Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

This foot re-injury story does not add up....it's a smokescreen.


SBiii

Recommended Posts

Cam showed no signs of an injury in the game. 

If he was injured the Panthers were obligated to provide an In-Game Injury Report (there was none).

Cam walked normally after the game, wore his normal street shoes, no boot was required.

If there really is a tweak/injury it must be WAY less serious than the original sprain, this is the good news.

Last time there were x-rays taken, a boot was utilized, the GM provided an update the next day ("We are cautiously optimistic he will be ready for Week 1.") including a probable time-line for return.  Cam returned to practice, albeit with limited participation, 4-days after the Patriots game.

We've established that if there is a tweak of the sprain it's less serious than the original injury and here we are just finding out about it on day-5?  And he can't practice and there's zero disclosure on a probable time-frame, etc...?

Doesn't add up.  This is a smokescreen....

....eventually the smoke will clear and we will learn the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SBiii said:

Cam showed no signs of an injury in the game. 

If he was injured the Panthers were obligated to provide an In-Game Injury Report (there was none).

Cam walked normally after the game, wore his normal street shoes, no boot was required.

If there really is a tweak/injury it must be WAY less serious than the original sprain, this is the good news.

Last time there were x-rays taken, a boot was utilized, the GM provided an update the next day ("We are cautiously optimistic he will be ready for Week 1.") including a probable time-line for return.  Cam returned to practice, albeit with limited participation, 4-days after the Patriots game.

We've established that if there is a tweak of the sprain it's less serious than the original injury and here we are just finding out about it on day-5?  And he can't practice and there's zero disclosure on a probable time-frame, etc...?

Doesn't add up.  This is a smokescreen....

....eventually the smoke will clear and we will learn the truth.

You and these fugin injury reports. Cam showed plenty of signs in the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Happy Panther said:

Smokescreen for what?

I can think of two options:

1. He really has fallen out of love with the game and the team is using the foot as cover to give him time to figure what he wants to do. It going public that he is have mental issues would not be good for him. He admitted to battling some depression last year.

2. It’s actually the shoulder and we don’t want other teams to know it’s the shoulder.

I really hope it’s option 3 and it’s just the foot, but the OP is right that foot thing doesn’t really add up. Possible he did hurt it a little but I have a hard time seeing it being hurt enough to completely prevent him from playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, SBiii said:

Cam showed no signs of an injury in the game. 

If he was injured the Panthers were obligated to provide an In-Game Injury Report (there was none).

Cam walked normally after the game, wore his normal street shoes, no boot was required.

If there really is a tweak/injury it must be WAY less serious than the original sprain, this is the good news.

Last time there were x-rays taken, a boot was utilized, the GM provided an update the next day ("We are cautiously optimistic he will be ready for Week 1.") including a probable time-line for return.  Cam returned to practice, albeit with limited participation, 4-days after the Patriots game.

We've established that if there is a tweak of the sprain it's less serious than the original injury and here we are just finding out about it on day-5?  And he can't practice and there's zero disclosure on a probable time-frame, etc...?

Doesn't add up.  This is a smokescreen....

....eventually the smoke will clear and we will learn the truth.

teams simply  don't disclose all injuries on an injury report.  We know that is a fact.  As our own players when the season has ended have then admitted to all sorts of injuries that they played with for weeks.  And team clearly was aware. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CRA said:

teams simply  don't disclose all injuries on an injury report.  We know that is a fact.  As our own players when the season has ended have then admitted to all sorts of injuries that they played with for weeks.  And team clearly was aware. 

How long is the mod crew planning on letting OP drag this alt out? How much idiocy do you need to see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CRA said:

teams simply  don't disclose all injuries on an injury report.  We know that is a fact.  As our own players when the season has ended have then admitted to all sorts of injuries that they played with for weeks.  And team clearly was aware. 

If the team was aware of injuries and didn’t report it the union would have a field day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Why are most NFL refs senior citizens lol
    • I can't speak to the sample size on the double ACL tears, I could look into it but I am unsure about the quality of data I am able to find. Anecdotally, I don't think that is common for sure.  Well one giant red flag for Dobbins is that of the 3-5 serious injuries he has had in his NFL career, 100% of them have been the same leg. That's not good and it doesn't bode well for his longevity at all. As I have said several hundred times in this forum(in this case it will be in regards to Thomas Davis), outliers are memorable for a reason....because they are outliers. You don't base your decision making on outliers. That's.....stupid. I am also not high on Etienne but he does play special teams and Brooks does not. Currently, I couldn't blame anyone in the FO for choosing a 3rd string RB that can play special teams and has actually played more than 23 career snaps in the NFL in 2+ seasons.  I am not advocating for cutting Brooks but I don't think it's a player I would consider for anything other than a 3rd string role(and likely competing for it, at that) if I am building a roster for 2026. It's not like they are going to get to see him at 100% in 2026.
    • I'm not going to argue against black helmets, but love our silver helmets. No one has anything similar. If you took all the logos off all 32 team's helmets, you could pick out our helmet easy. 
×
×
  • Create New...