- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 12,401
- Reaction score
- 16,532
- Points
- 113
Gotta give 'em a minute. The first one always opens the door and then the flood happens.
Any idiot can see that the best way to handle this is to just use the same test and criteria for all ... But, there will be some who ...
Well, let's just wait for the comments.
It's not that simple though. The only solution would be to do a thorough cognitive test on every single player every year, so each player could be compared to themselves. Do the players want that? Part of the problem with that is there have been stories of guys who try to intentionally tank their cognitive tests to set a low baseline so that if they do get a concussion, they can still probably match their low baseline. That's not good. Kind of defeats the purpose.
If you don't have good individual data then you have to go with some sort of generic baseline comparison. Some sort of norming. How do you do that? You go by statistics. What are stats based on? They are based on a data set, which ultimately means it will boil down to something like an average for various groups.
I really don't think you can use the same baseline for everybody. It has to be at least somewhat customized. So if you don't want data defined by race, then what other groupings do you use? How about college? Position group? Area of the country where you grew up? You run into the same problems. There are smart QBs and dumb QBs but the QB position overall is likely smarter than CB. There are both dumb guys from Bama and smart guys. There are both super intelligent guys from Penn State and merely above average guys.
What is more important, getting a correct as possible diagnosis or being politically correct? If you set the baseline comparison too high then guys will be held out for concussions more often. Set it too low and you have guys with concussions being cleared to play.
What they will do is have a diverse group come up with some sort of new complex data norming that will still piss somebody off.