MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'

http://image.nola.com/home/nola-medi...309-mmmain.jpg

By Amos Morale III amorale@nola.com,
NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune

Saints general manager Mickey Loomis said Monday that Nick Fairley's heart condition which spurred to Saints to put him on injured reserve has been a difficult situation for the team.

"Obviously the time of the discovery wasn't great for us, nor for him," Loomis said. "But the most important thing is his health.....when doctor says 'look you shouldn't play' you shouldn't play. That's where we are at right now and that's pretty much all we can say about it."

Loomis joined NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune's columnists Jeff Duncan and Larry Holder's daily radio show Dunc & Holder on 1280 FM Monday morning and discussed the team's reaction to Fairley's condition.

Fairley, who posted 43 tackles, nine for loss, 6.5 sacks and 22 quarterback hits, saw at least three heart specialists after a team doctor noticed an irregularity with his heart at some point after the physical he took to sign his new contract in March.

Loomis said he couldn't go into specifics of Fairley's condition because of "his personal health information" but said that Fairley's absence has been difficult for the team.

"He had really maybe his best season ever last year," Loomis told Duncan and Holder. "We were counting on him and looking forward to having on our team going forward so this has been difficult.

More here ...

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

This article verifies that Fairley's condition was something new after the physical that he passed at the time of his contract signing. It states that a "team doctor noticed an irregularity with his heart at some point after the physical he took to sign his new contract in March."

I know some around here have put the blame on the Saints front office, but they did their due diligence and it was just bad luck that something new was found later.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Guido, I respectfully disagree...

This was a known condition of Fairley's that obviously has worsened; irregardless, I'd made sure his pre-contract physical was more in-depth with regards to the cardiology component of the examination; and had language for the preexisting condition or decline in same...

Far too often we've signed guys either knowing there was some injury and disregarded its severity or someone or some group of medical professionals that the Saints continue to use has once again failed to do their due diligence in examining players...

It's not that in one case that a doctor has missed something and Loomis & FO should be hung out to dry, it's that it seems to be happening more often than it should; and that is on Loomis & the FO people for continuing to use an unreliable medical group (OHP)...

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

You are making an assumption there, JP, that it was his existing condition and was worsening. I have read otherwise that it was arrhythmia. That isn't something that is easily missed. It is very apparent when the heart beat is irregular and could not have been missed in the earlier physical. In doing some reading I have found out that arrhythmia can occur in even a healthy heart, although it is most likely more common with some other heart related issue. It could have been brought on by combinations of factors including diet and exercise, two things most likely to have been affected at the beginning of OTA's when the condition was discovered.

Now I don't know how reliable this information is either, but coupled with wording involving a "new" condition being found in early releases it does make sense.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

It says the team doctor "noticed" the irregularity after the physical, meaning it could have been there all along and the team doctor should have noticed it straight away.

Just seems awful coincidental for a guy with a pretty bad track record when it comes to signing guys to huge contracts.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

It was said some time back that it was found during the physicals taken at the beginning of OTA's, months AFTER the March physical before his contract signing. Once again, arrhythmia is easy to detect. There is no way it could be missed in March if it was there. Arrhythmia can also occur at any time, even in a perfectly healthy heart.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Of course and it is not to say it was a fluke, but I think you have to give it a longer look and really wonder about this front office and their due diligence. I am just not an apologist simply because I am a Saints fan.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

All very valid points

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Guido, no offense but this article doesn't verify anything other than the fact that the diagnosis sucks for both sides. No where does it say that there was a "new" condition that recently developed. So, I stick with my original question which is how did we not notice this before the contract.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Our team doctors must have gotten their medical degree in Mexico. Ochsner was an account of mine when I sold medical equipment. The place was nasty......... I wouldn't send my dog there.

It's obvious to the uneducated eye that the front office and our medical staff don't evaluate injuries very well. Our track record on injured athletes is abysmal at best.

Like Joe Vitt and company I believe that it's time to move on and get a fresh pertspective.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Name that long list of free agents sign by the Saints with a history of injuries that was overlooked.

And also name the list of free agent or returning player signings that turned out bad.

I'll start them out.

Injury
Jarius Byrd
Nick Fairley

Contracts gone bad (non-injury history)
Junior Galette
Brandon Browner

Perhaps Keenen Lewis, but I am not sure which category he would fall into. His injury problems began after his big contract, yet he was let go early resulting in the same cap hit.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Jimmy Graham.

Edit: And CJ Spiller, his contract was exactly the same as Ingrams.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Loomis confirmed that a physical was done in March before the new deal was signed. If a new condition was present it would have been found, especially if it was arrhythmia as suspected. It would have shown up in several commonly applied tests. He also said that a team doctor noticed it later. That later was at the beginning of the OTA's when all players go through a physical. That was reported several times when the news first broke.

By all indicators it is arrhythmia which can occur at any time without any prior warning. Thus the bad timing to which Loomis refers. If the arrhythmia had began a few months earlier they could have avoided the situation. It wasn't an additional ECG, EKG, Holter Monitor or a stress test that was required, it would have had to have been a crystal ball. As far as I know no doctor has one of those.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

How was Jimmy Graham a bad contract by the front office? It did result in a cap hit of sorts, but that was because Seattle demanded Graham instead of Stills as Payton had originally offered in trade.

But, for arguments sake, include those. That brings us up to what, seven, although only one dealt with players with injury histories of which we were originally comparing Fairley's situation. But, let's see. Seven contracts out of how many in twelve years of Loomis/Payton? How many contracts were negotiated over that period? Perhaps twenty per year in one form or another? That would be roughly 250 contracts. Seven gone bad out of that number isn't what I would call an epidemic.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

You've just answered your own question.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

But the jury is still out on whether or not the move was of worth. Cap hits have to be factored into all decisions and cannot be looked at in a vacuum. I think most around here though see Unger and what turned into Anthony may turn out to be more valuable than what has turned into a constantly injured Graham.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Agreed, that's fair point that it another cardiac condition; nonetheless, you can have parallel and secondary conditions develop (i.e. a hip flares up for overcompensation for knee injury, ankle stress from a Lisfranc); because of one ongoing issue, it just seems it would be even more prudent to have a full cardiac workup, of the type that you literally have millions of dollars invested, with several cardiologist involved, would have caught something that only reared just a few weeks later?!?

Personal Experience: I know when my late Father began to have heart problems from a prior misdiagnosed heart attack, his cardiologist that I'd befriended a couple of years before as our children were in the same class, school took his time and caught a number of things going on with Dad and probably added those eight years with his granddaughter (my child) because he really took his time and didn't "process" Dad like a piece of meat (of course, my Dad had that type of affect on people); and my Dad probably would have lived longer had that same cardiologist not moved away and we got stuck with a jerk who mailed it in one day and missed my Dad in the middle of a cardiac episode...

There just seems to be a higher number of these types of reports with the Saints than some of these other franchises and I can't help but wonder if there's not a systematic dysfunction that needs to be addressed...

Eric Asher, a local radio and television reporter has addressed this issue on both his shows and granted, while he's no cardiologist, he's taken an awful risk to his stock and his broadcasters' stock to call out Ochsners Sports and Health to highlight this problem...

I intend on calling in to his next show when two certain reporters are on to see if there isn't a few players having concers as well...

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Can't we just blame this on Obamacare already?

:banana:

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Loomis' son and Russia...

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

To this I agree completely. That's why I suspect a total range of testing did take place concerning his cardiac condition. And that is what leads me to believe even more that the condition is arrhythmia which can arise at any moment. The heart can suddenly slow down, speed up, or become sporadic without any warning. That would explain Loomis' comment concerning timing.

I can understand your predisposition toward Oschner and all. As a point of full disclosure, my eldest son is an employee of the Oschner health system as the head coach at their fitness facility in Elmwood.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

It wasn't in Mexico, they got their degrees out of a Cracker Jack box

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

This was found during the draft process. He got one of those he is ok BUT down the road .... conclusion. well we are down that road now.

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

Not to sound cold and callous, but does anyone know how Nick's condition will impact the current cap? IIRC the Saints were inside the top 3 in all of the NFL as it relates to "Dead Money".

Re: MIckey Loomis on Nick Fairley's condition: 'The time of the discovery wasn't great for us nor for him'
 

It doesn't affect the cap. It is just like any other player that is placed upon IR as long as he doesn't retire. He'll receive any guaranteed money but not game checks. So, in a way it frees up some cap for this season.