10 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

Does anyone still think the medical staff has to do with injuries after what happened with Brooks? My main issue with the staff last season was how they treated injuries when they happened (i.e. lagging DeSean out and not having the surgery done even though it was reported that he didn't want to have the surgery and Howard's mysterious shoulder injury which lingered and somehow got worse during a bye week.)

I don't think there's really much you can do to prevent injuries. I mean in an odd twist of fate, Brooks was in the weight room trying to get stronger when he tore his achilles. I really think that this team is just snake-bitten. You can't prevent a guy from blasting Ertz in the ribs or spearing Wentz in the head to give him a concussion. The Chargers are another team that is in the same boat with having a ton of key injuries. It just happens and it's not really anyone's fault. 

 

He tore it running I believe. Not sure what could be done besides stretching to prevent that (not saying that stretching 100% prevents anything.

The only question to be asked is if Howie should have made a 29 year old with 1 torn Achilles in his past the highest paid interior OL in the NFL.

You can replace a RG.  You can’t replace a $30m guaranteed hole in the cap.

 

22 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I thought Lincoln was a "free soiler," which was the group that opposed the expansion of slavery into territories but did not oppose slavery in states where it was established.

34 minutes ago, justrelax said:

In the second quarter of the nineteenth century, the American Abolitionist movement organized. It was divided into three groups: colonialization, gradualism, and immediatism. The first group, of which Lincoln was a part, wanted to ship  the slaves back to Africa. The second said we want to abolish slavery but do it gradually, which in practice meant never. The third wished the thing to be done now, immediately. Immediately took about 40 years.

I think we’re facing a comparable moment here.One hundred fifty-five years of gradualism have not done the trick.

Was Lincoln really an abolitionist as they used the term? I mean prior to the Civil War he thought slavery would die out without legal intervention essentially. Lincoln described himself as always being morally opposed to slavery.  He was against the expansion of slavery.  From a legal perspective he campaigned against Douglas and criticized Douglas's Kansas-Nebraska Act which allowed for Kansas and Nebraska to determine the legality of slavery as opposed to following the Missouri compromise which would have prohibited it.  

6 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The only question to be asked is if Howie should have made a 29 year old with 1 torn Achilles in his past the highest paid interior OL in the NFL.

You can replace a RG.  You can’t replace a $30m guaranteed hole in the cap.

When healthy he's arguably the best

6 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The only question to be asked is if Howie should have made a 29 year old with 1 torn Achilles in his past the highest paid interior OL in the NFL.

You can replace a RG.  You can’t replace a $30m guaranteed hole in the cap.

We do love our aging vets. I imagine Ertz will be the next guy to get showered with Benjamins just as he enters the NFL equivalent of the death zone.

4 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The only question to be asked is if Howie should have made a 29 year old with 1 torn Achilles in his past the highest paid interior OL in the NFL.

You can replace a RG.  You can’t replace a $30m guaranteed hole in the cap.

Well let's hope Brooks comes back but the deal to Brooks doesn't look like a deal Banner would have made. 

35 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

I thought Lincoln was a "free soiler," which was the group that opposed the expansion of slavery into territories but did not oppose slavery in states where it was established.

Both. The Constitution prevented him from emancipation until the war broke out. It did not prevent resisting the expansion of slavery into the Western  Territories.

16 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The only question to be asked is if Howie should have made a 29 year old with 1 torn Achilles in his past the highest paid interior OL in the NFL.

You can replace a RG.  You can’t replace a $30m guaranteed hole in the cap.

Given that he tore the other achilles, it's more bad luck than anything else. Brooks was a Pro Bowl level player. I would have waited to sign him to the extension, but you can't predict these types of injuries. 

Jason Peters played 7 more years for us after tearing his achilles twice in 2012. 

20 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

The only question to be asked is if Howie should have made a 29 year old with 1 torn Achilles in his past the highest paid interior OL in the NFL.

You can replace a RG.  You can’t replace a $30m guaranteed hole in the cap.

Its so easy to second guess these contracts later on.

Did we lose anybody today yet?

42 minutes ago, greend said:

Sorry to tell you but I have given money and supported many causes the didn't make me feel "uncomfortable". What other "side" are we talking about here? Because I dislike disrespect to the flag I'm on a different "side". I wholeheartedly believe in freedom for all and want the laws to be fair to everyone. And I don't care what color the people kneeling are, or even if it was a cause that I supported for instance I'm against abortion but I'm not going to kneel during the national anthem over it, nor am I going to say that it's cool with me if my church group does it.

I'm speaking in generalization. Yes, there are people who will support/donate etc in things without needing to feel uncomfortable. Kudos to you and those alike. There is also a large mass of people who live in a bubble. The point of the protesting is to spread the message to everyone, not just the ones paying attention to whats going on in the world. 

And sides, again, is a generalization. Just simplifying it to the side that wants to do it and the side that doesn't want them to. I know not everything is black and white and there is many shades of gray in between. 

1 hour ago, Ace Nova said:

As a parent or guardian, you are ultimately responsible for the actions of your child (In most cases, depending on age, circumstances, etc.)  You are also responsible for their safety when under your guardianship.  If you as a parent are well aware of the risks, then you would be ultimately accountable for their safety.
 

 I can’t see any fair minded judge holding a professional sports franchise/league liable if a child at a game gets sick, especially if they are following all CDC guidelines in relation to social distancing, masks, sanitizing, etc   
 

Also, it would be pretty hard to prove; unless there was some sort of massive spike in infections among people that attended the game.  Even so, I would think that "assumption of risk” would come into play for the adult, who is also ultimately responsible for the minor. 

In my past profession, we had many discussions about the degree of fault of the parent.  Ultimately, it is a losing argument in front of many juries.  

Like it or not, juries tend to discriminate against companies.  Jury verdict research proves that out by just comparing verdicts for similar injuries in similar auto accidents where the defendant was an individual or a company. Fairness, justice with a jury can be fleeting.

Fair minded judges have nothing to do with most of it. All the judge is going to do is decide what the law is based on statute or case law.

Issues of fact lie with the jury.  So if the facts include a CDC warning against gatherings exceeding X and the football game exceeded X, if the facts show that the victim suffered from or died from COVID-19, if the facts show the victim sat in the section with a person that suffered from the same strain of COVID and that through contact tracing maybe even through help by the Eagles, well then there may be enough for a jury to fault.  Add to that issues of masks taken off and show in game footage , expectation of yelling and singing, maybe even the stadium crew playing Fly, Eagles, Fly after scores and maybe even that the other sufferer moved seats, a good plaintiff lawyer will argue are signs of negligence on the part,of the Eagles.  There may be a dispute as to who had the virus first but most cases aren’t won on the science.  

Maybe the victim left behind a widow and a couple young kids. So now it’s not a person v a person but rather a widow and two young kids v a billion dollar entity (absent a punitive claim, worth doesn’t get presented to a jury but you can bet at least one juror will be aware of Wentz’s contract).  

The jury will also thing they have plenty of insurance.  Now folks should think about insurance like tax.  Everyone pays for it so the bigger the hit to insurance the bigger the hit to your pocketbook.  I would suspect that every team already self insures to a high amount. $10s of millions most likely. I could also see the domestic market deciding a pandemic risk in a large stadium isn’t in their appetite. There is no actuarial data to base premium costs on so I would expect, at least to lower level domestic (US) policies they will face a pandemic or Covid-19 exclusion. But the jury doesn’t get evidence of insurance so they won’t know that. 

So widow and two young kids have a higher likelihood of a verdict in their favor than you would suspect.  
 

To JR’s point about the likelihood of a season, well insurance will play a part.  You would be surprised at how the size of balls shrinks when insurers say they won’t insure a risk. 

Some of you guys are prone to short term thinking; Brooks could easily play at a high level at RG for 5 more years.  You’d even think some of you just lost your first born son:

Okay, that’s an exaggeration — but that clip always makes me laugh 

Back to DP's comments on Alshon today.  How much of JJAW sucking so bad do you think comes in to play with their plans with Alshon?  If JJAW showed any sign of being ready to take over would they be more prone to say let's see how he heals up?  As of now it sounds like they want Alshon to be a big part of the team.

Of course it could be total coach speak too, not burning a bridge or letting anyone know what they plan to do.

18 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Back to DP's comments on Alshon today.  How much of JJAW sucking so bad do you think comes in to play with their plans with Alshon?  If JJAW showed any sign of being ready to take over would they be more prone to say let's see how he heals up?  As of now it sounds like they want Alshon to be a big part of the team.

Of course it could be total coach speak too, not burning a bridge or letting anyone know what they plan to do.

Wow I just asked this question about Alshon earlier without hearing what DP had to say today. I thought that plan was scary then and still is.

46 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

Some of you guys are prone to short term thinking; Brooks could easily play at a high level at RG for 5 more years.  You’d even think some of you just lost your first born son:

Okay, that’s an exaggeration — but that clip always makes me laugh 

And I'd call that wishful thinking.

Jeez, talk about being cursed....   Eagles are 4-0 in playoff games in which Brandon Brooks finished healthy....

2 hours ago, T-1000 said:

Anyone who politicizes wearing or not wearing a mask on either side of the spectrum are morons. It's not a political statement. It's about being unselfish, taking precautions, and keeping everyone safe. It may or may not make a difference, but then again it might. There is literally nothing to lose by wearing one.

Your paragraph reads exactly like when somebody says something like, "I don't mean to sound like a prejudiced, racist, hateful person, but..."  and goes on to say the most prejudiced, racist, hateful s***.

C'mon, man...

17 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I dont see Driscoll as an NFL OT at all.  His arms are short, but he seems ideal inside, specifically at C.  

 

Prince on the other hand has the body for OT, either side.  He's so raw. But he's got the tools athletically, especially if the knee checks out.  I really see him as a likely starting OT down the road, either here or elsewhere.  I think he has that kind of potential and I think Stout is that good when he has the clay to mold.

Driscoll struck me as a new Toddfather type who can probably play any position on the OL in a pinch. 

Well, after he gets C down better since he admittedly just started that.

5 hours ago, ManuManu said:

Sounds like JJAW as the X at the beginning of the year?

 

Also sounds like they realize they did JJAW a disservice by having him learn all the spots from the jump.

That was just so backwards thinking it s amazing to me that they even tried it.

12 minutes ago, Green Dog said:

Jeez, talk about being cursed....   Eagles are 4-0 in playoff games in which Brandon Brooks finished healthy....

Your paragraph reads exactly like when somebody says something like, "I don't mean to sound like a prejudiced, racist, hateful person, but..."  and goes on to say the most prejudiced, racist, hateful s***.

C'mon, man...

I will just ignore this complete and utter nonsense since obviously you are either trolling or mentally challenged.

LMAO at it being racist and hateful to suggest listening to scientists and being considerate to others by wearing a mask.

3 hours ago, austinfan said:

Peters could step in and play RG, I mean the guy is super smart and you can't get more experienced.

And RG would actually fit his declining skills, he'd instantly be one of the most powerful guards in the NFL, wouldn't have to worry about diminished range, and is still agile enough to handle DTs.

 

As far as protests, most were wearing masks and it was outside, but they didn't exactly practice social distancing and there were a few idiots without masks. Including many of the cops watching the protests. So there are going to be increased infections, but probably less proportionately than from say churches with people without masks (see West Viriginia).

Anyone think the majority of the crowd Saturday will be wearing masks, inside for hours, with people shouting? 

Asking Peters to play predominately out of a 3 poont stance, at his age, could bring on more injury issues, couldn't it?

7 minutes ago, PrinceKelby said:

Asking Peters to play predominately out of a 3 poont stance, at his age, could bring on more injury issues, couldn't it?

Did he ever line up with his hand in the ground even when they ran the ball as of late?  I can't remember him in a 3 point at all.

1 hour ago, RLC said:

Given that he tore the other achilles, it's more bad luck than anything else. Brooks was a Pro Bowl level player. I would have waited to sign him to the extension, but you can't predict these types of injuries. 

Jason Peters played 7 more years for us after tearing his achilles twice in 2012. 

I believe the risk of contralateral Achilles injury actually is higher, so I wouldn’t say it was completely unpredictable.  

20 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

I will just ignore this complete and utter nonsense since obviously you are either trolling or mentally challenged.

LMAO at it being racist and hateful to suggest listening to scientists and being considerate to others by wearing a mask.

Your should have ignored it with how you interpreted it.  I'm not saying you are any of those descriptors, I'm saying what you posted begins with a statement that the next 4 sentences clearly show is not the case.

Of course not wearing a mask is political.

40 minutes ago, Green Dog said:

Jeez, talk about being cursed....   Eagles are 4-0 in playoff games in which Brandon Brooks finished healthy....

Your paragraph reads exactly like when somebody says something like, "I don't mean to sound like a prejudiced, racist, hateful person, but..."  and goes on to say the most prejudiced, racist, hateful s***.

C'mon, man...

Except there's nothing controversial about wearing a mask.