SUMMARY: McNair's agent, Bus Cook, said McNair was notified in a letter that McNair failed a team physical at the end of the 2005 season so he needed a physical before he could practice or work out with the Titans. Cook wondered why the failed physical wasn't even mentioned during the grievance hearing. According to Cook, no one was available Monday to handle it. "They told Steve no one would be available to schedule a physical until Tuesday or Wednesday, so I don't know what is going to happen," Cook said. Trade talks between the Ravens and Titans have been on hold for three weeks while the Titans awaited a ruling. "Steve is disappointed and frustrated," Cook said of the holdup in determining his future.
What do you think about this article? Post your comments below.
What do you think about this article? Post your comments below.
Wow they titans should have mentioned this a LONG TIME AGO! Alot more people would have been understanding about him being locked out AND the contract situations. We may have won the grievance. And we could have eliminated this PR blunder. Now it just looks even worse to the public.
I think the devil is in the details here. What kind of failure are we talking about? There are a ton of players hurting by the end of the season and most either need surgery or just some time to take care of it of the issue. McNair didn't have anything done after the season which leads me to believe time would take care of things.
This has to be minor and just a precautionary measure or it would have been mentioned before now. Unless the Titans didn't want to scare off the Ratbirds...
This has to be minor and just a precautionary measure or it would have been mentioned before now. Unless the Titans didn't want to scare off the Ratbirds...
It was probably a pectorial muscle he strained in the Miami game.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/recap?gid=20051224015
"It got sore and more sore as the game went on," McNair said. "It hurt more when I threw."
It was apparently good enough in Hawaii in the Pro Bowl. This must be a non-issue.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/recap?gid=20051224015
"It got sore and more sore as the game went on," McNair said. "It hurt more when I threw."
It was apparently good enough in Hawaii in the Pro Bowl. This must be a non-issue.
i tend to agree with jeff on this one with it being a minor thing....
i think it may be a move to get mac in BSP within the next day or two to get his physical done so he can be on the field with the players next week as the OTA's roll around....
i think it may be a move to get mac in BSP within the next day or two to get his physical done so he can be on the field with the players next week as the OTA's roll around....
Of course it's a non-issue, but Cook would like us to think that McNair was informed of the failure just last week.....after the hearing. I find it hard to believe that McNair had no idea.TitanJeff said:
If they knew he failed the January physical (my guess is they did), then they should have no objection to him having to pass one before working out now.
from http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060603/SPORTS01/606030362/1328/SPORTS
"Feerick's decision said that McNair was at the team's facility for offseason workouts on at least two days during the week of March 27. It also said the parties disagreed on whether McNair declined to sign a standard "workout agreement" that outlined the program, including a player's responsibility to report injuries suffered in it.
"I participated in all the drills, the foot drills, the ladder drill, lift — did the lift weights — did my core exercises, did a couple cardio. … I only (threw) one day, and that was on Wednesday," McNair testified. "And we had young receivers — some of the young receivers that was healthy out there throwing."
Interesting that he wasn't asked to take a physical before he worked out in March - but I agree it's a non-issue.
"Feerick's decision said that McNair was at the team's facility for offseason workouts on at least two days during the week of March 27. It also said the parties disagreed on whether McNair declined to sign a standard "workout agreement" that outlined the program, including a player's responsibility to report injuries suffered in it.
"I participated in all the drills, the foot drills, the ladder drill, lift — did the lift weights — did my core exercises, did a couple cardio. … I only (threw) one day, and that was on Wednesday," McNair testified. "And we had young receivers — some of the young receivers that was healthy out there throwing."
Interesting that he wasn't asked to take a physical before he worked out in March - but I agree it's a non-issue.
TitanJeff said:
If I was Steve, I'd be playing up the injury as a way to explain my pathetic performance in that game.
Also remember, its the player's decision whether or not to play in the Pro Bowl, not the teams.
Good stuff from PK.Brian said:
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060606/SPORTS01/606060366/1027
McCormick has a much better article on what this whole deal means...
http://nashvillecitypaper.com/index.cfm?section=7&screen=news&news_id=50253
http://nashvillecitypaper.com/index.cfm?section=7&screen=news&news_id=50253
One things for sure. My knowledge of how the injury/medical-physical/insurance/liability/contract obligation/workout at team facilities vs work out off team facility part of the NFL has increased significantly this off season.
http://home.att.net/~kittycatfurballssounds/catticked.wavnigel said:
You guys are really pissy about your writers huh?
:ha:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
