What a Tuel

He is trolling. He said the same in the shoutbox hours ago, was corrected, and never responded. Blatant trolling.

That's the thing. People act like this will be a nagging problem, and will taint his career. All indications are that once he has this repaired, he will be fine, and maybe more capable.

won't contribute this season? Weren't you the one saying the negative nancy's can accurately interpret the facts? (in a sarcastic manner anyway.) Yep, you were.

They can't. As shown by the "Whaley promised Lawson was just fine and would never need surgery" statements.

Yep, Lawson needs his shoulder removed (out 4 years), and Sammy refuses to keep his foot in line (perpetual injury).

Sure, be negative with a name like Koolaid

A bunch of people with no insight into why or why not Sammy Watkins had surgery when, or even how it escalated into needing surgery, and then implying that he did it to the detriment of the team. This is why the negative people are widely disregarded. Get a grip.

This is why the negative people are so widely disregarded. There isn't any factual argument here. Just an irrational fan spouting off negativity about a player being injured that they were probably being negative, and doubting that he would have a great effect for us when we drafted him anyway. Wooest us, the season is now over. Get a grip.

Good thing they are available almost 90% of the time.

Better now than week 1 or preseason.

He is just simply not good enough to avoid microfractures in his foot! Concentrate Sammy, concentrate!

Just wait for the "injury prone" talk to start.

Wasn't Dez out for longer? Or did it just seem like it? Or did he need surgery or something?

We will still "win now". With recovery times the way they are, Lawson will be back and healthy before you know it, ready for the playoff push, if not earlier. Step away from the ledge. Someone mentioned that they were probably working him out and testing it out, and determined that surgery is better now, rather than risking injury during the season.

I think you mean "dooooooooomed"

To me that sounds a whole lot like Whaley knew about the shoulder, and they thought he might go a season without surgery. Didn't happen. This shouldn't be some huge overreaction and a Pegula investigation into the matter. Sure be skeptical, but as was quoted above, it sounds as though they knew about it. Something happened that they thought they better get the surgery done.

Yeah but the screen that 26CornerBlitz posted says he had an occurrence of the condition last week. Wouldn't that mean that the situation changed?

I think you are confusing peaks with career years. You don't pick a year because it is the RB's highest given year, and claim they peaked because of age when they don't repeat. I mean you can claim they technically peaked, but it is meaningless. At that point you imply their career goes down hill from there, and that simply isn't true. Lynch, Forte, Freddy, Charles, Foster, Gore, and Peterson are all RB's off the top of my head that have recently had fantastic years after your 27 years old mark. The statistical outlier of any player not getting back up to their career year is not because of age. It is coming back to earth off of a fantastic season. Same with Murray, same with Charles, same with Forte, same with Peterson and same with McCoy. These RB's all had career years and then returned to their statistical fantastic averages. If you are saying McCoy won't have another 1,600 yard rushing season, then sure, I might agree with you. (He might have a 1,600 all purpose yard season in him though) But it sounds as though you are saying he will be so bad, he would be worthy of cutting, and that is not the trend with these great RB's. They have very productive fantastic years after 27 and it just isn't true. If you don't think McCoy can handle it, then let's wait and see if Karlos shows that he can take on the load, and perform alongside McCoy then maybe in 2018 we consider cutting McCoy because we found another gem. If you think he isn't worth the money - well we will just have to agree to disagree that his production isn't worth the cap hit.

Man, I was going to respond to ridiculous post after post in this thread but the wheels are just coming off for you people. Take a deep breath, everything's gonna be alright. The Bill's knew about the shoulder. They weighed it as not a huge concern for them. Time will tell if Lawson will be a great player, but the shoulder surgery will turn out fine, there's a reason everyone says "he will need shoulder surgery at some point" and not "serious shoulder surgery could mean Lawson doesn't fully recover". Quit embarrassing yourselves overreacting like this.

There's a lot of questionable statements in this post, but Shady is almost 42 so what do I know.

"A second misconception is that pedophilia is a choice."

Let me ask you why do you think a trans persons feelings about what bathroom or changing room they prefer to be in supersedes the privacy concerns of every other individual? I am offended by the notion that any woman wants me out of their bathroom because I am a man, and men do bad things! No, rather I understand the need for separate facilities for both privacy and safety reasons. If 50% of the population can accept that, and not be hurt that they are practically being called potential creeps and rapists, why can't less than 1%? I agree that the bathroom situation isn't the biggest deal, because trans people have been doing it for years, and hardly anyone has noticed or cared. When you open it up to a free for all, then you have the creeps come out of the woodwork because they have no skin in the game. Creep wants to go into the girls bathroom at Target after he sees some girl go in? Why not? He's a creep. Girl tries to get him kicked out - "well that is what I identify as" and on to the next victim until it becomes a little more physical. Then there comes the changing rooms, which people say will never happen, but just like bathrooms how can you argue to block people out of changing/locker rooms? You say they are harmless, but it is still violating someone's privacy, and that shouldn't just be disregarded as bigotry. It should be considered because that is how these people feel - and you are all about protecting everyone's feelings right? Not just the special cases.

Curious if Obama would care if his daughters felt violated changing in a bathroom with a anatomical male present. Not sure it would matter to his daughters what the anatomical male identifies as - he/she is still an anatomical male in the wrong lockerroom. I'm sure he raised them better than to be concerned for their privacy though.

http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/21/why-these-high-school-girls-dont-want-transgender-student-a-in-their-locker-room/ Edit: Read the whole story. It is a good glimpse into what will be the major issue of "advancing rights" in the next few years. Gotta give those .02% their full rights! Even if it means infringing on the rights of 99.98% others.