- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Greg Brooks Suing LSU
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:01 am to WaterLink
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:01 am to WaterLink
quote:
I mean what are the coaches supposed to say?
If I were a coach in that situation, I would say "hey this guy is constantly having to sit out of practice with neurological issues, can we send him somewhere to get checked out?"
I'm not really blaming BK for anything. He's not a doctor, he is going off what the team doctors say. I'm more so saying it's a bad look for the medical staff.
This post was edited on 10/11/24 at 11:05 am
1
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:01 am to tenderfoot tigah
His brain tumor was diagnosed more quickly and dealt with more determinedly than >99% of the population, regardless of insurance status.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:03 am to WDAIII
quote:
So what's next then? Kids start suing their parents because the parents don't notice that their kids are sick?
LSU coaches, doctors and trainers aren’t your parents.
In Louisiana unemancipated minors cannot sue anyone who has parental control over them.
There is still a genuine issue of negligence.
Like I said, if a kid comes to you complaining of headaches, I don’t think the duty is to send him to a neurologist if he clears a concussion protocol
If he is having blurred vision… it’s another story.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:03 am to LSBoosie
quote:
No but if he is constantly having to sit out of practice because he is passing out and throwing up with blurry vision, they should have probably sent him somewhere to get checked out instead of telling him to go sit on the sidelines.
Is he not a grown man? If you are constantly passing out, blurred vision, and throwing up then go see a doctor. Why does he need the teams permission? The ER would take him right away.
Now if he was told specifically not to seek medical help outside of the building then that's another story.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:05 am to LSBoosie
quote:
If I were a coach in that situation, I would say "hey this guy is constantly having to sit out of practice with neurological issues, can we send him somewhere to get checked out?"
If he was diagnosed with vertigo, isn't that basically what they did? Greg said he felt ill, was given the option to sit out if he didn't feel well enough to play, with the warning that he could be replaced if he wasn't well enough to practice. After a few weeks and the vertigo didn't go away they send him for more testing and find a tumor. I don't see how that's malpractice from the team, coaches, doctors, etc. You aren't going to immediately run tests for brain cancer for every athlete that feels dizzy.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:05 am to Dragula
quote:
Neurosurgery has its risks
Anecdotal evidence from a local Neuro ICU.. I’d say >90% of these pts come out with permanent disabilities, or a complication post op subsequently yields a neurological derangement.
I’ve yet to come across a neurosurgeon that wasn’t eager to cut someone’s head open, but obviously can’t speak to the risk/reward in his case.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:05 am to BayouTiger33
The Petition (lawsuit) generally alleges that the training staff/team doctors should have sent him to a neurological specialist earlier than they did, which was in early/mid September. As a result of the delay, when he did see a Neurosurgeon it was determined he had a tumor and needed surgery to remove the tumor. They are asserting malpractice against the Neurosurgeon in a separate medical review panel proceeding.
The theme alleged in the lawsuit is that LSU prioritized winning over his health and constructively "forced" him to play despite his symptoms by essentially saying that if he didn't practice he couldn't play and would lose his starting job. However, the lawsuit does allege Brooks was given the option of sitting out practice/games. Furthermore, it is alleged that if LSU would have referred him to a neurological specialist earlier he may not have had to undergo surgery performed by the doctor who performed the surgery, and could have chosen a different doctor.
It is an interesting case. But remember, this is just ONE side of the argument and the allegations are always going to paint defendants in a bad light. Notably, there are no allegations acts of the LSU staff CAUSED the tumor, nor does there appear any allegations practicing/playing made the tumor/condition worse. They are basically arguing LSU should have sent him for a deeper evaluation sooner and, if so, the tumor would have been diagnosed earlier, which may have allowed him to choose a different doctor/treatment path. Yet, LSU didn't do so because they prioritized winning over his health.
The theme alleged in the lawsuit is that LSU prioritized winning over his health and constructively "forced" him to play despite his symptoms by essentially saying that if he didn't practice he couldn't play and would lose his starting job. However, the lawsuit does allege Brooks was given the option of sitting out practice/games. Furthermore, it is alleged that if LSU would have referred him to a neurological specialist earlier he may not have had to undergo surgery performed by the doctor who performed the surgery, and could have chosen a different doctor.
It is an interesting case. But remember, this is just ONE side of the argument and the allegations are always going to paint defendants in a bad light. Notably, there are no allegations acts of the LSU staff CAUSED the tumor, nor does there appear any allegations practicing/playing made the tumor/condition worse. They are basically arguing LSU should have sent him for a deeper evaluation sooner and, if so, the tumor would have been diagnosed earlier, which may have allowed him to choose a different doctor/treatment path. Yet, LSU didn't do so because they prioritized winning over his health.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:06 am to Bert Macklin FBI
Bro cmon, he’s an LSU athlete. I’m all for personal responsibility, but any lsu athlete is gonna go see the team Doctor before going to the neurologist. Lmao
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:06 am to BananaManCan
Who represents Brooks?
Is it the “official injury attorneys of LSU”?
Is it the “official injury attorneys of LSU”?
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:07 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
I see the other thread was deleted. This is a serious accusation against Kelly that, if true, will be his downfall. No way he could wiggle out of this accusation if there's any sort of truth to it.
Big if, though.
For reference, a videographer died under his direction at ND
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:07 am to Bert Macklin FBI
Is a wind storm not a form of a storm?
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:07 am to Red Drum
quote:
His brain tumor was diagnosed more quickly and dealt with more determinedly than >99% of the population, regardless of insurance status.
if you go and look at early symptoms of brain cancer it’s pretty banal stuff like Headaches
if you’re an athlete getting headaches it’s more likely dehydration or hits to the head than a tumor.
To win the case against LSU he’s going to have to show probably that he was presenting significant symptoms and team medical staff was ignoring them.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:07 am to SmoothBox
This case has zero to do with the videographer.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:09 am to SammyTiger
quote:
Like I said, if a kid comes to you complaining of headaches, I don’t think the duty is to send him to a neurologist if he clears a concussion protocol
Yeah. People are confusing training staffs as if they are primary care givers
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:09 am to SmoothBox
Did you watch our defensive backs last season
His starting job was not in jeapordy
LSU has plenty of evidence to show them
Most people would not have donated to his fund had they known this was outcome
It’s also why doctors have malpractice insurance
It’s not LSU job to diagnose what he has
His starting job was not in jeapordy
LSU has plenty of evidence to show them
Most people would not have donated to his fund had they known this was outcome
It’s also why doctors have malpractice insurance
It’s not LSU job to diagnose what he has
This post was edited on 10/11/24 at 11:17 am
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:09 am to TDsngumbo
quote:If you actually read the petition, there are little to no allegations made against Kelly. In fact, an exception was filed (still not availible for viewing on clerkconnet) that I imagine is filed on behalf of Kelly as an NCA, seeing as no viable cause of action is actually alleged against him.
This is a serious accusation against Kelly that, if true, will be his downfall. No way he could wiggle out of this accusation if there's any sort of truth to it.
The Petition is weak. Their main arguments are that Brooks was never evaluated by an MD... but then they alternatively allege he was seen by an MD who is a GP and not a neuro. They then try and paint LSU as the bad guy with the GoFundMe but I can almost guarantee you they've done everything they can legally do (in the eyes of the NCAA) when it comes to dolling out money to the family. Their allegation is literally "it's been hard to get the money."
Finally, give me a break about the "you'll lose your starting spot" stuff. Not even going to go into how dumb of an allegation that is.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:10 am to Ingeniero
quote:
If he was diagnosed with vertigo, isn't that basically what they did?
I think that's the problem. They just diagnosed him with vertigo without know what was actually causing it. I'm not putting anything on the coaches really, they just go off of info from the doctors. But the symptoms persisted for over a month before they sent him to get checked out. If the trainers/doctors don't know much about neurology, that's fine. But they should have sent him to someone who does imo.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:10 am to LSBoosie
quote:
No but if he is constantly having to sit out of practice because he is passing out and throwing up with blurry vision, they should have probably sent him somewhere to get checked out instead of telling him to go sit on the sidelines.
You think a few weeks delay in diagnosis was a factor in a brain tumor that had likely been growing for years?
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:10 am to talmaniandevil_25
Sure it does, brooks is saying the staff forced him to practice or he would lose his position. My argument is that it’s not that far fetched of an idea due to what happened in 2010, where Kelly forced a young man to film from an aerial lift in a wind storm with 40+mph gusts.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 11:11 am to Alt26
quote:I noticed they're also seeking pain and suffering from the initial symptoms to the diagnosis. It's just weak.
It is an interesting case. But remember, this is just ONE side of the argument and the allegations are always going to paint defendants in a bad light. Notably, there are no allegations acts of the LSU staff CAUSED the tumor, nor does there appear any allegations practicing/playing made the tumor/condition worse. They are basically arguing LSU should have sent him for a deeper evaluation sooner and, if so, the tumor would have been diagnosed earlier, which may have allowed him to choose a different doctor/treatment path. Yet, LSU didn't do so because they prioritized winning over his health.
That being said, I'm not going to fault them for trying. His life is fricked forever. He and his family are in an unimaginable position.
Page 4 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News