Mayo Clinic in Minnesota cleared Sasser to play

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
http://www.columbiatribune.com/spor...cle_a38b2813-663c-5ed8-b05b-5f449a2d3f69.html

By DAVID MORRISON

Friday, June 5, 2015 at 2:00 pm

The St. Louis Rams released former Missouri wideout Bud Sasser on Thursday after he could not get physically cleared to play because of a pre-existing heart condition.

The team waived him with a nonfootball illness designation after he was diagnosed with a genetic condition that causes the thickening of the heart muscle that could impede blood flow.

“It sucks. I would like to get out there and play. There’s nothing like sitting back and watching — I’ll tell you that much,” Sasser told the Tribune by phone Thursday morning. “If the opportunity comes up, I’ll happily take it. As of right now, I don’t really have an idea where to go from here.”

Sasser was not invited to participate in February’s NFL combine — where prospects undergo rigorous health testing — but took physicals during rookie orientation last month and was not cleared to participate.

Coach Jeff Fisher, who spoke with the media after the Rams’ organized team activities Thursday, said the team’s medical staff and outside physicians recommended Sasser not play.

“We did some extensive studies after the draft — very extensive, as you can imagine — and it was determined and concluded by numerous physicians that he had a pre-existing condition that we don’t feel will allow him to play,” Fisher said.

In a text, Sasser’s agent, Scott Thiel, said the receiver got a second opinion from doctors at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, who told Sasser that while he does have a “low-risk” case of this diagnosis, his heart is “fine to play football.”

“He has a very small case of the diagnosis given in St. Louis, he is at little to no risk, he should be able to play,” Thiel wrote. “The doctor told Bud he in fact knows there are others in the league playing with this same issue.”


The Rams chose the 6-foot-3, 219-pound Sasser with the 201st overall pick in the sixth round of May’s NFL draft. Sasser caught 77 passes for 1,003 yards and 12 touchdowns as a senior for the Tigers last fall.

Fisher told reporters that the Rams consulted with Missouri about Sasser’s issue and that it “kind of slipped through the cracks.”

In an email, Missouri team spokesman Chad Moller said federal privacy laws prohibit the university from discussing specific medical records about one of its students, but “nobody is allowed on the field if our medical team isn’t comfortable with their health situation.”

The Rams signed Sasser to his rookie contract Tuesday, a four-year deal worth $2.39 million according to Spotrac.com. The only guaranteed portion of the contract is the $113,737 signing bonus.

Thiel said the decision over whether Sasser can play is ultimately up to a team’s doctors and “hopefully another team will see things our way.”
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,938
I applaud the Rams for not risking his life to play. His agent sees him as an investment. No surprise he wants to make money. If another team clears him and is willing to let him play, that's their choice. But I fully support the Rams not taking the risk.
 

HometownBoy

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
3,527
Name
Aaron
If somebody tells me I'll die and another tells me I'll live I go with the former. Better safe than sorry when it comes to your actual life.
 

Mikey Ram

Hall of Fame
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
3,403
Name
Mike
This is a classic example of why it is so damned important for these guys to take advantage of a free education...At least then they have something to fall back on in case this happens to them...At least he got a little short-term help with the signing bonus....
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
49,225
Name
Burger man
But; what's he supposed to do?

I mean... He needs to stay active, as we all do. Is the condition such that football will really stress his heart? Can he have sex? Does he need to refrain from what?

Nobody wants to see him put himself at risk, but why is football more dangerous than life it self (strictly speaking about the heart).
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #6
But; what's he supposed to do?

I mean... He needs to stay active, as we all do. Is the condition such that football will really stress his heart? Can he have sex? Does he need to refrain from what?

Nobody wants to see him put himself at risk, but why is football more dangerous than life it self (strictly speaking about the heart).

I applaude the Rams for signing him, it was a real class move.

However, if he can have experts say he's not at any real risk, and that is definitely what the Mayo Clinic is, it should be up to him, IMHO. What risk are the Rams taking? None, really, it's all on him.
 

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,936
What risk are the Rams taking? None, really, it's all on him.

Well, besides them wanting to do the right thing (and not wanting the issues related to a player possibly dying would bring to the team) if he died during a football related activity then there'd be a good chance that Sasser's heirs would sue the team, at least to pay the full contract. Even if he signed a waiver, once the Rams had received a health warning it would likely be the case that the heirs would win in court to overcome the waiver. So yes, signing Sasser once their doctors advised not to would be the wrong business decision, as well as the wrong decision otherwise.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,938
I applaude the Rams for signing him, it was a real class move.

However, if he can have experts say he's not at any real risk, and that is definitely what the Mayo Clinic is, it should be up to him, IMHO. What risk are the Rams taking? None, really, it's all on him.

Even if we assume the Rams are taking no financial risk, is what you're proposing a moral/ethical thing to do? I don't think so.

It's like the people who argue that players should be allowed to go back into games when they have concussions because it should be their choice.

I think it's just a very unethical to allow a guy on the field knowing that he might die...even if it is what he wants.

Let another team take that risk.

But; what's he supposed to do?

I mean... He needs to stay active, as we all do. Is the condition such that football will really stress his heart? Can he have sex? Does he need to refrain from what?

Nobody wants to see him put himself at risk, but why is football more dangerous than life it self (strictly speaking about the heart).

Because of the physical exertion.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
Well, besides them wanting to do the right thing (and not wanting the issues related to a player possibly dying would bring to the team) if he died during a football related activity then there'd be a good chance that Sasser's heirs would sue the team, at least to pay the full contract. Even if he signed a waiver, once the Rams had received a health warning it would likely be the case that the heirs would win in court to overcome the waiver. So yes, signing Sasser once their doctors advised not to would be the wrong business decision, as well as the wrong decision otherwise.

I guess we'll just disagree. The Mayo Clinic is recognized as experts, not just team doctors. There may not be an opinion in the world that carries more weight. I wouldn't ruin a mans life over a lesser opinion without some serious investigation.
 

HometownBoy

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
3,527
Name
Aaron
But; what's he supposed to do?

I mean... He needs to stay active, as we all do. Is the condition such that football will really stress his heart? Can he have sex? Does he need to refrain from what?

Nobody wants to see him put himself at risk, but why is football more dangerous than life it self (strictly speaking about the heart).
Sports in general are more detrimental to the heart than most things. Remembering reading a story about a young hockey player who by all means was just a normal guy, who got hit just right enough to stop his heart and end his life. Compound things like that being capable of happening with a faulty heart and it's an unnecessary escalation of a risk he faces simply by existing.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,938
I guess we'll just disagree. The Mayo Clinic is recognized as experts, not just team doctors. There may not be an opinion in the world that carries more weight. I wouldn't ruin a mans life over a lesser opinion without some serious investigation.

"Ruin" his life? He has 31 other teams he can go play for. They're not "ruining" his life by refusing to take the chance that he dies due to a heart condition. Even if he can't get cleared by the other teams (which would indicate that they don't agree with the Mayo Clinic here), he still has a life to live away from football.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
Even if we assume the Rams are taking no financial risk, is what you're proposing a moral/ethical thing to do? I don't think so.

It's like the people who argue that players should be allowed to go back into games when they have concussions because it should be their choice.

I think it's just a very unethical to allow a guy on the field knowing that he might die...even if it is what he wants.

Let another team take that risk.



Because of the physical exertion.

Except, of course, the heart EXPERTS are saying it's not a risk. ALL football players are at risk of death, paralysis, long term cognitive damage, so isn't allowing anyone play immoral?
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
"Ruin" his life? He has 31 other teams he can go play for. They're not "ruining" his life by refusing to take the chance that he dies due to a heart condition. Even if he can't get cleared by the other teams (which would indicate that they don't agree with the Mayo Clinic here), he still has a life to live away from football.

Yes, I misspoke. Ruin his opportunity with the Rams. My only point is if the heart experts aren't worried, that should trump doctors. They aren't experts. If i were Sasser, I would go to 2 or 3 EXPERTS and see if they agree.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
40,592
There was really no other choice for the Rams and they did right by the kid. Signed him, got him some money and medical coverage for the year. I have a hard time seeing any team taking a chance with a diagnosis like this with everything else going on in the NFL at concussions. Last thing a team or the league would want is for something unfortunate to happen to Bud or a guy like him. Even if the Mayo clinic is right and it's a small risk a team just isn't going to push it.
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
40,592
Yes, I misspoke. Ruin his opportunity with the Rams. My only point is if the heart experts aren't worried, that should trump doctors. They aren't experts. If i were Sasser, I would go to 2 or 3 EXPERTS and see if they agree.

Do we know who exactly he saw prior to the Mayo Clinic? Pretty big assumption that the Rams didn't send him to cardiologist and only let their team physicians see him.
 

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,936
I guess we'll just disagree. The Mayo Clinic is recognized as experts, not just team doctors. There may not be an opinion in the world that carries more weight. I wouldn't ruin a mans life over a lesser opinion without some serious investigation.

First, they did do more investigation - they asked multiple other doctors apparently, who did agree there was a risk. Sasser and his agent shopped around for a doctor who would clear him. The Mayo Clinic is not perfect, the doctors there are not perfect. And even then the Mayo Clinic acknowledged there was a condition - just they felt it was minor enough to be an acceptable risk.

In any case, once the Rams team doctors - who ARE experts in sports related issues - AND the second opinions (again, presumably experts) agreed that there was an elevated risk, then besides it being the right thing to do the Rams did have an issue of liability. Even if Sasser signed a waiver. If something happened to Sasser, can you imagine Snead being cross-examined in front of a jury, having to acknowledge that multiple doctors, the experts the team would normally use, had warned him there were significant dangers, and the Rams signed and played Sasser anyway? The jury almost certainly would overturn the waiver, since the team should have known better, and it was just a kid trying to make a living, while the Rams were a billion dollar company taking advantage of him.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,938
Except, of course, the heart EXPERTS are saying it's not a risk. ALL football players are at risk of death, paralysis, long term cognitive damage, so isn't allowing anyone play immoral?

No. Just like allowing someone to be a police officer or firefighter isn't immoral.

But allowing someone to play when you know that they have a medical condition that could kill them is unethical. It's putting your team's success above a kid's life.

The Rams don't want to be in a situation like this:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcD5XUXfr1Y


And they're right to not risk it. Thing is that LMU did nothing wrong either. They thought the young man was taking medicine...but he cut back on his medication because it made him play worse. Do you think if all those people had the chance to go back they'd let him play knowing what would happen?
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
49,225
Name
Burger man
No. Just like allowing someone to be a police officer or firefighter isn't immoral.

But allowing someone to play when you know that they have a medical condition that could kill them is unethical. It's putting your team's success above a kid's life.

The Rams don't want to be in a situation like this:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcD5XUXfr1Y


And they're right to not risk it. Thing is that LMU did nothing wrong either. They thought the young man was taking medicine...but he cut back on his medication because it made him play worse. Do you think if all those people had the chance to go back they'd let him play knowing what would happen?


Man, I didn't like watching that.

I don't want to compare those situations though. Is the diagnosis the same?
 

ChrisW

Stating the obvious
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
4,670
Even if we assume the Rams are taking no financial risk, is what you're proposing a moral/ethical thing to do? I don't think so.

If I had two conflicting health reports. I'd get a third opinion. Then I'd ask the kid what he really wants to do. Tell him to take a week and go talk to his family and decide.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
Well, there are a lot of strong opinions here I see.

I'm not assuming he saw experts until he went to Mayo. If he did, then they should speak to Mayo and see why the disagreement. One of them is wrong.

The Mayo Clinic is where the experts go for advice and, according to their cardiac page, they diagnose in teams, not individuals. Were talking about the teams that do heart transplants and have pioneered much of that field, not sports medicine. I will assume they would not put their stamp on something like this lightly.

At the very least, it would create a doubt in my mind that the team got it right and I would reexamine the decision.