The Texans team Dr.'s obviously missed Brooks anxiety problem. He was throwing up/missing games here, went to Philly was still throwing up before games, their Dr.'s figured out what was wrong and they ended up with Pro Bowl OG. Of course after the DDW/Boselli/JDC misdiagnosis I will admit I have absolutely no faith in the Texans medical staff. In fact a Dr on another MB said Foreman needed surgery and the Texans Dr.'s decided to let Foreman's foot heal naturally. What followed was Foreman tearing his achillies. This isn't my opinion, this is a respected DR, in the Med centers opinion.
Did this "respected DR" examine the patient? Was he consulted for a professional opinion? If so, is it ethical for him to discuss the case? If not, what qualifies him to judge? How respectable is a doctor who talks behind a colleagues's back? Classic garbage you read in forums. You may find heresay you like convincing and you may think that Tony Boselli is relevant to the team today, but none of this supports the claim that physicians are corrupted by their professional association with a team. You guys can also argue incessantly about Brooks and who's to "blame" based on no one here knowing the first thing about it (in classic CF fashion). Did Brooks seek medical help while with the Texans? Likely not. Did he seek help after leaving the Texans? Likely not, Did his current team fail to diagnose him? Yes, just as much as the Texans did. He ended up hospitalized. Furthermore, is Brooks a better player because of the diagnosis or because of superior medical care? You guys don't know, stop pretending you do.
Yes he was, multiple times. Pot, meet kettle... You do understand the meaning of ad hominem?: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ad+hominem Of course it doesn't. And all of those football players are just dumb liars. "The team doctor, the team trainers, they work for the team. And I love 'em, you know," he said. "They're some good people, you know. They want to see you do good. But at the same time, they work for the team, you know. They're trying to do whatever they can to get you back on the field and make your team look good. So if it's not gonna make the team look good, or if you're not gonna be on the field, then they're tryin' to do whatever they can to make that happen." Like those Harvard dummies... Harvard: NFL Doctors Should Not Report To Teams But you're smarter than those people at Harvard. Got it. Two separate disciplinary actions (there's more): 1) Chao was given five years probation and had his medical license revoked in 2014; 2) 2017: The board agreed to resolve its accusation against Chao by prohibiting him from prescribing Ambien for four years, requiring him to keep additional records on his prescriptions of controlled substances and attend courses on prescribing medication and ethics “In a case as in Junior Seau, who is suffering from a variety of problems manifested by confusion, depression, improper atypical behavior … you don’t prescribe a drug like Ambien,” Dr. Cyril Wecht told 10News.com. “You may be placing that patient at greater risk to doing something to himself, such as committing suicide.” Oh really? So you're an MD? What's your specialty? Where is your practice?
I am only seeing evidence of one hospitalization while playing for the Eagles. Please provide links to "multiple" hospitalizations while with Houston. Did Brooks ever pursue second opinions? Why not? I would also like to see evidence that the change in his health care, central to the argument here, resulted in improvements in his performance because his healthcare in Houston was negligent. It's clear that his new team's doctors also failed to diagnose at least until he was hospitalized there. They also had the benefit of greater medical history. I know Brooks is a popular subject to use while denigrating the team. It's also an ignorant one. No one here knows specifics of that case, and no one here demonstrates the background and experience needed to judge even if such specifics were known. It's just speculation. I don't deny offering insults, and occasional ad hominem, you deserve it. I identified ad hominem as part of a steady stream of fallacious arguments on your part, not to claim I have taken the high road. I don't believe in the high road, I believe you should be subjected to the same trash you dish out. Furthermore, most of those are comments on your statements and are not ad hominem. You do understand the meaning of ad hominem? [omits condescending link designed to present air of superiority] I do, in fact, understand the meaning but it's not clear that you do. Ad hominem is not merely insult, it is presenting an argument that attacks a person's character rather than addresses an issue. Calling your comment "dumb" or "stupid" is not ad hominem, saying "do you even follow sports, or just read box scores?" is. One addresses the comment, the other the commentor. Educate yourself. The next time you offer an argument that actually supports the claim you made, it will be the first time. That's not ad hominem, that's a fact. Straw man argument again. ...and another straw man, and implied ad hominem. Funny how you are so quick to question the motives of some professionals, yet not those of "those people at Harvard". Moreover, it's not important to you that the study you reference doesn't support your claim. That study impugns the integrity of the league and the teams, not the physicians. There you go again with the dishonesty. These aren't "two separate disciplinary actions". There is one outcome and you misrepresented it deliberately because it didn't suit your narrative. All the while, you are citing a case that doesn't support your claim. There is NO reason to believe that the alleged errors had anything to do with the physician being a team employee. When you don't have arguments, you offer rat-holes. Here you demonstrate your reading comprehension problems. I have not stated any such thing, nor would I. I'm not big on appeals to authority, I prefer my comments to stand on their own merit and I don't need "my friends" to "inform my opinions". I've worked directly in the medical field, you have not, so your experience is not superior to mine. I am not, however, making any claims that my positions are superior because of any medical background. Your posts are filled with logical fallacies and failures to cite even the slightest germane evidence. It would be far easier for you to simply restate a position less insulting and inflammatory, but you seem more interested in bullying your way through it. Keep trying, but the outcome is already clear.
I was actually enjoying it. *Michael Jackson Popcorn gif* EDIT: Can someone tell me how to upload a gif? I supported the site and can't take advantage haha.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/03/05/nfl-combine-2018-news-josh-rosen-shaquem-griffin-mmqb-peter-king 8. I think the favorite to sign the best offensive lineman in free agency, Carolina guard Andrew Norwell, is the New York Giants. It makes sense in all ways but financial. The Giants have but $23.6-million available in cap space, and their needs are significant.
Where will tight end Jimmy Graham land in free agency? Matt Bowen, NFL writer: Houston. The Texans have the cap space, and Graham could be a key matchup piece in their heavy play-action scheme with Deshaun Watson back on the field at quarterback. Landing Graham also would give Watson another top red zone weapon to pair with standout wide receiver DeAndre Hopkins. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...18-offseason-free-agency-trades-signings-cuts
Typical NY sports entitlement. The Giants badly need an o lineman but have very little money to offer. Therefore, they are the favorites to land “the best offensive lineman in free agency”. Everything makes sense except for the market value part.
Earl's been training in Austin. I know that because I was getting gas this morning next to him in his white Lambo. No pics, sorry... Here's his Instagram though: https://www.instagram.com/earl/?hl=en He was shorter than I would have thought... but then apparently he's 5'10... not a giant or anything
Solder, Norwell, Graham, and trade a 3rd and 6th for Thomas. Then go for a lower end CB. Im just reaching, no idea if we could do all that. But it would be awesome. Draft CB with our 3rd and another Olineman.
Makes sense, after the bad experience with Duane Brown the team won't want any more of those idiots around. I think it's smart to focus on players who focus on the game rather than off field BS.
That just destroys the credibility of whoever was being quoted, the franchise QB is black, the long time GM was black....but sure, the FO is looking to field an all white team.... I wonder if this is coming from Duane Brown's agent.....
