AJ Long to Wagner | Page 6 | Syracusefan.com

AJ Long to Wagner

This has been explained dozens of times, but here goes - SU is not DQing players for the safety of the players. Somewhere around a decade ago someone in SU's risk assessment team predicted that the liability from lawsuits over long term health issues from repeated head trauma would put the college in a precariously dangerous financial position. They instituted a concussion protocol to reduce the risk, and now they must follow it or they run the risk of being negligent. They have a similar protocol for heart issues, blood issues, diabetes, etc.

They don't need an expert to determine if the athlete is to be disqualified. Just a medical professional to determine if the player has reached a predetermined threshold for disqualification. It's kind of like getting your car inspected. It isn't a mechanical engineer that is determining if your car is fit to drive. Just a guy with a clipboard checking the boxes.

This is purely to protect the university. You can find a specialist to tell you anything you want to hear, and being consistent is paramount. They are following a program to lower the overall liability from lawsuits. That is all.

Given that, it's fair for people to contend that SU's threshold is lower than other schools and we may DQ some players in circumstances that other schools would not.

It's also fair to note that SU may have less financial resources to absorb a large lawsuit payment than the public universities in P5, hence that lower DQ threshold.

This stuff ain't easy.
 
Given that, it's fair for people to contend that SU's threshold is lower than other schools and we may DQ some players in circumstances that other schools would not.

At this point I don't think they can change it. It would jeopardize their legal position. Maybe there is a former player that is in a position to sue for damages and they implemented this policy to alleviate the risk from that. Not sure.
 
The school has insurance the doctor has insurance. Both can ask for a release.
 
The school has insurance the doctor has insurance. Both can ask for a release.

The school is covered for lawyers fees, not for damages. The doctor would lose his largest client. A lot to lose for both.
 
Not to be crass, but the outrage about "the process" was certainly bigger when the player being DQ'd was expected to be a major contributor as opposed to a bench warmer.

Cue Kaiser's comments about cattle.

Exactly...it's an issue when you suffer a loss. When you don't suffer a loss, the process isn't put under a spotlight.
 
Not to be crass, but the outrage about "the process" was certainly bigger when the player being DQ'd was expected to be a major contributor as opposed to a bench warmer.

Cue Kaiser's comments about cattle.
I think the outrage was also greater when a person with inside information about it was giving us updates versus previous situations when we were in the dark.
 
Exactly...it's an issue when you suffer a loss. When you don't suffer a loss, the process isn't put under a spotlight.
Or maybe it takes a high profile person to raise the profile of a problem: Magic Johnson with HIV, Jimmy V with cancer, Pat Summitt with Alzheimer's.

Clark was a player we liked because he was good and his dad has been a great contributor to the board. The combination of losing him along with his dad's candidness throughout the process made us more aware of the problem.
 
Given that, it's fair for people to contend that SU's threshold is lower than other schools and we may DQ some players in circumstances that other schools would not.

It's also fair to note that SU may have less financial resources to absorb a large lawsuit payment than the public universities in P5, hence that lower DQ threshold.

This stuff ain't easy.

True, but malpractice insurance would pick it up, not SU.
 
True, but malpractice insurance would pick it up, not SU.

Negative on that. SU if proven culpable of willfully hiding concussion dangers from the players would be liable for tens of millions of dollars in damages in a class action suit. Maybe 100s of millions depending who else jumps on board in the suit.

Please read the article that Cherie posted. This is likely what is driving the DQ bus and why SU is being so cautious.
 
Last edited:
Negative on that. SU if proven culpable of willfully hiding concussion dangers from the players would be liable for tens of millions of dollars in damages in a class action suit. Maybe 100s of millions depending who else jumps on board in the suit.

Please read the article that Cherie posted. This is likely what is driving the DQ bus and why SU is being so cautious.

imgres
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3974.JPG
    IMG_3974.JPG
    83.1 KB · Views: 51
You are literally calling yourself superior to a doctor.

No I'm not. I'm literally calling a neurologist superior to a GP when diagnosing concussion issues.
 
No I'm not. I'm literally calling a neurologist superior to a GP when diagnosing concussion issues.
Medicine is about evaluation and interpretation, especially when it comes to head injuries. As much as you don't want to hear it, the right answer is much more subjective than you or I or anyone wants it to be.
 
Medicine is about evaluation and interpretation, especially when it comes to head injuries. As much as you don't want to hear it, the right answer is much more subjective than you or I or anyone wants it to be.
Which is exactly why our current process is crap. Too much power in one man's hand.
 
NCAA mandates that one person make the final decision.

Enterprise rent a car mandates one person be the driver but everyone in the car can figure out where to go.
 
Which is exactly why our current process is crap. Too much power in one man's hand.

It's a good process if your goal is to protect the university from lawsuits.

It's a crap process if you want players with multiple concussions to continue to play.
 
My gripe with "the process;" just show some cojones and say dq is due to University's adversity to risk, don't guise it in a cloak of medical disqualification.
 
My gripe with "the process;" just show some cojones and say dq is due to University's adversity to risk, don't guise it in a cloak of medical disqualification.
Nah, that opens up the doors to all kinds of interpretation that the university doesn't want. Organizations don't show cajones for a reason.
 
Medicine is about evaluation and interpretation, especially when it comes to head injuries. As much as you don't want to hear it, the right answer is much more subjective than you or I or anyone wants it to be.
How subjective is 1 against 6?
 
It's called a second opinion for a reason, especially when the word of the appointed guy is the most important.
It really is indefensible, no matter what. You know that. Most know that. Just say it; CYA.
 
It really is indefensible, no matter what. You know that. Most know that. Just say it; CYA.
I agree that this situation sucks. But as a market researcher, my ability to give an opinion on medicine can't really go beyond that.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,603
Messages
4,714,820
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
24
Guests online
1,954
Total visitors
1,978


Top Bottom