Yes "brain swelling" absolutely can occur hours after an injury. He probably had a subdural hematoma which can grow unpredictably based on a number of factors that can occur at the time of injury or some time later. We have too many untrained folks playing doctor here. TCU did nothing wrong medically from what I can tell from the few actual facts that have come out.
Bud Kennedy needs to explain himself.
- Thread starter TxFrog1999
- Start date
tcudoc
Full Member
The ability to diagnose a head injury in the 1980s vs present day is vastly different, as is the treatment protocol.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have the on site medical personnel evaluate and make a decision. Likely, it made zero difference in the outcome. It sounds like it was not a surgical injury (did not require a craniotomy to release the pressure in the head), so he was likely just observed in the hospital to make sure the injury did not worsen. A team doctor is a perfectly reasonable person to make the initial assessment. The timeline to transitioning the patient to the hospital seems reasonable. If the ambulance was called, they have a 20-30 minute response time anyway. Then they take thirty minutes to get the patient ready for transport then they take drive to the ER. Then it takes thirty minutes to do the intake process in the ER before evaluation and treatment decisions are made.
If it’s a stroke (not likely in his age group) things can move much faster, especially at a stroke center. But that is not what this was.
I think the timeline was reasonable to allow adequate evaluation, initial stabilization, and decision making. He was awake and responsive (by most accounts), so taking the time to evaluate his condition seems perfectly reasonable especially when there is a sports medicine doctor actually on site.
I forgot the actual amount of time that was quoted, but I think it was an hour and forty something minutes. Everyone is rounding that up to “almost two hours” and some even said “3 hours.” Things are not instantaneous. The trainer may have arrived at minute 12-15. The physician may have arrived at minute 30-40, even if on-site. Evaluation processes could have taken another 30-60 minutes. Then the decision was made to escalate to a scan that would have been scheduled and they would have likely had fairly quick access to a scheduled CT scan. But then they escalated to just going to the ER to get faster access. That decision tree takes a few minutes to evolve and is based on the patient’s current state and signs and symptoms. Nobody can walk into a completely unknown situation and gather all of the pertinent information and render an accurate assessment instantaneously.
I see no evidence of a cover up. The response seems reasonable.
The medical response and the response to the media are totally separate entities and should not be conflated. WRT the media response with the ST credentials, I wonder if the AD’s previous military employment played a role. In the Army, they don’t tolerate things the outside world does, and they dole out punishment. In the military, this seems normal. In a private institution, many cry foul.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to have the on site medical personnel evaluate and make a decision. Likely, it made zero difference in the outcome. It sounds like it was not a surgical injury (did not require a craniotomy to release the pressure in the head), so he was likely just observed in the hospital to make sure the injury did not worsen. A team doctor is a perfectly reasonable person to make the initial assessment. The timeline to transitioning the patient to the hospital seems reasonable. If the ambulance was called, they have a 20-30 minute response time anyway. Then they take thirty minutes to get the patient ready for transport then they take drive to the ER. Then it takes thirty minutes to do the intake process in the ER before evaluation and treatment decisions are made.
If it’s a stroke (not likely in his age group) things can move much faster, especially at a stroke center. But that is not what this was.
I think the timeline was reasonable to allow adequate evaluation, initial stabilization, and decision making. He was awake and responsive (by most accounts), so taking the time to evaluate his condition seems perfectly reasonable especially when there is a sports medicine doctor actually on site.
I forgot the actual amount of time that was quoted, but I think it was an hour and forty something minutes. Everyone is rounding that up to “almost two hours” and some even said “3 hours.” Things are not instantaneous. The trainer may have arrived at minute 12-15. The physician may have arrived at minute 30-40, even if on-site. Evaluation processes could have taken another 30-60 minutes. Then the decision was made to escalate to a scan that would have been scheduled and they would have likely had fairly quick access to a scheduled CT scan. But then they escalated to just going to the ER to get faster access. That decision tree takes a few minutes to evolve and is based on the patient’s current state and signs and symptoms. Nobody can walk into a completely unknown situation and gather all of the pertinent information and render an accurate assessment instantaneously.
I see no evidence of a cover up. The response seems reasonable.
The medical response and the response to the media are totally separate entities and should not be conflated. WRT the media response with the ST credentials, I wonder if the AD’s previous military employment played a role. In the Army, they don’t tolerate things the outside world does, and they dole out punishment. In the military, this seems normal. In a private institution, many cry foul.
Last edited:
TxFrog1999
The Man Behind The Curtain
And their fellow travelers in the media are gleefully promoting their disingenuous narrative because they can't stand accountability when it comes for one of their own.
At this point I wouldn't mind if the Star-Telegram loses their press credentials for all sporting events through the end of baseball season. They need to win back the trust of the institution, starting with a concerted effort to correct the record and apologize. But, we all know that would never happen.
Again, I'll point out that if this was us or even Jeremy's outlet our credentials would have been pulled and none of the babies crying about the Star-Telegram would have said a word.
froginmn
Fan Club
Thanks for giving an actual medical assessment; it's nice to hear from someone with knowledge of how these things can work.
froginmn
Fan Club
I honestly think they're playing a potentially dangerous game here. They first published unsubstantiated information from someone connected to the perpetrator, and Dozie was potentially endangered based upon that (they said they didn't name him, but it was easy to figure out who wasn't at practice, and Dozie named himself, not realizing what the ST was publishing). I don't think he should sue but people sue for a lot less.
Then Bud issues a tweet implying that they acted improperly wrt medical treatment, without any knowledge of the timeline of what happened, how they came to the decision regarding sending him for a CT, etc.
Seems like they are playing stupid games here, and it would be better to apologize to Dozie and the school before someone decides to escalate.
tcudoc
Full Member
Just to be clear, I have no details of the actual case. Just what was shared and critiqued by the media.
Thanks for giving an actual medical assessment; it's nice to hear from someone with knowledge of how these things can work.
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
What price will they pay? Sure, TCU could sue, but the legal system is so ridiculous, time consuming, and expensive that such a path is worse than useless. Absent that costly and likely fruitless path of litigation, about the only weapon TCU holds is access. Or lack thereof.
Kicking the rat [ "illegitimate Baylor boys" ] out was the best course of action available, and the one most likely to meaningly cause the Startlegram some pain in response to it's actions. The Startlegram is reacting just like one would expect a toddler who has had his lollipop taken away to react: They're throwing a tantrum. They're also showing both us and the rest of their remaining readers just how morally hollow, and utterly thin-skinned they really are.
Frog-in-law1995
KMA
Just read the story. It clearly explains the timeline and that it gets that information from the arrest warrant. Kennedy‘s Facebook post stating that he was not sent to the ER for nearly 2 hours is accurate, if a bit sensationalist, but the story explains all the care the team gave him immediately following the incident. Newspapers have been doing that for centuries. Why is this a 5 page thread?
Trelvis
Active Member
I don't know anyone with a fwst subscription but if you still have one, cancel it. They don't report news that you can't find elsewhere. You can also open links in private tabs to bypass the paywall. No need in giving them money. You are supporting people like Bud and Mac and the rest of em.
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
Because it's a sports forum? The other prominent forum is 10x worse.
Frog-in-law1995
KMA
I’ve been away.
Bud Kennedy is a libtard who hates TCU. He's a dirty pseudo journalist with zero integrity.
If he's a "libtard" he ought to like TCU, shouldn't he?
Sweat Equity
Tier 1
A portmanteau of “liberal” and “retard.” I confess, I had credited my fellow Horned Frogs with a somewhat more sophisticated command of the English language.
TxFrog1999
The Man Behind The Curtain
Big Frog II
Active Member
From the get go, we should have had a meeting with the reporter once his article came out and told him exactly what happened so he could have corrected his early article and get the facts straight. Sadly this did not happen, and now it has become a huge bruhaha.
HornyWartyToad
Active Member
Because folks are apparently so determined to have their purple panties in a twist that they either don’t know or don’t care about the difference between a reporter and an opinion columnist
Mean Purple
Active Member
eeeeaassy
Mean Purple
Active Member
nonsense. you actually think a reporter who went so far as to make up a significant part of his article, in an obvious effort to manufacture a scandal, would have corrected it? He only corrected it when the truth of the situation became public and showed that part of the article to be fraud.
Not to mention this involves what appears to be an active investigation into a possible criminal matter. It is likely that the school's legal staff would responsibly direct their client to not speak with media beyond some statements which, hopefully, that legal staff had a hand or at least strong influence in drafting.
Some of us on this board have dealt with reporters. For some of us, were unfortunate enough to have it tied to our jobs. So let me instill some reality. It's very unlikely that pandering to a reporter, who would go so far as to write a corrupted piece, is going to drive that reporter to write a less corruptable piece. A newspaper's/news outlet's job is to sell advertisements these days. That's the only way they survive. In their minds, the saucier they make a piece, the better the chance of views/reading.
