He was just talking about it on DC sports radio. But he said OV is so good that he still was able to use his speed last week and not his hands as much.
If he's able to go out there, why bother giving the opponent a heads-up that he's not 100%? I thought he would have fared better against the Saints OL, but that wasn't the case. Maybe there is something he's working through.
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
The defensiveness on this thread is absurd. Specialist implies a problem that a generalist may not be equipped to handle. Simples.
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
The defensiveness on this thread is absurd. Specialist implies a problem that a generalist may not be equipped to handle. Simples.
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
The defensiveness on this thread is absurd. Specialist implies a problem that a generalist may not be equipped to handle. Simples.
...Olivier Vernon had 3 solo tackles and 1 assisted tackle.
In Game Two against New Orleans, he had a total of 1 assisted tackle.
Throw away the stats and ask yourself: In which game did Olivier Vernon look more active?
And then ask yourself: Why?
Doesn't mean the Giants are hiding anything. But not a stretch that his play last week was impacted by his hand injury.
There could be many reasons for this. Saints attempted less than 15 running plays. The Saints also had a number of three and outs while The Cowboys had extensive drives. The Cowboys ran more plays. The list if reasons can go on and on fir why he appeared more active against the Cowboys.
I am not arguing one way or the other. I don't know. But there can be numerous reasons why OV had less tackles in the second game than in the first. OV was very active against the run. The Saints didn't run the ball much. I dont think you can use this comparison as any type of proof he is impacted by his injury when we played two very different teams.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
Quote:
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
The defensiveness on this thread is absurd. Specialist implies a problem that a generalist may not be equipped to handle. Simples.
Quote:
In comment 13138094 Bill in UT said:
Quote:
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
The defensiveness on this thread is absurd. Specialist implies a problem that a generalist may not be equipped to handle. Simples.
Link?
Quote:
In comment 13138140 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 13138094 Bill in UT said:
Quote:
Oh, maybe because early today I read that D. Thompson isn't concerned about his foot and an hour later we find out he's got an appointment with a specialist next week.
Seeing a specialist is now a bad thing? Since when are you obligated to see anything less than the finest physician available based on the perceived severity of the injury? What a ridiculous POV.
The defensiveness on this thread is absurd. Specialist implies a problem that a generalist may not be equipped to handle. Simples.
Link?
http://www.giants.com/videos/videos/Safety-Thompson-on-injury/8dbfc713-6128-4103-811e-32a814242d3a
http://corner.bigblueinteractive.com/index.php?mode=2&thread=541735
...Olivier Vernon had 3 solo tackles and 1 assisted tackle.
In Game Two against New Orleans, he had a total of 1 assisted tackle.
Throw away the stats and ask yourself: In which game did Olivier Vernon look more active?
And then ask yourself: Why?
Doesn't mean the Giants are hiding anything. But not a stretch that his play last week was impacted by his hand injury.
...Olivier Vernon had 3 solo tackles and 1 assisted tackle.
In Game Two against New Orleans, he had a total of 1 assisted tackle.
Throw away the stats and ask yourself: In which game did Olivier Vernon look more active?
And then ask yourself: Why?
Doesn't mean the Giants are hiding anything. But not a stretch that his play last week was impacted by his hand injury.
There could be many reasons for this. Saints attempted less than 15 running plays. The Saints also had a number of three and outs while The Cowboys had extensive drives. The Cowboys ran more plays. The list if reasons can go on and on fir why he appeared more active against the Cowboys.
I am not arguing one way or the other. I don't know. But there can be numerous reasons why OV had less tackles in the second game than in the first. OV was very active against the run. The Saints didn't run the ball much. I dont think you can use this comparison as any type of proof he is impacted by his injury when we played two very different teams.