Around the NFL Week 1.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

By now, I would hope that even your casual NFL fan knows that the extent of any knee injury cannot be determined without the aid of an MRI. Once the knee is injured, players should not be allowed back on the field in the same game by NFL rule. Only after a full medical examination, including an MRI, followed by appropriate medical treatment and rehabilitation should they be allowed to return to practices and games - again by league rule.

Based on the physician's creed to first do no harm to the patient, to send the player back out on the field without knowing the extent of his injury seems to me to border on malpractice. Isn't it possible that the player in this case had a lesser injury, such as a partial tear, until he went back on the field and tore the ligament completely?

I disagree ,I do think there is nothing wrong with being safe but you want a league rule for it and that won't happen but I do admit I am old school and remember when the best medicine was to rub dirt on it and to get back into the game. It is a game were people get hurt and every player to a man knows this and his body ,some consideration should be given to that. Again OMO .

[Buffalo Bob]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

By now, I would hope that even your casual NFL fan knows that the extent of any knee injury cannot be determined without the aid of an MRI. Once the knee is injured, players should not be allowed back on the field in the same game by NFL rule. Only after a full medical examination, including an MRI, followed by appropriate medical treatment and rehabilitation should they be allowed to return to practices and games - again by league rule.

Based on the physician's creed to first do no harm to the patient, to send the player back out on the field without knowing the extent of his injury seems to me to border on malpractice. Isn't it possible that the player in this case had a lesser injury, such as a partial tear, until he went back on the field and tore the ligament completely?

Originally Posted by Giantone

I disagree ,I do think there is nothing wrong with being safe but you want a league rule for it and that won't happen but I do admit I am old school and remember when the best medicine was to rub dirt on it and to get back into the game. It is a game were people get hurt and every player to a man knows this and his body ,some consideration should be given to that. Again OMO .

On the other hand it is a knee, not a head, neck or back where playing injured can cause irreversible damage. If you play on an injured knee you could turn a 6 week recovery into a 6 month one. If you play with a hairline fracture of a neck bone you could turn a 6 month recovery into a lifetime ride in a wheelchair. I think what part of the body is injured should determine the protocol for returning to the game.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Buffalo Bob

On the other hand it is a knee, not a head, neck or back where playing injured can cause irreversible damage. If you play on an injured knee you could turn a 6 week recovery into a 6 month one. If you play with a hairline fracture of a neck bone you could turn a 6 month recovery into a lifetime ride in a wheelchair. I think what part of the body is injured should determine the protocol for returning to the game.

Yes, I should have been clearer . I apologize .I was most definitely talking about the knee example used ...as for any head injury that of course is a completely different situation.

[Chico23231]

Imo, this is a pretty bad look by Levon Bell...kinda surprised. Dude...over 14 million per for a RB...you need to show up for work. Gotta be a let down for team...I think this could really back fire for him

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Imo, this is a pretty bad look by Levon Bell...kinda surprised. Dude...over 14 million per for a RB...you need to show up for work. Gotta be a let down for team...I think this could really back fire for him

Imagine passing on $850k a week, wtf

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Imo, this is a pretty bad look by Levon Bell...kinda surprised. Dude...over 14 million per for a RB...you need to show up for work. Gotta be a let down for team...I think this could really back fire for him

Awe Chico, I think this is the first time I've disagreed with you on something of substance.

The collective bargaining agreement says he can come in after 11 games and get credit for the year toward FA. If that's what he wants to do then why not?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

Awe Chico, I think this is the first time I've disagreed with you on something of substance.

The collective bargaining agreement says he can come in after 11 games and get credit for the year toward FA. If that's what he wants to do then why not?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

consider these 2 "doomsday" scenarios:
1) he signed his tender Wednesday and played wk 1 under the tag with a guaranteed $14million. He blows out his leg, and career ends.
or
2) he signs his tag at the last week possible. He plays that week, and has the same career ending injury. In this case though, he gets $5.5million.

Granted both sums of money are outrageously large to me, and likely everyone on this board, but still the risk of losing an extra 9million seems like a bad move to me.

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

consider these 2 "doomsday" scenarios:
1) he signed his tender Wednesday and played wk 1 under the tag with a guaranteed $14million. He blows out his leg, and career ends.
or
2) he signs his tag at the last week possible. He plays that week, and has the same career ending injury. In this case though, he gets $5.5million.

Granted both sums of money are outrageously large to me, and likely everyone on this board, but still the risk of losing an extra 9million seems like a bad move to me.

Agreed. And I'd add another scenario:

Before his holdout, there would have been a crazy free agency bidding war to get him next year.
Now, I'm not saying he won't get crazy money, but some teams might get cold feet and think twice about breaking the bank for a guy who's so not about the team that he'd rather stay home than get 850K per week to play...

[Defensewins]

No.If Bell is healthy and is allowed to be a free agent, there will be a bidding war and he will get his $20 million. See Kirk Cousins.
I do not see anything wrong with Bell holding out. He is fighting a system that favors the teams and can trap players on teams they may not want to play for. Bell met his obligation to Steelers and played out his rookie contract. He played very well for them Steelers also got one of the best RB’s in the NFL for bargain price.
In a $9 billion dollar a year business that the average employee only works a few years due work place injuries or lack of production, then is tossed out like trash, it is crazy a player cannot get his freedom after meeting his initial obligation, so he can go work at his dream job or make a maximum salary. All because his current boss owns him?
If Bell’s life long dream was to play for the Redskins and was prevented from it, would you be calling Bell a negative then?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

No.If Bell is healthy and is allowed to be a free agent, there will be a bidding war and he will get his $20 million. See Kirk Cousins.
I do not see anything wrong with Bell holding out. He is fighting a system that favors the teams and can trap players on teams they may not want to play for. Bell met his obligation to Steelers and played out his rookie contract. He played very well for them Steelers also got one of the best RB’s in the NFL for bargain price.
In a $9 billion dollar a year business that the average employee only works a few years due work place injuries or lack of production, then is tossed out like trash, it is crazy a player cannot get his freedom after meeting his initial obligation, so he can go work at his dream job or make a maximum salary. All because his current boss owns him?
If Bell’s life long dream was to play for the Redskins and was prevented from it, would you be calling Bell a negative then?

I find it interesting we are using words and phrase's like ...."fighting the system" and "trap players","his Freedom","Obligation" and I love this one....."his current boss owns him" .... about a football player looking to make 14 million DOLLARS for a season.We seem to forget that that player (and others) all agreed to the way it is through "Collective Bargaining". This is the way the business side of football runs Bell and his representatives know this .Yes he has to do what is right for him I get it but please let's not make this out like he is a slave,he is an employee and working the system that is in place for him to achieve his desired goal for himself and his family,simply put.

[Buffalo Bob]

Originally Posted by MTK

Imagine passing on $850k a week, wtf

It is all about ego with him, he wants starting QB type money.

[Chico23231]

Also, think of the fantasy football players who drafted Bell! Man, I’d be pissed!

What Bell last 2 year total? 26-27 million guaranteed? That’s pretty good for a RB.

[CRedskinsRule]

I agree with G1 (i checked and hell isnt frozen yet)

The CBA is in place and both sides have clearly prospered under it.

Bell does have the right to sit out, but it doesnt make it the right choice for him to make. If he comes in week 10 and plays lights out, no injuries, and scores a big contract then great for him, but there are a lot of other scenarios where this move costs him millions of dollars.

All i know is I wish i were in the position to lose a half a year's salary because i wanted more money.

[Chico23231]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-abuse-policy/

Report: Randy Gregory faces new discipline under substance-abuse policy

Couldn’t happen to a nicer piece of shit. Why do the cowboys constantly give trash like this an opportunity?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I agree with G1 (i checked and hell isnt frozen yet)

The CBA is in place and both sides have clearly prospered under it.

Bell does have the right to sit out, but it doesnt make it the right choice for him to make. If he comes in week 10 and plays lights out, no injuries, and scores a big contract then great for him, but there are a lot of other scenarios where this move costs him millions of dollars.

All i know is I wish i were in the position to lose a half a year's salary because i wanted more money.

I think from the players' side, a very small percentage of them have prospered under the CBA. The majority of the players are still at the financial mercy of the owners. Going into the new negotiations, the NFLPA should focus more on financial issues that affect all players, instead of focusing on things like player discipline, which affects a small percentage of players.