Charles
Benched
- Messages
- 3,408
- Reaction score
- 1
:laugh1:MichaelWinicki said:True.
I think amputation is going to be the answer.
Michael put the Bottle away it's not even 5pm on the East Coast yet
:laugh1:MichaelWinicki said:True.
I think amputation is going to be the answer.
BigDFan5 said:I think they should amputate both legs just as a premeptive strike against him injuring his other knee, what do you think?
leotisbrown said:Huh!!??
Thats a terrible idea. Why would they amputate off a leg that's not hurt? Its bad enough what he will have to go through with the hurt leg but damaging the unhurt leg seems silly to me.
As for the preemptive strike he could do the same thing by stretching the unhurt leg before practice and wearing a leg brace during games that would be much better than amputate it straight off.
RonBurgandy31 said:Thats not was I trying to say, everyone starts saying hes done for the year right after hes hurt. Im trying to say it takes time to find everything out, and dont jump to conclusions.
leotisbrown said:Huh!!??
Thats a terrible idea. Why would they amputate off a leg that's not hurt? Its bad enough what he will have to go through with the hurt leg but damaging the unhurt leg seems silly to me.
As for the preemptive strike he could do the same thing by stretching the unhurt leg before practice and wearing a leg brace during games that would be much better than amputate it straight off.
dargonking999 said:it was a joke man, he's not serious
leotisbrown said:Huh!!??
Thats a terrible idea. Why would they amputate off a leg that's not hurt? Its bad enough what he will have to go through with the hurt leg but damaging the unhurt leg seems silly to me.
As for the preemptive strike he could do the same thing by stretching the unhurt leg before practice and wearing a leg brace during games that would be much better than amputate it straight off.
Huh!!??
Thats a terrible idea. Why would they amputate off a leg that's not hurt? Its bad enough what he will have to go through with the hurt leg but damaging the unhurt leg seems silly to me.
As for the preemptive strike he could do the same thing by stretching the unhurt leg before practice and wearing a leg brace during games that would be much better than amputate it straight off.
AsthmaField said:I agree. Stretching the ligaments as opposed to amputation is a much better way. I really think we shouldn't amputate his good leg just to avoid future injury.
***Please donate to the United Sarcasm Blindness Fund... Because missing a good joke is a terrible thing.***
Vertigo_17 said:There's a difference when you/I get an MRI and a profootball player. He's the only one in line to have the report done. The radiologist will start working/readling the imaging study as soon as the MRI is complete. They will know something later today.
AsthmaField said:I agree. Stretching the ligaments as opposed to amputation is a much better way. I really think we shouldn't amputate his good leg just to avoid future injury.
***Please donate to the United Sarcasm Blindness Fund... Because missing a good joke is a terrible thing.***
agreedRonBurgandy31 said:Thats not was I trying to say, everyone starts saying hes done for the year right after hes hurt. Im trying to say it takes time to find everything out, and dont jump to conclusions.
MichaelWinicki said:Even a half-arsed technician will be able to look at that MRI after it's finished and know one way or the other.
BigDFan5 said:I think they should amputate both legs just as a premeptive strike against him injuring his other knee, what do you think?
HardHittin'Witten said:wow...I wonder if we can get Kavika Pittman back. We are doomed.
MichaelWinicki said:That's absolutely brilliant!
Maybe they should consider doing the whole team-- whatcha think?
dargonking999 said:it was a joke man, he's not serious