The more I read of what you post the less I believe you comprehend what you read. There is nothing contradictory in the two things you post.
I agree that there is no reason to accept public statements of coaches as anything other than self-serving; there is no good reason for them to give opponents any inside information whatsoever. Eisen is way too close to the organization to ask the tough questions, not that they would be answered anyway. Football players sweat; I don't attach any great significance to it. Many are also fat. I haven't seen him in action so I can't tell if he's ready for action. I'm perfectly fine waiting to see what he can do when he actually does something.
Oh, I can change my mind at any time, I have no problem with that but I'm certainly not going to change it based on your opinion, your Judge Judy quote or anything at all that has or will be posted on Reddit. The simple fact that you believe those provide proof of anything is astonishingly laughable and the joke is not on you - it is you.
You say “it does not appear it (medical information) can be shared legally with the public (because of HIPPA)” The article says HIPPA rules don’t apply. On the surface it appears these statements are in exact contradiction. Please explain how they aren’t completely opposite statements. Edit. CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THESE TWO STATEMENTS AREN’T COMPLETE OPPOSITES Here is the exact post or Ralebird Here’s a direct quote from the article. Such regulations do not apply to team physicians or trainers employed by an organization or franchise. These medical officials are not subject to HIPAA, but to their employer. @Stevied @anyone
Medical professionals aren't in the dark, they generally know what they speak about through training and experience and don't make statements from a position of darkness. I have never heard of a medical professional making statements that do not allow for individual cases to differ from a typical case. Your hypothetical broken leg question here is not relative to Becton's condition or conditioning; no hypothetical would be.
There is no such thing as HIPPA. Get back to us when you know a little bit about the law you cannot understand.
That's not a typo when it's repeated often. You simply don't know what you're talking about or how to read for content.
That's cool if you believe it. More power to you. For the record I have Roach winning on points and it's really not close. A few more big blows and I'm stopping the fight.
Then explain it to me like I’m a child. Here is your post and direct quote. Here is a direct quote from the article. Such regulations do not apply to team physicians or trainers employed by an organization or franchise. These medical officials are not subject to HIPAA, but to their employer. Here is another quote from the article: Athletes though, agree to share health information with their employer (even if the athlete visits an independent medical professional) when they sign a contract with a team. The reason we know so much about these athletes’ injuries on any given day is that once the information is provided to the organization through the athlete, or through the team physician, the organization is free to publicize it. PLEASE TELL ME HOW YOUR STATEMENT IS BACKED UP BY THE ARTICLE YOU LINKED. I would love for you to be proven right for once.
translation I could change my mind but no matter what i actually wont. there is no proof of burden. you got owned and tried to play all smart and came out looking dumb and doubled down. now i'll put you out of your misery. the federal court already made this ruling when brady tried to sue for deflategate punishment. this was well known years ago before the new CBA. the new CBA was written specifically so players can't even take it as far as brady did (despite even the old CBA allowing it) and goodall has supreme power over punishments as ruled by the federal courts because the NFLPA and NFL agreed to it in their CBA and they found it to be a legally binding document. the precedent is already set. now you wanna admit you are wrong or is the federal court ruling on this exact matter a joke too?
So for those who didn’t hear Ciminis pod today: That’s right, it ain’t a shot in the dark. Which is why I was surprised that you categorized his time frame that was provided by experts as such. Differing is one thing, few weeks, a month..this is beyond differing..it’s 2x at least what they said he’d be out for. Btw per Cimini today: -he should be good to go come day 1 TC, that’s per saleh. If he ain’t ready, he reinjured or ain’t in shape. -he is overweight! Boomer’s Becton above 395lb ain’t shocking to anyone. -cimini said Bectons own nutritionist (he’s using 2 trainers also btw) is ducking questions about his weight. -apparently organization, and rightly so, is pretty annoyed @ Becton. -Def tension between NYJ and Becton. I’m not sure what more folks here need to see, realistically, to lead you to believe Becton ain’t cutting it work ethic wise. You’ll never see him on a scale, and apparently a nearly 10 month recovery (surgery in September) for a 4 month recovery with no obvious complications is par for the course. All that said, even though I ain’t jazzed about him at the moment, I want this guy VERY badly to get with the program. I think most of not everyone on here does, LT being solved goes a llooonnnggg way towards getting us where we want. And he still can get with the picture, but for those of you to put your heads in the sand regarding what he has/hasn’t done, more or less, IMO are just completely missing this!
It is my understanding from the article and other reading that the team doctor, the trainers, the coaches, owners and whoever else works for the team is treated like a single entity by HIPAA and may share information among themselves, similar to your doctor not needing to get your position to share your information with a PA or nurse in their office. That does not allow the team to share the player's information with the general public any more than your doctor can share yours with even your spouse. The article discusses medical information given to the team through an agent as being fair game for release by a team. Of course, both an NFL player and you have the right to authorize any disclosure you or they care to. The second half of the Deadspin article discusses medical privacy law other than that guaranteed by HIPAA and references both the Ezekiel Elliott and Jason Pierre Paul cases.
"Proof of burden..." classic! Please supply a link to your federal court ruling that you claim is definitive proof that no NFL player can sue the league. Until you do your claim is as valid as your use of a Judge Judy episode as some kind of proof. We're talking about the law where the devil resides in the details, not internet chit-chat. You're not really suggesting that Tom Brady's lawsuit against the NFL proves that players cannot sue the NFL are you?
