- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 139,030
Has anyone heard any real good reason's against the surgery?
I haven't. And, I can't think of any.
Has anyone heard any real good reason's against the surgery?
You, skid and Clay were on the Mazevo site?
Hmmph.
Sorry then.

Since Campo. To be fair, I was a lot more homer back then.
I remember moving to here after the hutch incident, and you guys all had fake names.![]()
And people still, to this day, figure it is all on Weeden and Cassel.
ditto
You were on Austin 360 before that. That's a span old about 25 years.
Since 1991?
The Mumford procedure has been the preferred option, sources told Staff Writer David Moore earlier this month, because it places less long-term stress on the collarbone than attaching a plate. That approach is taken to reduce pain and discomfort where the clavicle meets the shoulder.

So basically one procedure will prevent the injury from happening again and the other won't. The guy has now broken his collarbone 3 times and we aren't concerned that he will break it again?
All I can say is I hope we draft one of these QB this year because they will be playing in week 6 when Romo breaks his collarbone again.
Nope.
They will assume the surgery "fixes" it for the next three-four years (it's not a damn debate, guys).
So basically one procedure will prevent the injury from happening again and the other won't. The guy has now broken his collarbone 3 times and we aren't concerned that he will break it again?
All I can say is I hope we draft one of these QB this year because they will be playing in week 6 when Romo breaks his collarbone again.