2022 Dolphins: Our coach is cooler than yours

rymflaherty

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2010
3,421
Norfolk
It’s shocking to me that the league wasn’t involved, or aware of the situation and decision last Sunday.

It’s not like Tua was in the tent and back the next series…there was a lot of real world time between the injury and taking the field in the second half. I guess that’s something I’m curious about…because I just can’t fathom that that replay wasn’t seen, there wasn’t some sort of contact and questioning, with the answers (theoretically) being seen as satisfactory.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,475
It’s shocking to me that the league wasn’t involved, or aware of the situation and decision last Sunday.

It’s not like Tua was in the tent and back the next series…there was a lot of real world time between the injury and taking the field in the second half. I guess that’s something I’m curious about…because I just can’t fathom that that replay wasn’t seen, there wasn’t some sort of contact and questioning, with the answers (theoretically) being seen as satisfactory.
I wouldn't assume the league wasn't aware of the situation or decision. Anyone watching the game was aware and I'm sure there are league office members watching every single game. Would be very interesting to know their involvement or lackthereof but doubt well ever know.
 

dwainw

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,405
Minneapolis, MN
Is it even possible for any type of back injury to cause the difficulties Tua had last week? I’ve never seen that except from head trauma, in which case I’ve seen that often.
I am STILL waiting to hear anything that reasonably supports (or definitively refutes) this contention. Watching his legs give out during Sunday's game, I was like everyone else--concerned for Tua's immediate health and trying to guess at how many games he'd miss. After the game and the seemingly convoluted explanations of the sequence that led to Tua's return, I expected to hear expert opinions from either side offering more clarity. Leaving aside the obvious added danger involved in the act of playing football, can't back issues and injuries lead to all kinds of funky symptoms that look and feel bad, but can be overcome relatively quickly and effectively with top notch treatment?
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,133
Rhode Island
I would find fault with McDaniels if there evidence he:

1. Tried to persuade the medical staff to clear Tua

OR

2. Asked Tua to misrepresent his symptoms (“hey bud, we really need you, if you say this is a back thing, they won’t be able to declare you out”.)

Otherwise, lots of misplaced blame here.
I would add if he created or perpetuated a culture where the medical staff felt compelled to present best case scenarios. I don’t have any clue if that is the case, but as the Head Coach he is like a CEO. The best ones create an atmosphere where people feel able to challenge him and not say only what he wants to hear. The “Buck stops here” with the head coach of an NFL team in regards to players that hit the field. The best framing I‘ll accept for McDaniel’s culpability in all this is his inexperience got the best of him. I hope he learns from it.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,626
CT
If you're known for one thing in here it's your consistent, quality posting through sheer unchecked defensiveness about your team allegiance.
That post was obviously 1000% a joke. Glad to see everyone is on high alert here.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,375
Newton
The Athletic (subs. required) has a good primer on the NFL concussion protocol. It says this:

If the team’s medical staff feels any player is at risk of a concussion, they are required to pull the player to the sideline and into the medical tent for a focused neurological exam. The exam includes a cervical spine exam (including range of motion and pain), an evaluation of speech, observation of gait, and an eye movement and pupillary exam. If the player displays signs of any loss of consciousness, gross motor inability, confusion or amnesia, team medical staff are not permitted to let the player return to action.
So one question I have is: is there any weight given to on-field behavior? It seems to me that a lot of players get a potential head injury on the field, go into the tent, pass the tests and go back out there. Does “passing the tests” mean the player definitively doesn’t have a concussion?

Because it seems to me that absent any consideration of the head trauma itself, if you stumble and fall over on the football field but don’t display any signs thereafter, they can give you a pat on the butt, say “Go get ‘em” and send you back out there.

That’s what this Sunday situation with Tua feels like
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
14,218
Boulder, CO
What I find so scary about this is that neither hit looked impossibly violent at first glance. I hesitate to go so far as to say that they looked 'innocuous', but I didn't immediately jump to either and think "terrible concussion," and maybe that says more about what levels of violence we've become conditioned to consider 'normal' as NFL fans.

This situation sucks, and I'm no fan of the Phins or of Tua but I hope he makes a full recovery. That was really gross, really scary shit on that second hit.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,475
What I find so scary about this is that neither hit looked impossibly violent at first glance. I hesitate to go so far as to say that they looked 'innocuous', but I didn't immediately jump to either and think "terrible concussion," and maybe that says more about what levels of violence we've become conditioned to consider 'normal' as NFL fans.

This situation sucks, and I'm no fan of the Phins or of Tua but I hope he makes a full recovery. That was really gross, really scary shit on that second hit.
The first one happens basically multiple times a game. Milano pushed him, he fell back, and didn’t land overly hard although I think he did hit his head a little bit.

The second one though looked really bad. The amount of force by the Cincy DL was ridiculous. These guys are just so strong.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,476
What I find so scary about this is that neither hit looked impossibly violent at first glance. I hesitate to go so far as to say that they looked 'innocuous', but I didn't immediately jump to either and think "terrible concussion," and maybe that says more about what levels of violence we've become conditioned to consider 'normal' as NFL fans.

This situation sucks, and I'm no fan of the Phins or of Tua but I hope he makes a full recovery. That was really gross, really scary shit on that second hit.
That one from last night, the suplex or ddt or whatever looked bad. But you’re right, as big and strong as these guys are, you don’t need a powerbomb to concuss someone.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
9,251
If I'm an independent neurologist I'm sure I'll tell the team doctor my opinion but I'm not about to give up a paying gig with sideline tickets by going public with my doubts, resigning over a marginal case where the team doctor disagrees with me, etc.
So just ignore that whole "Do no harm" thing just for the sweet seats huh?
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,626
CT
The first one happens basically multiple times a game. Milano pushed him, he fell back, and didn’t land overly hard although I think he did hit his head a little bit.

The second one though looked really bad. The amount of force by the Cincy DL was ridiculous. These guys are just so strong.
The one from last night looked far worse to me. I gasped when it happened. The speed at which he went from upright to down to the turf was scary.

I hope that Tua can learn to protect himself. He suffered that injury at Alabama holding the ball too long and getting trampled.

He had a lot of time to get rid of that ball last night and kept waiting to try and hit a big play. Get rid of the ball and live to fight another down, Tua.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,375
Newton
The Athletic (subs. required) has a good primer on the NFL concussion protocol. It says this:


So one question I have is: is there any weight given to on-field behavior? It seems to me that a lot of players get a potential head injury on the field, go into the tent, pass the tests and go back out there. Does “passing the tests” mean the player definitively doesn’t have a concussion?
The WaPo article Apple News just sent me may answer this question:

Medical experts who treat concussion say it can be difficult to diagnose, particularly in athletes who may conceal their injuries because they fear losing playing time and opportunities, or because they don’t experience symptoms for hours after the initial blow.


“This is a subjective injury until you get something like” Tagovailoa’s visible symptoms, said Dustin Fink, head athletic trainer for the Mount Zion, Ill., school district, who also runs The Concussion Blog. “As medical professionals, we are so reliant upon the athlete telling us what’s going on with them, to help us make a judgment or decision. Because they can pass tests that we give them.”
This is why I’m struggling a little bit with what @radsoxfan is saying when he says coaches have to trust the medical professionals here. It seems completely clear to me that if concussion symptoms sometimes don’t show for hours, you can’t just say “Hey, he’s not showing any amnesia or gross motor function challenges, he’s good to go!” If they were stumbling around on the field, you have to consider that too.

It would appear no one on the Dolphins—McDaniel or their team doctor—did.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,475
The one from last night looked far worse to me. I gasped when it happened. The speed at which he went from upright to down to the turf was scary.

I hope that Tua can learn to protect himself. He suffered that injury at Alabama holding the ball too long and getting trampled.

He had a lot of time to get rid of that ball last night and kept waiting to try and hit a big play. Get rid of the ball and live to fight another down, Tua.
Agreed 100%. Bills one looked like a play you see every game. Last night’s play was far more violent. He absolutely should have thrown that away. Really needs to emulate how Brady, the Manning’s, etc. operated. Just throw it away. I do admit that it must be hard to have that mentality with Tyreek on your team. You know that at any point he can free himself and get you a TD.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,408
Unreal America
This is why I’m struggling a little bit with what @radsoxfan is saying when he says coaches have to trust the medical professionals here. It seems completely clear to me that if concussion symptoms sometimes don’t show for hours, you can’t just say “Hey, he’s not showing any amnesia or gross motor function challenges, he’s good to go!” If they were stumbling around on the field, you have to consider that too.

It would appear no one on the Dolphins—McDaniel or their team doctor—did.
Is the alternative to put the decision solely in the hands of the HC, though? The reason why this process exists is because that's basically how it used to be, and coaches overwhelmingly ran guys back onto the field who were nursing concussions.

I don't know if there is a post-game evaluation process when a player is cleared mid-game. Seems like that's worth investigating.
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
8,195
Monument, CO
I went through something like this with my son. He hit his head in a basketball game. He went down for a second because it hurt but popped right back up. He was taken out of the game for the rest of the night. The following day was a snow day so he was at home and showed no symptoms. The day after he went to school and saw the trainer. He passed the concussion test getting similar scores on the computer test as he did before the season. He did some running with the trainer and we then decided as a team to hold him out of that night's game as a precaution. He had a concussion 4 years earlier and we wanted to be careful. The following day we took him to the doctor who ran him through a bunch of tests which he passed. He then went to the walkthrough that day but he ran hard and did all the basketball moves with the trainer watching to make sure he was good.

We decided to let him play that night as he had been cleared by the doctor, trainer, and passed all the tests. That night he banged heads with another player and went out on his feet as he stumbled backwards and fell. He spent the next 3-4 weeks in a low lit room as he recovered. I have never felt like a worse parent. It seems clear he had a mild concussion on the first hit looking back but I'm not sure how anyone would have known. Concussions and brain injuries are hard to diagnose and determine.

It seems clear from the way Tua stumbled on Sunday that he had a concussion but it is not always so black and white. The problem is the NFL is untrustworthy so it is hard to believe them.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,540
Blaming McDaniel for this feels really misguided. We've all seen videos of BB where a medical staff member or positional coach approaches him before a game and simply informs him, "player X can't go." Theres no discussion. Hes told if a player can or can not play. Its his job to react accordingly.

If a medical professional told McDaniel "Tua is good to play on Thursday", it isn't his job to question that. Do Your Job. If McDaniel is put in a situation where he has to question the opinion of a medical professional, then thats a failure of the organization by providing the players with a shitty doctor.

Did McDaniel know Tua got a concussion on Sunday? Probably. Was McDaniel told that Tua was good to play on Thursday? Most likely. Any failure in that process was with the medical professionals, not McDaniel.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,475
Is the alternative to put the decision solely in the hands of the HC, though? The reason why this process exists is because that's basically how it used to be, and coaches overwhelmingly ran guys back onto the field who were nursing concussions.

I don't know if there is a post-game evaluation process when a player is cleared mid-game. Seems like that's worth investigating.
This is why I think it needs to be a league centralized decision. There is too much ambiguity and conflicting interests with the HC and training staff. It's almost unfair to the head coaches. They are paid to win games. They want guys out there. Even if they are trying to do the right thing, there is an implicit bias in their decision-making. Likewise for the training staff who know they need to keep the coaches/owner(s) happy.

We already have a "spotter" so if a spotter sees someone exhibiting clear concussion symptoms, like a pronounced stumble or falling over or that fencer's response (forget the exact term), they're done for the day. Period. No blue tent. Then, you work through the post-game protocol as it's currently written and see how they respond over the course of the week. Now, that may not have prevented Tua from playing on TNF when he shouldn't have but it at least would hopefully limit the damage inflicted during the first recorded incident.

This would really only deal with the most catastrophic cases but I feel like you have to start there.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,906
Is the alternative to put the decision solely in the hands of the HC, though? The reason why this process exists is because that's basically how it used to be, and coaches overwhelmingly ran guys back onto the field who were nursing concussions.
I agree. I think people are conflating idea of the head coach being in charge of the entire operation (i.e. some version of "institutional control") with medical decisions.

An NFL coach should be delegating these decisions to trained professionals. If the trained professionals are no good, they should get new ones. It's a medical decision made by a doctor, not a coaching decision made by a coach.

If he disagrees with it, it's his right to make sure they saw the video on Sunday, make sure they have all the facts, ask them about the thought process etc. But it would be highly unusual and beyond the scope of his skillset to simply refuse the doctor's clearance if he believes it's being made in good faith.

Is there some reason, with the knowledge we have so far, to think McDaniel should have known there was something nefarious going on with the medical staff?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,803
around the way
I agree. I think people are conflating idea of the head coach being in charge of the entire operation (i.e. some version of "institutional control") with medical decisions.

An NFL coach should be delegating these decisions to trained professionals. If the trained professionals are no good, they should get new ones. It's a medical decision made by a doctor, not a coaching decision made by a coach.

If he disagrees with it, it's his right to make sure they saw the video on Sunday, make sure they have all the facts, ask them about the thought process etc. But it would be highly unusual and beyond the scope of his skillset to simply refuse the doctor's clearance if he believes it's being made in good faith.

Is there some reason, with the knowledge we have so far, to think McDaniel should have known there was something nefarious going on with the medical staff?
Man, it's a humanity issue, not a legal issue.

A couple of months ago, some random young woman knocked on our door for help. Turns out that my next door neighbor took a header on the sidewalk and was clearly disoriented. Found out later that he fainted and banged his head (coincidence), but we didn't know much at the time. She was like 110 pounds, and he's easily 275 and in his 60s. I helped him back to his house next door and delivered him to his brother, who called an ambulance.

I had no legal obligation to do anything, nor did this random 20-something who doesn't even live on my street. We helped because he couldn't help himself. Leaving him there would have been the wrong thing to do.

Anyone who watched the week 3 game and came away thinking that Tua was actually "fine" has an agenda. McDaniel was well within his rights to start him if the docs cleared him. Doesn't mean that it wasn't the wrong thing to do then.

I wouldn't want to be a guy, having to watch Tua pin his name and home address inside his jacket this winter, knowing that I could have done something.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,906
Man, it's a humanity issue, not a legal issue.

A couple of months ago, some random young woman knocked on our door for help. Turns out that my next door neighbor took a header on the sidewalk and was clearly disoriented. Found out later that he fainted and banged his head (coincidence), but we didn't know much at the time. She was like 110 pounds, and he's easily 275 and in his 60s. I helped him back to his house next door and delivered him to his brother, who called an ambulance.

I had no legal obligation to do anything, nor did this random 20-something who doesn't even live on my street. We helped because he couldn't help himself. Leaving him there would have been the wrong thing to do.

Anyone who watched the week 3 game and came away thinking that Tua was actually "fine" has an agenda. McDaniel was well within his rights to start him if the docs cleared him. Doesn't mean that it wasn't the wrong thing to do then.

I wouldn't want to be a guy, having to watch Tua pin his name and home address inside his jacket this winter, knowing that I could have done something.
It’s medical issue, not a legal issue. Apologies for the legal terminology.

It’s so strange to think NFL head coaches, with all the resources available to them, should be making medical decisions.

What a ridiculously unfair position to put coaches in. Plenty of times what seems “obvious” medically to a non physician is not in fact, obvious or correct.

NFL head coaches don’t get to put on their doctor hat when they feel like it. Nor should they feel obligated to.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,476
It’s medical issue, not a legal issue. Apologies for the legal terminology.

It’s so strange to think NFL head coaches, with all the resources available to them, should be making medical decisions.

What a ridiculously unfair position to put coaches in. Plenty of times what seems “obvious” medically to a non physician is not in fact, obvious or correct.

NFL head coaches don’t get to put on their doctor hat when they feel like it. Nor should they feel obligated to.
What if a pitcher was perfect through 8 with 120 pitches. Doctor says it’s fine. Trainer says it’s fine. Coach takes the pitcher out because he’s seen what can happen if you push even a seemingly healthy arm too far. Overreach?

I’m not trying to say doctor’s jobs are easy or can be done by layman. I’m saying when someone hits their head and then shakes their head and is woozy and falls down, it is what it is, and even if the tests suggest otherwise, the coach or the owner make the ultimate decisions.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,906
What if a pitcher was perfect through 8 with 120 pitches. Doctor says it’s fine. Trainer says it’s fine. Coach takes the pitcher out because he’s seen what can happen if you push even a seemingly healthy arm too far. Overreach?

I’m not trying to say doctor’s jobs are easy or can be done by layman. I’m saying when someone hits their head and then shakes their head and is woozy and falls down, it is what it is, and even if the tests suggest otherwise, the coach or the owner make the ultimate decisions.
If you think the doctor is making the wrong decision, look around for a new doctor.

Do not become the doctor.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,906
Another good point by McDaniel honestly. Once he takes over the medical decisions he's just winging it. When is it suddenly OK?

I can't emphasize enough how many things may seem obvious and are in fact not obvious, in a general sense, with medical decisions.

This particular one I understand the confusion, as it seems like Sunday what we saw on the field alone would be concerning for a concussion. If the medical staff doesn't understand that, and they were medically incorrect, they should be fired. Not the coach.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,001
Right Here
I'm no expert on this by any means, but I've had two cases in youth sports in which a player had a concussion. First case was in soccer, no one on the field even noticed it. Kid kept playing and never mentioned it. It wasn't until later that night that his parents took him to the hospital as the kid was throwing up and had other symptoms that were diagnosed as a concussion, Lesson learned in that one is that this can take place and everyone on the field can miss it.

Second case was in CYO Basketball. Our team that year was horrendously misplaced in the wrong league so we ended up playing teams whose worst player was better than our best. Woefully mismatched. One of our players goes in for a layup and gets upended under the basket and falls head first onto the floor. I was the bench coach so I put him through every cognitive test that I knew... kid passed every single one. Common sense told us that he's out of the game. His parents took him to the ER later that night... diagnosis concussion. Lesson learned that night is that absent of whatever technology that a hospital might possess on-site, it's possible for a player to pass a bunch of tests and still have a concussion.

Players need to be protected from themselves. Coaches need to be protected from themselves. The medical professionals are the last line of defense. When they depend strictly on a protocol whose results deny what common sense would dictate, they need to be able to override the results of the test.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,475
Another good point by McDaniel honestly. Once he takes over the medical decisions he's just winging it. When is it suddenly OK?

I can't emphasize enough how many things may seem obvious and are in fact not obvious, in a general sense, with medical decisions.

This particular one I understand the confusion, as it seems like Sunday what we saw on the field alone would be concerning for a concussion. If the medical staff doesn't understand that, and they were medically incorrect, they should be fired. Not the coach.
Does it even have to be a concussion? Someone who stumbles like Tua did on Sunday clearly isn't right. We don't have to know what exactly it is to know the decision needs to be made to pull the player. It could be heat stroke, a heart condition, etc. Whenever a player like that is spotted making an unusual stumble/fall that is clearly not a trip or spasm upon video review, I think they need to be pulled from the game for the duration to protect all involved.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Another good point by McDaniel honestly. Once he takes over the medical decisions he's just winging it. When is it suddenly OK?

I can't emphasize enough how many things may seem obvious and are in fact not obvious, in a general sense, with medical decisions.

This particular one I understand the confusion, as it seems like Sunday what we saw on the field alone would be concerning for a concussion. If the medical staff doesn't understand that, and they were medically incorrect, they should be fired. Not the coach.
I mean I get it, but I'm not sure that a coach saying be _more_ cautious than a doctor suggests is really a problem.

I get that the HC should trust the doctors but man, this is one case where it's just so easy to doubt the doctor that you wonder if the coach should question the authority as well. Roughly 50 million people saw the Sunday incident and were able to see something that looks a hell of a lot like a concussion and at the very least a potential concussion (the loss of gross motor skills right after being hit in the head). It's also seemingly impossible to figure out how the doctors ruled out a potential concussion (exactly how could you prove that that loss of motor skills ten seconds after being hit in the head was definitively the result of the back spasm?)

For what its worth the protocol is kind of a mess on this point. "Gross motor instability" ("identified in the judgment of the Club medical staff in consultations with the sideline UNC, who observe the player's behavior, have access to the player's relevant history, and are able to rule out an orthopedic cause for any observed instability") is supposedly a "No-go" Sign and the player "Shall be considered to have suffered a concussion and may not return to participation..on the same day under any circumstances." I guess their story is going to be that they could not rule out an orthopedic cause for the stumbling so the clause doesn't apply, and it's not a no-go sign (i.e. you only deem it to be an automatic concussion if you can conclusively say that the stumbling wasn't caused by-in this instance--back spasms). But that seems to be the opposite of a smart protocol--the default should be to treat stumbling as presumptive concussion only you can actually diagnose the orthopedic or other non concussion related reason for the stumbling.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,028
This is why I think it needs to be a league centralized decision. There is too much ambiguity and conflicting interests with the HC and training staff. It's almost unfair to the head coaches. They are paid to win games. They want guys out there. Even if they are trying to do the right thing, there is an implicit bias in their decision-making. Likewise for the training staff who know they need to keep the coaches/owner(s) happy.

We already have a "spotter" so if a spotter sees someone exhibiting clear concussion symptoms, like a pronounced stumble or falling over or that fencer's response (forget the exact term), they're done for the day. Period. No blue tent. Then, you work through the post-game protocol as it's currently written and see how they respond over the course of the week. Now, that may not have prevented Tua from playing on TNF when he shouldn't have but it at least would hopefully limit the damage inflicted during the first recorded incident.

This would really only deal with the most catastrophic cases but I feel like you have to start there.
I understand what you're saying but re: the bolded... I mean.... The NFL literally worked to bury evidence of the CTE study. They are the LAST people on earth who are objective and who have no interest in these players playing.

Late season game, huge playoff implications, and you think a "spotter" is going to be able to tell the NFL that, say, Patrick Mahomes is done for the day? With hundreds of millions of dollars potentially on the line?
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,408
Unreal America
If you think the doctor is making the wrong decision, look around for a new doctor.

Do not become the doctor.
Yep. It's weird to me that a lot of people who I know are all-in on "trust the science" are now advocating that a head football coach should be a greater arbiter of a medical diagnosis than a doctor.

Every week we see a player take a hit -- whether it is to a head or some other body part -- and there are proclamations on this very forum about the guy being done. Then a couple snaps later the player is back on the field, and it turns out the horrible looking hit didn't do much, if any, real damage. The human body is complex, that's why we have trained professionals address it.
 

RSN Diaspora

molests goats for comedy
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2005
11,716
Washington, DC
Another good point by McDaniel honestly. Once he takes over the medical decisions he's just winging it. When is it suddenly OK?

I can't emphasize enough how many things may seem obvious and are in fact not obvious, in a general sense, with medical decisions.

This particular one I understand the confusion, as it seems like Sunday what we saw on the field alone would be concerning for a concussion. If the medical staff doesn't understand that, and they were medically incorrect, they should be fired. Not the coach.
And in a general sense, we don't want coaches overruling medical staff...or anyone without their level of training. When I had wrist surgery a few years ago, the anesthesiologist was going over the options and told me it was my decision on which kind of anesthesia. When I asked for her opinion, she reiterated that it was my decision. After we went back and forth a couple times, I finally looked at her and said, "I understand that it is my decision. You are a board-certified anesthesiologist and I am not. I would like to get your expert opinion on the best course of action, understanding that the decision ultimately rests with me."

It's important to know what you don't know--no way I'm overruling a qualified neurologist or neurosurgeon for the simple reason they have presumably forgotten more about head trauma than I'll ever know. And I don't want sports coaches doing so either.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,475
I understand what you're saying but re: the bolded... I mean.... The NFL literally worked to bury evidence of the CTE study. They are the LAST people on earth who are objective and who have no interest in these players playing.

Late season game, huge playoff implications, and you think a "spotter" is going to be able to tell the NFL that, say, Patrick Mahomes is done for the day? With hundreds of millions of dollars potentially on the line?
That’s the real problem, yes. The league isn’t trustworthy at all and people care more about Draft Kings and Yahoo Fantasy teams than players’ health. So, the league is delivering what people want.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,980
NOVA
And in a general sense, we don't want coaches overruling medical staff...or anyone without their level of training. When I had wrist surgery a few years ago, the anesthesiologist was going over the options and told me it was my decision on which kind of anesthesia. When I asked for her opinion, she reiterated that it was my decision. After we went back and forth a couple times, I finally looked at her and said, "I understand that it is my decision. You are a board-certified anesthesiologist and I am not. I would like to get your expert opinion on the best course of action, understanding that the decision ultimately rests with me."

It's important to know what you don't know--no way I'm overruling a qualified neurologist or neurosurgeon for the simple reason they have presumably forgotten more about head trauma than I'll ever know. And I don't want sports coaches doing so either.
A coach deciding not to play someone they feel is concussed is not OVERRULING a doctor because the coach decides who plays not the doctor. A coach deciding to play someone despite the doctor saying the player has a concussion and should play is OVERRULING the doctor because the doctor can say who should not play.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,490
it's his right to make sure they saw the video on Sunday, make sure they have all the facts, ask them about the thought process etc. But it would be highly unusual and beyond the scope of his skillset to simply refuse the doctor's clearance if he believes it's being made in good faith.
This is basically where I'm at. Although, I think it is not only McDaniel's right but his responsibility to make sure they saw the video and completely discuss all the possibilities and probabilities with them. If he had those conversations and medical staff was clear that Tua was good and did not have a concussion then any mistake is completely on them. If McDaniel didn't have that conversation then he would bear some responsibility although I still think the medical staff would bear a large portion of the responsibility.


And agree with others that a coach not playing someone who has been cleared is NOT overruling a doctor. It is a very different thing than playing someone who has been cleared. To compare the two is a completely disingenuous imo. First, most of these injuries are not 100% one way or another. Especially within the same game it is very rare the player is 100% healthy ready to go back in. As mentioned earlier, diagnosing a concussion can be very subjective since you are usually dealing with an uncooperative patient.
 
Last edited:

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,906
I’m not gonna get into specifics….but I’ll get into specifics that suggest the protocol was followed and the player was appropriately protected:

View: https://twitter.com/judybattista/status/1575904061005742086?s=46&t=B-hiPrLvwbohUwtcXar6kw
If I had to make a prediction.... They will claim protocol was followed.

They will also tweak the "absolute no return" situations. He mentioned currently that posturing or confusion/amnesia mean the player cannot return, regardless of the neuro exam results.

Currently there is a loophole for stumbling around after a head injury (I guess in theory because you could have a lower body injury?), but it's almost always obvious the cause. In the future, anyone wobbly like Tua will probably be included in the automatic no-return group.

Just a guess.
 
Last edited:

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,482
Hartford, CT
If I had to make a prediction.... They will claim protocol was followed.

They will also tweak the "absolute no return" situations. He mentioned currently that posurturing or confusion/amnesia mean the player cannot return, regardless of the neuro exam results.

Currently there is a loophole for stumbling around after a head injury (I guess in theory because you could have a lower body injury?), but it's almost always obvious the cause. In the future, anyone wobbly like Tua will probably be included in the automatic no-return group.

Just a guess.
I agree - it’s telling how he explicitly broached the no-go list just a few minutes before explaining that the protocols are always subject to change in consultation with the PA.

Sills is essentially a PR guy in this context, so nothing is accidental.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,048
Isle of Plum
I’m not gonna get into specifics….but I’ll get into specifics that suggest the protocol was followed and the player was appropriately protected:

View: https://twitter.com/judybattista/status/1575904061005742086?s=46&t=B-hiPrLvwbohUwtcXar6kw
Thanks for posting, very informative. A part of me wondered if, by claiming back injury, Tua himself was able to avoid an initial screen. Clearly not the case, and he even had daily checks after.

It does seem protocol may have been followed, but that’s exactly not the same as adequately protecting the player. The doc left open the door that various ‘loopholes’ in the process were closed in the past and maybe they need further updates.

Edit: or what radsox already said but more authoritatively.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,530
Imaginationland
But this happens every week, this case was just potentially egregious. Many of us are Pats fans, and supposedly there's a chance that Mac Jones plays on Sunday. Is there any doubt that if he does he's "compromised"? What if he plays next week after getting more "treatment" (a.k.a. a shot to override his body's pain receptors)?

David Andrews has been playing for 2 years with a serious blood clot condition. Does anyone even think about that anymore? A doctor cleared him, so I guess he's fine? Teddy Bruschi played weeks after having a stroke.

I assume that the vast majority of NFL players are "compromised", in some way, every time they take the field.
Not intending to go too far off topic, but Bruschi had his stroke just after the Pro Bowl in early 2015, and didn't play until late October. I'm sure he did lots of stuff in between, but he went 8+ months between game action, not weeks.
 

Bowser

New Member
Sep 27, 2019
433
Players need to be protected from themselves. Coaches need to be protected from themselves. The medical professionals are the last line of defense. When they depend strictly on a protocol whose results deny what common sense would dictate, they need to be able to override the results of the test.
This, and particularly the bolded. The science that's brought to bear on an NFL sideline isn't up to the task of accurately assessing the injuries we're seeing. Even when the protocols are followed faithfully, outcomes like this -- which defy good sense -- are all too common. And when the protocols are not followed faithfully...

In short, the protections for players are woefully inadequate, everyone knows it, and those who shrug and say the protocol was followed and the medical experts had their say are hiding behind a very tiny fig leaf.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Mike McDaniel is 3-0 versus Bill Belichick, John Harbaugh, and Sean McDermott. That’s hugely impressive.

Josh Boyer has stepped out from behind Flores shadow and held the boogeyman to 17 points. Say what you want about the Bills defense being decimated, they had almost their entire offense in the game. That’s huge.

This is a good football team. If they can actually win Thursday night, they would be 4-0 to start coming into the soft part of their schedule that we were hoping they could make up ground on. That now may be where they attempt to put some distance between themselves and the Bills.
Teams want to get ahead by risking the career and possible life of the young QB that has finally started to play well for a Week 3 game?
Looks like this was more than just a week 3 game.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,408
Unreal America
Not intending to go too far off topic, but Bruschi had his stroke just after the Pro Bowl in early 2015, and didn't play until late October. I'm sure he did lots of stuff in between, but he went 8+ months between game action, not weeks.
Thanks for correcting me. My bad!
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,803
around the way
Yep. It's weird to me that a lot of people who I know are all-in on "trust the science" are now advocating that a head football coach should be a greater arbiter of a medical diagnosis than a doctor.
This is bullshit.

Most of the "trust the science" folks to which you refer were taking measures above and beyond what was required during covid. Making and keeping people safe, exceeding minimum requirements is a noble thing, not a thumb in the eye of those setting the minimum requirements.

I get rad's thoughts on whether NFL coaches would decide to do this. Maybe none would, because it's a job and a war mindset, and who has time to second guess doctors and plausible deniability and shit. But to imply that taking precautions in addition to those recommended by doctors/science is anti-science is nonsense.
 
Last edited:

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,980
NOVA
John Harbaugh surprised to see Tua playing:
What happened to hypo whataboutism in this thread? All NFL coaches would have done the exact same thing in this particular circumstance because all NFL coaches as we have seen have viewed and experienced this exact same thing in their tenure.

Look, I get where the other side is coming from but let's let go of the whataboutism hypo reasoning.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,980
NOVA
This is bullshit.

Most of the "trust the science" folks to which you refer were taking measures above and beyond what was required during covid. Making and keeping people safe, exceeding minimum requirements is a noble thing, not a thumb in the eye of those setting the minimum requirements.

I get rad's thoughts on whether NFL coaches would decide to do this. Maybe none would, because it's a job and a war mindset, and who has time to second guess doctors and plausible deniability and shit. But to imply that taking precautions in addition to those recommended by doctors/science is anti-science is nonsense.
Yeah you hit the nail. It's the exact opposite of science. When my wife (another thread in a different forum) was suffering badly from a rare and an acute problem I had to step in because the doctors to that point were just following their protocols. But, they didn't know her whole story and what exactly led up to her being in front of them and so I had to step in. Doctors are not infallible and rightfully so they follow certain patterns and observable phenomenon. Sometimes, others have more or additional information that should be taken into account and sometimes this should supplant what a doctor says. That's the essence of science. What is the harm to a player like Tua if coaches or others say FUCK this Doc may be wrong here and he should not play?

EDIT: Oh No! you went against medicine saying he isn't ready to play!
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,803
around the way
I'm 1000× against a coach overruling a doc who ruled a guy out. Doc should have veto power.

But I don't get why anyone has an issue with adding a tablespoon of caution, even if the doc said "ok to play". Doc might be right that a guy is ok, but you're not hurting anyone by being more careful.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,980
NOVA
I'm 1000× against a coach overruling a doc who ruled a guy out. Doc should have veto power.

But I don't get why anyone has an issue with adding a tablespoon of caution, even if the doc said "ok to play". Doc might be right that a guy is ok, but you're not hurting anyone by being more careful.
I made the same point in post 486. I don't get why this is so hard. All stakeholders (coaches, trainers, med staff, owners?) should have a say in ruling a player out, but not clearing a player. That is a significant difference.