From: United Federation of Planets
ORIGINAL: David Levine
ORIGINAL: David Levine
Damn, what a shame. I didn't realize he was that good once upon a time. I feel bad for the kid. It was a good move by the Vikings to get him as an undrafted FA. If they could rehab him back to his old arm strength, they could have had something. Like David said, if it hasn't come back after five years, it's not likely to.
I've dealt with a minor shoulder issue for maybe 10 years. I've gotten it to "okay" multiple times, although some motions were weirdly weak. About 2 months ago, I started 4 exercises that finally strengthened the shoulder to where it feels solid (weird range-of-motion stuff in a pool). So I don't know. Likely it'll never be the same, sure. But that was true 5 years ago, and much of the challenge is figuring out which muscles can be strengthened next without unbalancing the shoulder. So I wouldn't give up on the possibility of making progress.
But I'd imagine there is a huge gulf between an average person feeling "right" and a pro athlete being able to make NFL caliber throws.
And it seems to go beyond just having a noodle arm. It seems to have psychologically affected every other aspect of his game.
Oh, I'm certain there's no real comparison between me and any professional athlete. I'm extrapolating, perhaps absurdly. I learned to avoid certain motions and developed weird ways to compensate, like using my body to throw my arm up to reach above my shoulder. I only had to undo a few layers of that compensation to get normal-ish. I assume he has had many, many more layers of movements to re-learn to throw at an NFL level.
But with so many muscles in the shoulder, order matters, and to make the next bit of improvement, one challenge is to figure out which muscles need what type of work. (In retrospect, I needed to do something weird to make progress, because I'd done all the standard stuff.) I assume they're constantly trying to figure out which thing to improve next. It's a fantastically complicated rehab, and I doubt his college rehab was done with the comprehensiveness he's gotten in two years with Sugarman.
Probably won't get to his former potential, but who knows. Sugarman is really good. Maybe he's re-developed Browning's throwing motion to be a solid NFL backup, with more potential.
Or maybe it'll fizz.
And I'm fine with keeping him around a bit as an inactive 3rd QB to see if he can ever regain a viable NFL arm. But under no circumstance should he have been the #2 guy.
To me it is as simple as this.
If Browning were any good, We would not have drafted Nate Stanley the next year or Kellen Mond this year.
We couldn't count on Sloter. Or Heinecke. Why should we count on this guy?
I wish it was as easy to stop hating, as it was to start - Cmdr Chakotay - Star Trek: Voyager