Jarvis Johnson

Donate To GopherHole
W

whogoofed

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
360
Reaction score
34
Points
28
Strib has a small article on his playing some ball recently. I have not followed this closely. This question is more general but can't a family , if the player/family is willing take the risk, hold a school harmless to allow the kid to play? I realize the U doctors haven't cleared him but why can't he make that decision and take the risk if he wants to? His high school certainly knew the risk did they not? Despite his doctors clearing him there must have still been a risk of him collapsing on court that the high school was willing to take and any possible blowback? I don't have a feeling one or or another on whether he plays but I know of a couple of athletes in my child's school who play with known conditions and I certainly don't criticize them for playing or not. Maybe it's just that the U does not want to open itself to any second guessing. It wouldn't come from me though as that would be players/family decision.
 

Regardless of the legal liability, I don't think the U wants to chance a student athlete dying from a known heart defect on live television. Not a good look.
 

yes, but what does the say then about the high school letting him play. He could've died on the court during then, just not in as much public view.
 

whogoofed said:
yes, but what does the say then about the high school letting him play. He could've died on the court during then, just not in as much public view.
Click to expand...

The U of M is a big brand and that brand would be tarnished if a player died on the court.
 

High school also doesn't have a team doctor. The U does! They make the decision.
 


Deja vu


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I'm curious how this situation differs from Tyler Nanne's where he is cleared to play.
 


It was a physician's opinion that playing at the college level could be fatal.
If the family was not happy with that decision they could/can seek other opinions.
It is very superficial to think the "brand" was the reason the U acted on the physician's opinion.
A kid's life is at stake.
 



"An autopsy found that he suffered from a heart-muscle disorder, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.[16] Gathers' family later filed a $32.5-million lawsuit charging negligence.[25] Loyola Marymount settled out of court for $1.4 million, while the cardiologist who treated Gathers settled for $1 million"

This is why the University won't let him play.

Maybe he should transfer to Loyola Marymount.
 

olddoc said:
It was a physician's opinion that playing at the college level could be fatal.
If the family was not happy with that decision they could/can seek other opinions.
It is very superficial to think the "brand" was the reason the U acted on the physician's opinion.
A kid's life is at stake.
Click to expand...

If you don't think $$$$$ had anything to do with the decision, you're naive. On the doctors side, if they cleared him to play and something happened, they would open themselves up to a potential malpractice lawsuit.

From the University perspective, they would also be on the hook in a potential lawsuit as well as the negative PR hit they would take.

Those types of scenarios absolutely would play a part in the decision.
 

Jarvis's family can waive the right to sue all they want, Minnesota won't play him.

If he wants to play, he'll have to convince another university to allow him. He may or may not have tried that. He's not playing.
 





Jarvis is never going to play for the U. End of story.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom