Wow, even the mascot...
press pause on the second slow-mo replay around 0:12 mark
I wonder if Stern will decide to suspend him.
I have seen Boomer on a few occassions tackle one of the participants. A couple of times it seemed to get a little rough, but I thought it was just acting.
I always assumed that it was pre-arranged and just part of the fun.
In this particular incident... maybe not.
But I would say the guy could have chosen to play it safe and not participate. But on the other hand, he may have had no way of knowing that he would get roughed up by Boomer, playfully or otherwise.
It will probably be settled for 50K or whatever, and we'll never hear about it again.
But the Pacers don't need that kind of publicity, no matter how trivial it seems.
The only mascot that comes close to boomer as far as mascots that I like, is this guy.
That's "Squatch" the Sonics mascot....it's a sasquatch
Meaningless. That's worth more as a deterrent to keep someone from even trying to get anything and discourage then from seeing an atty. Because the first thing the atty will do is tell them that it is meaningless.
Much like the "Not Responsible for Accidents" sign at a yard sale... pointless... EXCEPT if some does injure themself you can point to the sign and hope they say "DARN! I didn't see that... I guess I'm screwed then... Sorry to trouble you"
As someone who knows a little about back injuries as well as having a friend who has had a couple of spinal surgeries, I can tell you it isn't the type of thing you take lightly. And many people with bad backs can function surprisingly well with the condition IF they can be deliberate in their actions, know not to overdo anything, etc.. It is the surprise movements (especially quick ones) that get you: Missing a step while carrying something... Stepping in a small hole when you expected level ground... bumping into a corner or something unexpected and unseen in your path.... getting tackled by a furry mascot from behind.
I defer to Uncle Buck on what the man can expect in a legitimate claim but I'm surprised he'd think 50,000.00 is out of the question. Knowing that a fusion surgery can and all that leads up to it can run 20,000.00 -30,000.00, I can't imagine how messing that up wouldn't be worth something for pain and suffering.
And I don't know the man had a fusion surgery but I offered that as an example of one type of surgery it could be.
This could be a legit claim... or not... BUT on it's face I think it could have merit. I heard nothing in the article to make me skeptical.
I agree with those that think this didn't need the reporter tying it to other Pacer misdeeds of recent history. If people wanted to make that connection they could on their own.
As for why it's went two years... Maybe the lawyers and insurance people have been fighting it out and getting nowhere so the man upped the ante before the statute of limitations kicked in.
Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.
"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."
Perhaps I spoke too soon about "no insurance company paying that guy $50,000" In order to say that with some authoirty I'd have to have more info on the exact injury and see the videotape of the incident, if there is one.
Wow, this is old, we still had tickets back then.
There's nothing wrong with Boomer. Now, that Bowser character, he's the real SOB.
Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!
Hmmm IF he informed the P's of his bad back. and IF Boomer was informed, and IF Boomer went ahead and involved the man in some Physical activity...I can see where a negligence case might be made. Certainly if you have a malpractice type litigator involved I could see where a case would stand a chance. Jury trial....juries almost always feel sorry for the injured and go after the one with the deep pockets. In some cases I've heard of the jurors didn't really feel that the defendent was "guilty" but felt the injured deserved some type of compensation for his injuries and so awarded $ from the not-so-guilty defendent with deep pockets who could afford it. (that is assuming the injuries were legit)
If you get to thinkin’ you’re a person of some influence, try orderin’ somebody else’s dog around..
alleging that the 6-foot-tall faux cat exacerbated the pain from a recent surgery
While he may very well have a case "legally"..
How exactly will they be able to prove that he indeed informed Boomer of his condition ?
I think Bowser is behind all of this..
Why Not Us ?
"He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)
Legit or not, you pay the guy $200,000 K regardless. The legal fees alone could eclipse that quickly and easily.
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill
“If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird
Trade Boomer for clutch...that mascot is awesome!
If the man told them about his back, and then he gets tackled when all he agreed to do was shoot free throws, that's the Pacers' fault IMO.
I'm not saying that means he has a legal case, just that personally I blame them, not the guy with the bad back.
I mentioned 50K as an out-of-court settlement on a whim... as an example.
But, if the man has lost work because of the injury, he's had pain and required any additional procedures on his back, jeesh... we are talking a lot bigger settlement than 50K.
The bottom line is that the Pacers would in no way want this going to trial in front of a jury. You do that and the legal fees alone will start mounting into some pretty big dollars. Asssuming the jury is leaning toward the plaintiff to begin with, all his lawyer has to do is point out that the Pacers are willing to pay $8M to a player that is not even playing a single game this year (Bender), and how do you think the jury will respond? They will probably take the attitude that if the Pacers can tinkle away $8M to someone who's not even earning it, then certainly they can afford to cough up some pretty big bucks to someone that they have injured through negligence.
No way would the Pacers ever want or even risk this case going to trial. As long as it has any merit whatsoever, it will be settled and we will never hear another word about it.