I realize it wasn't what you were referring to (that would be the part about if it was really something else), but in fairness, what you referred to was pretty vague and general the first time, you mentioned the leg with the most recent response immediately above. Not mentioning it initially clearly complicated me responding with specificity to something you didn't mention inthe first place. I alluded to it possibly being addressed AFTER IR. A team might want to keep an injury to an ACTIVE player on the down low (within the limits of complying with league's injury reporting policy), OBVIOUSLY, so they aren't a featured target in opposing game plans.
How does that apply to a player on IR? Keep in mind the sequence when you ask why they would make it public. THEY DID MAKE IT PUBLIC, only after he went on IR (which as noted above, seemingly can do no harm at that point). You may ask yourself...
why they would divulge that? But the fact is, they did. My question, still unanswered, IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE IT PUBLIC, why mention the eye and say what it wasn't, and keep secret what it really was? Either say nothing, or say what it was, othewise it kind of defeats the purpose.
I didn't hear anything close to consensus that his issue was a lingering 2012 leg injury, there was speculation that he wasn't the same player. I get that you don't think it is the case. I didn't say he absolutely, positively, definitely has hit the wall and lost it, just suggested it as a possibility, and do find their mentioning the eye puzzling and a headscratcher (why disinformation when no longer relevant?). Needless to say, his history is meaningless if he is no longer the player he was (unless in some kind of a coach/mentor capacity?). If he is the player he was, you or Fisher won't need to invoke history, his body of work at his best speaks for itself. If he still "doesn't seem to have the jump" in 2014, two years removed from the putative 2012 leg injury, at what point, how many more years of ineffectiveness would you need, to concur that maybe he isn't the player he was? There could be timing issues regarding when would be the best time cut or restructure him, if that is the directon they choose.
To recap, if he can return to something close to form, I'm onboard. If Fisher determines he can still play, I don't want him cut (but he needs to be drastically, severely restructured due to the uncertainty of the brutal 2013 season). If in his estimation he has lost it, he needs to be gone as a player, history or not. Not sure what you could possibly debate about this last part? :^)