Whatever week this is - Non B2B Champs games

[TBURGESS]

5 minutes ago, Booch said:

Najee Harris had a.minor strain..came back fast yup..and is a shell of what he was

Rourke had surgery..with hardware to correct bone and tendon...one worst case scenario for Linsfranc.. so no way in hell he is ahead of schedule as it's not possible for that particular healing process...sure maybe plus minus a week or so...not months...and how I know what type...I asked someone I know in lions organization who told me extent...so him coming back before hardware out..and minimal heal time regardless how he "feels" in a non game situation is pretty dumb

Thanks for the inside info on Rourke's surgery. Better than Google gave me.

[Booch]

40 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Thanks for the inside info on Rourke's surgery. Better than Google gave me.

Not sure if u being a smart arse and or are legit...or what your deal...But I know the surgery he had, it was also in media as well sometime back if u look, and it's the one requiring 2 surgeries when all said and done....and also know the timetable well as know of guys who went through it...there was also a Bomber years back who sustained it....never played again either

[SpeedFlex27]

4 hours ago, Geebrr said:

Even if he feels ok now (to whatever extent that is) you don’t practice getting hit or having a 300 lb guy fall on you. 
 

 

And give just a slight twist.

3 hours ago, Booch said:

Not sure if u being a smart arse and or are legit...or what your deal...But I know the surgery he had, it was also in media as well sometime back if u look, and it's the one requiring 2 surgeries when all said and done....and also know the timetable well as know of guys who went through it...there was also a Bomber years back who sustained it....never played again either

He ain't legit. 

[CodyT]

Regarding Rourke. Maybe I'm misinformed here, or just hopeful, but does the team not have the kids best interests in mind?

I just feel like if they thought he had a good chance of getting hurt they wouldn't play him. I saw the study booch put up with the soccer/rugby players. Surely Rourke himself has seen it or something similar

 I really just find it hard to believe THAT level of neglect would happen in a pro league, even if it is the CFL. It just seems strange. There's more to the story 

[SpeedFlex27]

1 hour ago, CodyT said:

Regarding Rourke. Maybe I'm misinformed here, or just hopeful, but does the team not have the kids best interests in mind?

I just feel like if they thought he had a good chance of getting hurt they wouldn't play him. I saw the study booch put up with the soccer/rugby players. Surely Rourke himself has seen it or something similar

 I really just find it hard to believe THAT level of neglect would happen in a pro league, even if it is the CFL. It just seems strange. There's more to the story 

The only reason Rourke has hardware in his foot is because one or more bones have shifted & need to be put back in place. It takes nine months for a bone to heal with hardware in it, according to my orthopedic surgeon.

I have hardware in my left foot from arthritis surgery in 2012 where my bones had also shifted. I had to wait 9 months for my foot bones to heal before that could be done. It's Mother Nature. The healing process is what it is. It may be sped up a bit by specific treatment, perhaps. However, as I've also been told by a surgeon, the healing time of a bone is a minimum of 9-12 months. Before the second surgery to take the hardware out. That's no picnic, either.

Edited October 28, 2022 by SpeedFlex27

[TBURGESS]

15 hours ago, Booch said:

Not sure if u being a smart arse and or are legit...or what your deal...But I know the surgery he had, it was also in media as well sometime back if u look, and it's the one requiring 2 surgeries when all said and done....and also know the timetable well as know of guys who went through it...there was also a Bomber years back who sustained it....never played again either

Even when I thank you you want to know what my deal is? FTR: I was honestly thanking you for providing info I didn't get from Google.

Some players never play again. Most do, even at the NFL level.

You continue to bang on about the timetable, when it was agreed in the first posts that Rourke is way ahead of the average. Only 3 NFL players got back on the field faster.

You're arguing that coming back early means: "1) Rourke is not human 2)B.C has a secret sports medicine program for faster healing or 3) they rolling the dice and being less than ethical 4) Rourke is just a dumb tool and signed a waiver to play...and likely ruining any NFL shot in the spring"

I'm arguing that it doesn't necessarily mean any of those things.

@SpeedFlex27 Your timeframe doesn't mesh with the average timeframe for NFL player to get back on the field. It's likely the difference between a 65 year old arthritic foot and a 24 year old pro athletes foot.

Edited October 28, 2022 by TBURGESS

[Geebrr]

10 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

@SpeedFlex27 Your timeframe doesn't mesh with the average timeframe for NFL player to get back on the field. It's likely the difference between a 65 year old arthritic foot and a 24 year old pro athletes foot.

More serious Lisfranc injuries require surgery, and the recovery will depend on the degree of displacement to the bones. When the Lisfranc ligament is torn the bones shift out of place. The recovery following the repair of a significant Lisfranc ligament tear is typically nine to 12 months. Basketball activities can be slowly reintroduced sooner, but playing in a live game won’t come for a while. 
 

- an article about a 22 year old NBA player 

[Booch]

10 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Even when I thank you you want to know what my deal is? FTR: I was honestly thanking you for providing info I didn't get from Google.

Some players never play again. Most do, even at the NFL level.

You continue to bang on about the timetable, when it was agreed in the first posts that Rourke is way ahead of the average. Only 3 NFL players got back on the field faster.

You're arguing that coming back early means: "1) Rourke is not human 2)B.C has a secret sports medicine program for faster healing or 3) they rolling the dice and being less than ethical 4) Rourke is just a dumb tool and signed a waiver to play...and likely ruining any NFL shot in the spring"

I'm arguing that it doesn't necessarily mean any of those things.

@SpeedFlex27 Your timeframe doesn't mesh with the average timeframe for NFL player to get back on the field. It's likely the difference between a 65 year old arthritic foot and a 24 year old pro athletes foot.

well if u look at the timelines...dates....and when hardware comes out ....which is the healing period....he is well under it...and obviously not totally healed....but is "pain free" but deosnt mean healed...pain free with tossing and skeleton work....big difference....and u can be ahead of the schedule....sure..happens with injuries...but not with structural fixation procedures using hardware...of which needs to be surgically removed to complete the healing, and that hasnt been done

The second study the one with the NFL players...where it states the timelines...and averages...also the propencity for being back to normal after the healing...which is very rare was pointed out to me from a staff member of the Arizona Cardinals strength and conditioning and rehab team...whom I do camps with and is a guideline all teams basically follow. I ran by him this lil scenario and whats happening...and the time lines and he said thats crazy, and is a recipe for disaster, and can't even believe the team orthopedic physician is even halfway ok with that.

I will stick to my opinion, and from the mouths of other who know WTF they talkin about on an NFL team as opposed to google and assumptions...he may not get hurt...he may get re-hurt ans never be the same...who knows, but fact of the matter it's a desperate rush job and frankly quite stupid...

20 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Even when I thank you you want to know what my deal is? FTR: I was honestly thanking you for providing info I didn't get from Google.

Some players never play again. Most do, even at the NFL level.

You continue to bang on about the timetable, when it was agreed in the first posts that Rourke is way ahead of the average. Only 3 NFL players got back on the field faster.

You're arguing that coming back early means: "1) Rourke is not human 2)B.C has a secret sports medicine program for faster healing or 3) they rolling the dice and being less than ethical 4) Rourke is just a dumb tool and signed a waiver to play...and likely ruining any NFL shot in the spring"

I'm arguing that it doesn't necessarily mean any of those things.

@SpeedFlex27 Your timeframe doesn't mesh with the average timeframe for NFL player to get back on the field. It's likely the difference between a 65 year old arthritic foot and a 24 year old pro athletes foot.

based on?...u are so full of crap...did you not read the second study...with NFL PLAYERS..and their return to play....obviously not, and also read my other post on actually asking a NFL team rehab and strength person about it....not just a google search and or assumption to continue an argument....good grief

[Geebrr]

He will have the ball in his hands for about 1 second post snap tonight. 

[Booch]

3 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

He will have the ball in his hands for about 1 second post snap tonight. 

tossing a ball under no diress, or having to run in earnest or have the weight of another human yanking u down is a different scenario...wish him well, and we pound him within the rules but if he gets hurt I will have no pity or sympathy....nope....none

[Geebrr]

Just now, Booch said:

tossing a ball under no diress, or having to run in earnest or have the weight of another human yanking u down is a different scenario...wish him well, and we pound him within the rules but if he gets hurt I will have no pity or sympathy....nope....none

I agree, I said a page back that you don’t practice getting hit or a guy falling on you. 
 

I just think it will be one read and out 

[Booch]

this could also be a test too...to see if he can actually play in the WSF....and if he is not 100% he prob is one and done....but who knows...they wont get past CGY anyway

[Geebrr]

Could definitely just be that or even gamesmanship from BC and he has no chance of playing at all in the WSF and will   Cosplay as a QB tonight. 

The problem is that nobody cares which one of their QBs plays. 

Not us, and not Calgary 
 

 

[Noeller]

I'm already exhausted from reading/hearing about Rourke and the will he/won't he/should he.........**** off already. Let's play ball and park that kid on his ass over and over and over.

[BigBlueFanatic]

14 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I'm already exhausted from reading/hearing about Rourke and the will he/won't he/should he.........**** off already. Let's play ball and park that kid on his ass over and over and over.

Yup any one of our DL gets in his face a few times and we quickly see him standing on the sidelines… hopefully for his sake as a safety precaution.  Otherwise the TB + media circle jerk and slurping is nauseating.

[Mike]

13 hours ago, CodyT said:

Regarding Rourke. Maybe I'm misinformed here, or just hopeful, but does the team not have the kids best interests in mind?

I just feel like if they thought he had a good chance of getting hurt they wouldn't play him. I saw the study booch put up with the soccer/rugby players. Surely Rourke himself has seen it or something similar

 I really just find it hard to believe THAT level of neglect would happen in a pro league, even if it is the CFL. It just seems strange. There's more to the story 

Football teams rarely, if ever, have their players best interests in mind.

[17to85]

1 minute ago, Mike said:

Football teams rarely, if ever, have their players best interests in mind.

Especially ones so seemingly desperate for success like BC. 

Honestly I hope someone on our DL absolutely buries Rourke within the rules the first time he drops back to pass. 

[Booch]

Just now, 17to85 said:

Especially ones so seemingly desperate for success like BC. 

Honestly I hope someone on our DL absolutely buries Rourke within the rules the first time he drops back to pass. 

seeing as it a meaningless game...I'd send the house play after play while he in there....just for funnsies and to see what happens...I bet he is yanked as quick as he was trotted out....if Campbell had and common sense and brains....but on that note...I dont think he has a lot as he has done a lot of dumbassed things as a HC

[Geebrr]

The way they celebrated like idiots squeaking out a win vs our backups, why not? 

[CodyT]

15 minutes ago, Mike said:

Football teams rarely, if ever, have their players best interests in mind.

But we can agree this is strange right? Like Rourke has clearly looked over a lot of realities, too. Dudes got a good shot at the NFL and he's playing on a 70 k salary.

I get the athletes want to play and are naturally competitve, but if it is as so many here say it to be, this is down right dumb on his behalf

[JuranBoldenRules]

13 hours ago, CodyT said:

Regarding Rourke. Maybe I'm misinformed here, or just hopeful, but does the team not have the kids best interests in mind?

I just feel like if they thought he had a good chance of getting hurt they wouldn't play him. I saw the study booch put up with the soccer/rugby players. Surely Rourke himself has seen it or something similar

 I really just find it hard to believe THAT level of neglect would happen in a pro league, even if it is the CFL. It just seems strange. There's more to the story 

The team doesn’t give a **** they just need the guy cleared.  
 

I don’t get Rourke’s representation and why they’d risk the NFL money.  There are a bunch of teams that don’t even have starters and he’s definitely better than a bunch of guys who are backups.  He’s proven that over half a season.  He’s a NFL #2 for sure.  The deal with the NFL now is to have a rookie QB to max the cap around the field to have a chance to win.  Would you rather have a guy coming out of NCAA you’re drafting at 18-19-20 or bring in a guy who’s played pro for 3 years as a “rookie?”
 

Now return early to play at 7:30 PM in Winnipeg late October with weather approaching freezing…makes no sense to me.  They are risking tens of millions of US dollars.

[Pete Catan's Ghost]

22 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Especially ones so seemingly desperate for success like BC. 

Honestly I hope someone on our DL absolutely buries Rourke within the rules the first time he drops back to pass. 

Any Bomber that inflicts even the most innocent of hits that puts him down will be scrutinized.
If he happens to be reinjured, the national sports media will view the Bomber player through the same lens as Mosca after Fleming. 
Good times

[JCon]

2 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

The team doesn’t give a **** they just need the guy cleared.  
 

I don’t get Rourke’s representation and why they’d risk the NFL money.  There are a bunch of teams that don’t even have starters and he’s definitely better than a bunch of guys who are backups.  He’s proven that over half a season.  He’s a NFL #2 for sure.  The deal with the NFL now is to have a rookie QB to max the cap around the field to have a chance to win.  Would you rather have a guy coming out of NCAA you’re drafting at 18-19-20 or bring in a guy who’s played pro for 3 years as a “rookie?”
 

Now return early to play at 7:30 PM in Winnipeg late October with weather approaching freezing…makes no sense to me.  They are risking tens of millions of US dollars.

They must believe that the risk is worth the reward. They must be hearing that he could cement his NFL potential with a few more games experience. It's all about the upfront money.

[Stickem]

4 minutes ago, Pete Catan's Ghost said:

Any Bomber that inflicts even the most innocent of hits that puts him down will be scrutinized.
If he happens to be reinjured, the national sports media will view the Bomber player through the same lens as Mosca after Fleming. 
Good times

Now you've gone and said it.....IF that scenario happens we will be 'tarred and featherd by the media '...you can be sure of that.....'Big Bad Bombers cripple the CFL darling'  .... I can see it all now ....I know our guys are not going to let up if his intention is to just sit in the pocket....The possbility is there AND I wish we were playing anybody else to end this season.......That bugger is laying a heavy on us, just being in there

[TBURGESS]

2 hours ago, Booch said:

well if u look at the timelines...dates....and when hardware comes out ....which is the healing period....he is well under it...and obviously not totally healed....but is "pain free" but deosnt mean healed...pain free with tossing and skeleton work....big difference....and u can be ahead of the schedule....sure..happens with injuries...but not with structural fixation procedures using hardware...of which needs to be surgically removed to complete the healing, and that hasnt been done

The second study the one with the NFL players...where it states the timelines...and averages...also the propencity for being back to normal after the healing...which is very rare was pointed out to me from a staff member of the Arizona Cardinals strength and conditioning and rehab team...whom I do camps with and is a guideline all teams basically follow. I ran by him this lil scenario and whats happening...and the time lines and he said thats crazy, and is a recipe for disaster, and can't even believe the team orthopedic physician is even halfway ok with that.

I will stick to my opinion, and from the mouths of other who know WTF they talkin about on an NFL team as opposed to google and assumptions...he may not get hurt...he may get re-hurt ans never be the same...who knows, but fact of the matter it's a desperate rush job and frankly quite stupid...

based on?...u are so full of crap...did you not read the second study...with NFL PLAYERS..and their return to play....obviously not, and also read my other post on actually asking a NFL team rehab and strength person about it....not just a google search and or assumption to continue an argument....good grief

Why do you insist on arguing the studies & timelines again & again & again & again...? It's been decided since post 1 that Rourke is ahead of schedule. You're arguing a point that has already been decided over and over again.

No one is saying Rourke isn't ahead of schedule. No one is saying he's back to normal. No one is saying he's 100%. No one is saying he's pain free. No one is even saying he'll last the whole quarter, let alone the whole game.

It's a matter of opinion, not fact, that it's "a desperate rush job and frankly stupid". The fact is he's going to play before most other players. The rest is your conjecture & your conjecture isn't fact no matter how much you believe it is. That's the crux of this stupid argument. You don't like your opinion being challenged. You believe it's fact and expect it to be treated that way otherwise it's days and days of angry text that ends up in name calling, cuz that's your intellectual level.