by bad car drivers.

How about we retest regularly the (old) people out there driving who shouldn't be behind a wheel of a car before we go after bikers?

[COLOR=blue]Compared with cars, motorcycles are an especially dangerous form of travel. Per mile traveled, the number of deaths on motorcycles in 2003 was about 32 times the number in cars[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#0000ff][/COLOR]
[URL="http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/helmet_use.html"]http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/helmet_use.html[/URL]

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[B] what a dumba$$!i heard some pittsbirg emts say if he would have had a helment on,he would have walked away with bumps and bruises.[/B]

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=BrudLee]After KWII had his "accident", Roethlisberger told reporters that he rode, and [U]would not[/U] wear a helmet. This is no one's fault but his own.[/quote]

i couldn,t have agreed more bud.
it,s his choice to make.

get well ben.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

i bet this,and this alone changes the no helment law in pennslyvania.the league may even try to work this, and other things like sky diving and climbing a mountain,and maybe even stock car racing
into players contracts too!!!

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

There was an interview transcript on ESPN done with Roethlisberger right after KWII's accident asking him all about his riding habits, why he rides, etc. Probably a half dozen times he stated that he just rides his "chopper" and his cruiser, doesn't ride sportbikes, saying that the sport bikes were dangerous and he was basically safe on his cruiser. Not just once, but over and over.

Kind of funny (in a sick way) that in this accident he was on a Hayabusa - basically the fastest production sportbike on the market.

Guess things changed a bit since that interview.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=LadyT]Sorry, I can't agree that it's all about personal freedom. When morons refuse to wear helmets or buckle up, and then get hurt in accidents, it affects us all in terms of higher insurance rates for everyone. The cost of surgery, medical care, rehab is covered by insurance and then passed along (in a fashion) to all policy holders by the insurance company. You don't honestly think that the premiums you pay would cover all of your medical expenses in a major car accident, do you? Because they won't and the insurance company recoups its costs by allocating their expenses to all of us.[/quote]

You are totally correct, but I think you have confused what IS with how it OUGHT to be--just because that is the reality, doesn't mean that it is right or acceptable. I see that insurance is the problem here--not negligent people. The government doesn't have the right to tell people how to live, unless it endangers other people (people should have the right to endanger their own lives, IMO). Riding without a helmet only endangers the bike rider (and not others). So if the only justification for telling people how to live their lives is so insurance premiums will not rise, that is a weak argument.

The problem with insurance rates is the government's problem--they are supposed to provide for the healthcare of their citizens (IMO). Since they cannot (read: do not want to), they have created the health insurance industry (privatization at its worst). If the government's only solution for their failure to provide adequate healthcare is to impose unnecessary restrictions on how their citizens live, then we are in desperate need of a revolution.

BTW, if you cannot already tell, I HATE insurance. It's the biggest scam EVER. ...and yes, I am ready for everyone to tell me how BAD things would be without insurance (and how naive I am).

EDIT-I should not say that I "HATE insurance", that is not accurate and I would like to retract that statement. It would be more accurate to say that I am truly frustrated with the entire situation.

:soapbox:

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=TheInspector]BTW, if you cannot already tell, I HATE insurance. It's the biggest scam EVER. ...and yes, I am ready for everyone to tell me how BAD things would be without insurance (and how naive I am).

:soapbox:[/quote]

You've pretty much answered your own question but I'll just elaborate.

If it wasn't for the people out there scamming the insurance companies, you probably wouldn't hate the insurance companies as much.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=TheInspector]
The problem with insurance rates is the government's problem--[B]they are supposed to provide for the healthcare of their citizens[/B] (IMO). Since they cannot (read: do not want to), they have created the health insurance industry (privatization at its worst). If the government's only solution for their failure to provide adequate healthcare is to impose unnecessary restrictions on how their citizens live, then we are in desperate need of a revolution.
[/QUOTE]

What do you base that opinion on?

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

According to Jim Rome, there are reports that Roethlisberger [u]did not have his motorcycle license[/u]. This slight sympathy I've had for him is disappearing.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=TheInspector]You are totally correct, but I think you have confused what IS with how it OUGHT to be--just because that is the reality, doesn't mean that it is right or acceptable. I see that insurance is the problem here--not negligent people. The government doesn't have the right to tell people how to live, unless it endangers other people (people should have the right to endanger their own lives, IMO). Riding without a helmet only endangers the bike rider (and not others). So if the only justification for telling people how to live their lives is so insurance premiums will not rise, that is a weak argument.

The problem with insurance rates is the government's problem--they are supposed to provide for the healthcare of their citizens (IMO). Since they cannot (read: do not want to), they have created the health insurance industry (privatization at its worst). If the government's only solution for their failure to provide adequate healthcare is to impose unnecessary restrictions on how their citizens live, then we are in desperate need of a revolution.

BTW, if you cannot already tell, I HATE insurance. It's the biggest scam EVER. ...and yes, I am ready for everyone to tell me how BAD things would be without insurance (and how naive I am).

:soapbox:[/quote]

I work for a Health System in Philadelphia in the finance department. I'm not going to get into a big thing, but suffice it to say you know nothing about the business. Socialized healthcare results in horrible standards of care.

Healthcare in the US is some of the most expensive in the world, but it's also BY FAR the best.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=Mattyk72]You've pretty much answered your own question but I'll just elaborate.

If it wasn't for the people out there scamming the insurance companies, you probably wouldn't hate the insurance companies as much.[/quote]

You're right. Unfortunately, they are a business who profits from NOT providing a service. The more of their service they provide (paying claims), the less money they make. So, they do everything in their power to invalidate any claims made from people who are (for the most part) honest, loyal, and paying customers. :(

Also, if they didn't behave this way they would be less profitable and the shareholders would fire the corporate officers. It really comes down to a fundamental flaw in the corporate model.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=Mattyk72]You've pretty much answered your own question but I'll just elaborate.

If it wasn't for the people out there scamming the insurance companies, you probably wouldn't hate the insurance companies as much.[/quote]

Bingo.

Between criminals (including illegal aliens who cross the border to have a baby or get free medical treatment) and people who put themselves in danger like Roethlisberger and expect everyone else to pay for their mistakes as well as lazy people and greedy lawyers who sue for millions of dollars for stupid stuff like burning themselves on coffee...that's driving the rates through the roof.

Insurance is not evil and DOES have a purpose, however the cost of having insurance is being driven up by the people who want to live without resposibility and/or morals.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=Schneed10]...suffice it to say you know nothing about the business...[/quote]

And let the comments about naivety come pouring in! :)

I don't need to know insurance business, because all business is the same: profits rule, and nothing else matters. It's a flaw in the corporate model (you probably learned about that in ethics).

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=mheisig]What do you base that opinion on?[/quote]

That is my opinion and I base it on my own experiences and principles...basically the same thing anyone bases any opinion on.

Maybe we should start an insurance thread? Ha ha, just kidding.

Really, I thought that I put enough IMO's and conservative remarks to have people just accept my opinion without too much argument. I guess I was wrong.

Please, instead of telling my why my opinion is wrong (and how I don't know), just tell me what your opinion is. That would be nicer. :)

mheisig: you didn't tell me my opinion was wrong, only other posters.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=Schneed10]I work for a Health System in Philadelphia in the finance department. I'm not going to get into a big thing, but suffice it to say you know nothing about the business. Socialized healthcare results in horrible standards of care.

Healthcare in the US is some of the most expensive in the world, but it's also BY FAR the best.[/quote]

You're right. Government control is NEVER better than control by the private market. It takes away competition and therefore lowers standards and stops striving to appeal to customers.

Last week, I heard a story about a woman in Canada who was pregnant. She was having discomfort and went to the ER, only to be sent home and asked to come back the next day since she wasn't dying. She went home and went into labor, only to lose the baby in her own bathroom because the hospital turned her away and she had no access to doctors.

That's only a single example of the mess that the socialists have made in Canada. Sure, they say everyone has healthcare, but it's the worst in the world. There's a 6-month wait for any non-life threatening surgery, which causes a lot of people to suffer and too often die while waiting for the government-controlled hospital to come up with funds to treat them.

Beware of Hillary Clinton. She wants us to be like Canada.

It's also a myth that "every American needs healthcare". Every American DOES have healthcare. You won't be turned away by a hospital and if you call an ambulance, they'll come. Even if you don't live here, whether you're a visitor to the country or an invader of the country from Mexico, you'll be treated. What the socialists want is FREE healthcare for every American. First of all, it won't be free. Your taxes will go up a LOT. Secondly, you really shouldn't expect the government to pay for things like cosmetic surgery. If the government takes over the healthcare in our country, it will be devastating to the quality and availability of care. European nations and Canada who have taken the market out of healthcare and tried to fund it solely with taxmoney and politicians' rules have become dangerous places to live. There's a reason so many people come to the USA for surgeries and healthcare from foreign nations, we have the BEST in the world. As long as competition and the free market push it, it will remain so.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=Schneed10]Healthcare in the US is some of the most expensive in the world, but it's also BY FAR the best.[/quote]

I don't think that it can be argued that the United States provides some of the best healthcare services in the world, but the issue is that it is too expensive.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the services, but the healthcare/insurance system is screwed up. I admit I wouldn't know how to fix it ( and I doubt that a lot of people would either ), but all I can tell you: what it comes down to, we are required to pay expensive insurance rates or healthcare service payments or we risk ours and our loved ones' health.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=TheInspector]And let the comments about naivity come pouring in! :)

I don't need to know insurance business, because all business is the same: profits rule, and nothing else matters. It's a flaw in the corporate model (you probably learned about that in ethics).[/QUOTE]

A flaw in the corporate model??? Any business owner's goal is to have his business succeed - success in business is typically measured by one's profit.

For the purpose of discussion I'll ignore the flawed, gross over-generalization that "nothing else matters." Pursuit of profit is not a flaw, it's the natural outworking of the pursuit of success. Maybe in a eutopian world every business would solely exist for the good of mankind, but we live on the planet earth where money is kind of important.

As a side rant while I'm thinking about it, it always blows me away at how mad people get at Microsoft for apparently being wealthy and successful. Microsoft simply did better business than everyone else and reaped the rewards - should we expect a successful company to just start giving things away when they reach a certain level of wealth? That totally flies in the face of the mindset that got that company there in the first place. Why the hell do people get angry at businesses succeeding? It's what makes the opportunitites and benefits that we enjoy possible.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=TheInspector]That is my opinion and I base it on my own experiences and principles...basically the same thing anyone bases any opinion on.
[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, I thought maybe it had a basis in constitution law, government models, hisotry or some other form of rational thought.

I'm on a spree of side-rants today: why won't people just argue their belief as opposed to chalking up to "oh it's my opinion and I guess we just have differing views." FIGHT and argue your damn viewpoint if you think you're right, I'd have alot more respect for that than this spineless capitulation of agreeing to disagree.

If the founders of this country just decided that their opinion differed from that of merry ol' England and left it at that, we'd all be drinking tea and driving on the wrong side of the road.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=mheisig]A flaw in the corporate model??? Any business owner's goal is to have his business succeed - success in business is typically measured by one's profit.

For the purpose of discussion I'll ignore the flawed, gross over-generalization that "nothing else matters." Pursuit of profit is not a flaw, it's the natural outworking of the pursuit of success. Maybe in a eutopian world every business would solely exist for the good of mankind, but we live on the planet earth where money is kind of important.

As a side rant while I'm thinking about it, it always blows me away at how mad people get at Microsoft for apparently being wealthy and successful. Microsoft simply did better business than everyone else and reaped the rewards - should we expect a successful company to just start giving things away when they reach a certain level of wealth? That totally flies in the face of the mindset that got that company there in the first place. Why the hell do people get angry at businesses succeeding? It's what makes the opportunitites and benefits that we enjoy possible.[/quote]

There is not anything wrong with the pursuit of profit, but there just seems to be something off with combining the pursuit of greater profit and healthcare. Don't get me wrong : doctors and all the healthcare workers deserve what they get paid, but trying to gain as much money out of anything you can just seems wrong to me. And this is mainly aimed at the corporate and committee heads that focus on the bottomline.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=mheisig]I'm sorry, I thought maybe it had a basis in constitution law, government models, hisotry or some other form of rational thought.

I'm on a spree of side-rants today: why won't people just argue their belief as opposed to chalking up to "oh it's my opinion and I guess we just have differing views." FIGHT and argue your damn viewpoint if you think you're right, I'd have alot more respect for that than this spineless capitulation of agreeing to disagree.

If the founders of this country just decided that their opinion differed from that of merry ol' England and left it at that, we'd all be drinking tea and driving on the wrong side of the road.[/quote]

This is not the place to "fight" for what I believe in. Besides, I can do a much better job when I can reply instantly (and not have to wait and then type my response).

Oh, and my "experiences and principles" are based on rational thought. Look up the ad hominem fallacy and you'll see that your argument is flawed. (and you also employ the slippery slope fallacy :))

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=warriorzpath]There is not anything wrong with the pursuit of profit, but there just seems to be something off with combining the pursuit of greater profit and healthcare. Don't get me wrong : doctors and all the healthcare workers deserve what they get paid, but trying to gain as much money out of anything you can just seems wrong to me. And this is mainly aimed at the corporate and committee head that focus on the bottomline.[/quote]

AMEN!

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=mheisig]A flaw in the corporate model??? Any business owner's goal is to have his business succeed - success in business is typically measured by one's profit.

For the purpose of discussion I'll ignore the flawed, gross over-generalization that "nothing else matters."[/quote]

Take a look at the Ford Pinto case.

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[QUOTE=TheInspector]This is not the place to "fight" for what I believe in. Besides, I can do a much better job when I can reply instantly (and not have to wait and then type my response).

Oh, and my "experiences and principles" are based on rational thought. Look up the ad hominem fallacy and you'll see that your argument is flawed.[/QUOTE]

It's pretty unusual to be able to argue a point better in person than through the written word. Very few debaters are capable of addressing each logical premise in sequence, draw conclusions and identify fallacious reasoning on the fly and in person. The written word provides a much higher degree of precision and referential ability than an oral debate.

You must have a remarkably unusual ability to argue orally or perhaps, like many, you use the ambiguity of speech to your advantage.

Thanks for the Philosophy 101 lesson - unfortunately my previous post exhibits no sign of an Ad Hominem attack, primarily because no argument was made. I made an inocuous, largely sarcastic comment that was in no way an attack on your person, thus no Ad Hominem.

I asked a question, you replied, I responded in sarcastic apology - no argument was formed or proposed. In the future it might be helpful to look up the fallacy yourself prior to using the term.

I'm done with this thread unless someone starts a "Healthcare Reform" thread in the Warpath Parking lot. This sucker has gone waaaaaaaaay :offtopic:

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=mheisig]It's pretty unusual to be able to argue a point better in person than through the written word. Very few debaters are capable of addressing each logical premise in sequence, draw conclusions and identify fallacious reasoning on the fly and in person. The written word provides a much higher degree of precision and referential ability than an oral debate.

You must have a remarkably unusual ability to argue orally or perhaps, like many, you use the ambiguity of speech to your advantage.

Thanks for the Philosophy 101 lesson - unfortunately my previous post exhibits no sign of an Ad Hominem attack, primarily because no argument was made. I made an inocuous, largely sarcastic comment that was in no way an attack on your person, thus no Ad Hominem.

I asked a question, you replied, I responded in sarcastic apology - no argument was formed or proposed. In the future it might be helpful to look up the fallacy yourself prior to using the term.

I'm done with this thread unless someone starts a "Healthcare Reform" thread in the Warpath Parking lot. This sucker has gone waaaaaaaaay :offtopic:[/quote]

I missed the sarcasm. My mistake. You win. I lose. (no sarcasm here)

P.S.: it's not a philosophy lesson--it's ethics (maybe you should look it up first ;) *sarcasm*).

Re: Roethlisberger injured in motorcycle accident
 

[quote=BrudLee]My feeling is that governmentally, there is not a reason to force people to wear helmets. Common sensically (look it up, it's a word), one would be foolish not to.[/quote]

Ok, then anyone who chooses to ride without a helmet should be uninsurable. Just like morons who build homes in hurricane alleys or flood plains.

Personal freedom is fine, but I don't want to have to pay for mistakes made by someone else who was exercising their right to personal freedom. I feel for the guy, but that's not going to make him whole again. I doubt seriously that he will be ready to play in September.