The ten second, slow down proposal for NCAA Football seems to be the story that never dies. Even though Nick Saban seems to be the popular face for this rule (even by Steve Spurrier), Arkansas Head Coach Bret Bielema is making a good case for it as well. However, he may be being a little more ridiculous about it.
Yesterday, Reports came out that quoted Bielema using the "death of a player" card.
In a Q&A with SI's Andy Staples, he explains why he said it:
"The reason I brought up the Cal player is this: We all have sickle cell players. To me, it's the most scary individual thing we face. There are no signs. There are no indicators. You test every one of your players when they come in. And there are players who come in that have no idea they have it. Then you've got to call the parents, sit the kid down and talk to them what it means -- what the possibilities of things happening are. It's a scary deal. But you contact the mom and dad and you tell them, listen, the one thing we'll do is we'll have our trainers locked into it. His coaches know. His position coach knows, and I know as the head coach. We're always going to be looking out for his well-being. You promise them that. I always make the guarantee when I'm in the parents' home. I say I can't guarantee playing time or a degree, but I'm going to guarantee that I'll help you get both. And the second thing I can guarantee is that I'll always look out for the safety and the well-being of your son. When you're halfway across the country, that means something. It means you're going to look out for their safety.
When this whole safety issue came up, everybody's thinking you're talking about knee injuries or hamstrings. I'm talking about the concussion crisis, sickle cell trait. This one [sickle cell trait] really scares you because you don't know when it's coming. The kids have difficulty breathing. They don't want to come out of practice or the game. All the ones I've ever been around, they want to stay in because they don't want their teammates to think they're quitting or stopping. What we began to rationalize is that when these players pass when they're involved in these conditioning drills, they pull themselves out of it or the trainer pulls them out of it because they're having difficulties. What if you're in the middle of the third or fourth quarter and you know that the kid standing 15 yards away from you or on the other side of the field has this trait. He's got this built-in possibility of something happening. Your doctors have told you about it. Your trainers have told you about it. He looks at you through those eyes or maybe the trainer even says, "Hey coach, you need to get him out of there." And you can't. You have no timeouts. He's not going to fake an injury. He's not going to fall down."
Wow! This kind of politicking would make Frank Underwood blush. According to a 2011 CDC Report, Sickle Cell affects 90,000 to 100,000 Americans. The Estimated Population of the United States is 316 Million.
I understand and fully respect the seriousness of this disease. However, this is very shallow politicking at best.
This is also the same guy who was whining about Urban Meyer's recruiting tactics when Meyer arrived at Ohio St.
Nice try Bret. Even though Nick Saban played the player safety card, we may have the call this the "Bielema Bitch Rule" after playing the death card. I'm not buying it.
UPDATE: Bielema has apologized to the family of Ted Aug, the Cal player cited in his remarks.
Sandy Barbour, AD at Cal, called Bielema's remarks "beyond insensitive".
I wouldn't go as far as insensitive. However, I would say they were very foolish in regards to tying it into a proposed rule change.
This could be a big blow to the pro-rule change crowd in getting crowd appeal, because it's obvious the pro-crowd is stretching.
After this stunt, I'd be shocked if the rule passed. Then again, look at who could decide it's fate.
UPDATE: Bielema has apologized to the family of Ted Aug, the Cal player cited in his remarks.
Sandy Barbour, AD at Cal, called Bielema's remarks "beyond insensitive".
I wouldn't go as far as insensitive. However, I would say they were very foolish in regards to tying it into a proposed rule change.
This could be a big blow to the pro-rule change crowd in getting crowd appeal, because it's obvious the pro-crowd is stretching.
After this stunt, I'd be shocked if the rule passed. Then again, look at who could decide it's fate.
No comments:
Post a Comment