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!

     

Olsen update


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, MHS831 said:

If you have never been in the hospital thinking your child may not survive, trust me, it is the worst and most terrifying fear their is.  It paralyzes you in a cloud of surreal vulnerability and helplessness.  It can only made worse by the heartbreak and devastation that coincides with losing a child, and I hear that rips your heart out of your body forever. 

To any of you who have experienced either, I know a bit about that pain and it returns whenever you share the experience with someone else.  Man I hope this is a happy ending.  When he writes "Day 8,"  trust me, he means much longer than a bit over a week. 

Man I thought I was tough, walking though the Duke Kids care center....broke my cold heart....Im getting teary now thinking about it.

  • Pie 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, MHS831 said:

When I had cancer and went to Duke for treatments, the first time I felt a bit sorry for myself.  Walking in, you see the cars in the parking lot with pink overlapped ribbon magnets on the back--not one of them--all of them.  Inside, the first kid you see is bald, smiling, holding a balloon, and acting happy to be alive.  Then there is another one, and another.  You leave feeling lucky, although your heart is heavy, not for yourself--never again did I feel any self-pity.

You hit on two things that stuck with me. The volume of children, I seen 50+ and it 100% wrecked me. You like I never felt sorry for myself, plus I prided myself on not complaining at all. Anyone that sees all those brave strong kids and remains constantly woe is me about some 1st world problems, just are not humans. Do me a favor and keep staying cancer free.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/5/2021 at 4:26 PM, Basbear said:

You hit on two things that stuck with me. The volume of children, I seen 50+ and it 100% wrecked me. You like I never felt sorry for myself, plus I prided myself on not complaining at all. Anyone that sees all those brave strong kids and remains constantly woe is me about some 1st world problems, just are not humans. Do me a favor and keep staying cancer free.

You too bro, but it may be back.  I am getting checked next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...