[needle]

Looks like Stanford has screened incoming athletes for sickle cell since 2009:

Starting in 2009, the Stanford Sports Medicine program will implement sickle cell trait
screening of all incoming student athletes. Sickle cell trait screening is done by a
simple blood test during the pre-participation physical exam process.

http://gostanford.com/fls/30600/pdf/spor...M_ID=30600

[needle]

Looks like Stanford has screened incoming athletes for sickle cell since 2009:

Starting in 2009, the Stanford Sports Medicine program will implement sickle cell trait
screening of all incoming student athletes. Sickle cell trait screening is done by a
simple blood test during the pre-participation physical exam process.

http://gostanford.com/fls/30600/pdf/spor...M_ID=30600

[fullmetal]

The football trainer during that incident was also the trainer during a death of a UCF football player in a previous incident.

http://yerridlaw.com/wrongful-death/ted-agu/

At the time of Agu’s collapse, he was under the supervision of Cal Berkeley’s head athletic trainer for football, Robert Jackson. Ironically, this is the very same Robert Jackson who, prior to becoming employed by Cal Berkeley, was involved in a remarkably similar death of another college football player. In 2008, Robert Jackson was the supervising athletic trainer responsible for the welfare of Ereck Plancher, a 19 year old wide receiver for the University of Central Florida in Orlando. Like Agu, Plancher also carried the sickle cell trait and during pre-season conditioning drills, he experienced nearly identical symptoms of distress as he sickled, struggled, and collapsed while under the supervision of Jackson. As with Agu, trainer Jackson failed to intervene and allowed a struggling Plancher to continue the excessively difficult and punishing drill that directly resulted in Plancher’s death. In 2011, Plancher’s family, represented by Steve Yerrid, Jeff Murphy, J.D. Dowell, and David Dickey, took the case to a three week trial against UCF Athletics Association, Inc., and obtained a jury verdict and final judgment (including costs, fees and interest awarded by the Court) that is now almost $15 million. Despite the fact that UCF Athletics Association had $21 million in liability insurance to pay this judgment, Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal ruled that “sovereign immunity” limited the liability of the Athletics Association and its insurance company to $200,000. The Plancher family has appealed that ruling and the matter is currently pending before the Florida Supreme Court.

EDIT: Oops, filled in the rest of the paragraph.

[fullmetal]

The football trainer during that incident was also the trainer during a death of a UCF football player in a previous incident.

http://yerridlaw.com/wrongful-death/ted-agu/

At the time of Agu’s collapse, he was under the supervision of Cal Berkeley’s head athletic trainer for football, Robert Jackson. Ironically, this is the very same Robert Jackson who, prior to becoming employed by Cal Berkeley, was involved in a remarkably similar death of another college football player. In 2008, Robert Jackson was the supervising athletic trainer responsible for the welfare of Ereck Plancher, a 19 year old wide receiver for the University of Central Florida in Orlando. Like Agu, Plancher also carried the sickle cell trait and during pre-season conditioning drills, he experienced nearly identical symptoms of distress as he sickled, struggled, and collapsed while under the supervision of Jackson. As with Agu, trainer Jackson failed to intervene and allowed a struggling Plancher to continue the excessively difficult and punishing drill that directly resulted in Plancher’s death. In 2011, Plancher’s family, represented by Steve Yerrid, Jeff Murphy, J.D. Dowell, and David Dickey, took the case to a three week trial against UCF Athletics Association, Inc., and obtained a jury verdict and final judgment (including costs, fees and interest awarded by the Court) that is now almost $15 million. Despite the fact that UCF Athletics Association had $21 million in liability insurance to pay this judgment, Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal ruled that “sovereign immunity” limited the liability of the Athletics Association and its insurance company to $200,000. The Plancher family has appealed that ruling and the matter is currently pending before the Florida Supreme Court.

EDIT: Oops, filled in the rest of the paragraph.

[yvonne]

He was a trainer at Berkeley right up until last month. He's now in medical device sales, but still maintains his athletic training certification. There does not appear to be a gap between his previous job and the current one.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-jackson-bba9a697

[yvonne]

He was a trainer at Berkeley right up until last month. He's now in medical device sales, but still maintains his athletic training certification. There does not appear to be a gap between his previous job and the current one.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-jackson-bba9a697

[Treebound]

Wow - what a mess and a very, very sad story for the family. 

Yvonne, I couldn't agree with you more.  Every time I go to that site it makes me sick.  Clearly having a losing program has made these people even worse.  CalVata (sp?) and wifeisaf*rd come off as very, very bitter, angry people.  They are what is worst in UCB fans.  I feel sorry for the guy's wife...talk about making a poor lifetime decision.  Yes, Stanford grads can make some big mistakes.  I saw some of this mentality with younger high school friends that went there after being denied by Old Union.    My kids picked up on the Cal chip on  the shoulder when they took college visits at UCB as Stanford was mentioned negatively multiple times.     

Most of us that grew up in NorCal, applied to both schools.  UCB is a great school (and a good bargain) and I would be happy if my children chose to go there.    The thin envelope can make haters out of people and that's sad.    These people deserve their crappy football team and a lifetime with no Rose Bowl.

[Treebound]

Wow - what a mess and a very, very sad story for the family. 

Yvonne, I couldn't agree with you more.  Every time I go to that site it makes me sick.  Clearly having a losing program has made these people even worse.  CalVata (sp?) and wifeisaf*rd come off as very, very bitter, angry people.  They are what is worst in UCB fans.  I feel sorry for the guy's wife...talk about making a poor lifetime decision.  Yes, Stanford grads can make some big mistakes.  I saw some of this mentality with younger high school friends that went there after being denied by Old Union.    My kids picked up on the Cal chip on  the shoulder when they took college visits at UCB as Stanford was mentioned negatively multiple times.     

Most of us that grew up in NorCal, applied to both schools.  UCB is a great school (and a good bargain) and I would be happy if my children chose to go there.    The thin envelope can make haters out of people and that's sad.    These people deserve their crappy football team and a lifetime with no Rose Bowl.

[BostonCard]

The sad thing is that other than when we play them, I don't routinely root against Cal.  I like that they continue to be Rose-bowl-less, and of course I love beating them.  But I was fine (even a bit happy for them) that they made it to a bowl game this year and won it.  I think it takes away a bit of the bitterness, and I would rather beat a good Cal team than a bad Cal team.

BC

[BostonCard]

The sad thing is that other than when we play them, I don't routinely root against Cal.  I like that they continue to be Rose-bowl-less, and of course I love beating them.  But I was fine (even a bit happy for them) that they made it to a bowl game this year and won it.  I think it takes away a bit of the bitterness, and I would rather beat a good Cal team than a bad Cal team.

BC

[winflop]

I agree with your last part BC but not much of the rest.  I never root for Low APR U, and I told my kids that if they want to go to Low APR U they can find someone else to pay for it.  The latter is as much because I don't think Berkeley is the kind of city where I want my kids living, due to both political and safety issues.  Plus, there's plenty of other really good schools.

Reality is my younger one won't be going to a UC anyway.  Will take him at least 5 years to graduate with impacted majors and such.  So it's gonna cost as much as a 4-year private college if not more.

[winflop]

I agree with your last part BC but not much of the rest.  I never root for Low APR U, and I told my kids that if they want to go to Low APR U they can find someone else to pay for it.  The latter is as much because I don't think Berkeley is the kind of city where I want my kids living, due to both political and safety issues.  Plus, there's plenty of other really good schools.

Reality is my younger one won't be going to a UC anyway.  Will take him at least 5 years to graduate with impacted majors and such.  So it's gonna cost as much as a 4-year private college if not more.

[Papa John]

You may be relying on old news, winflop. UC campuses have done a lot to improve graduation rates over the last 15-20 years. Berkeley and UCLA lead the pack, per usual.

http://accountability.universityofcalifo...ter-3.html

But then again, I'm a bit defensive of the UC system since I earned my doctoral degree from UCLA, my wife is a Bruin, and I married into a C.al family...

[Papa John]

You may be relying on old news, winflop. UC campuses have done a lot to improve graduation rates over the last 15-20 years. Berkeley and UCLA lead the pack, per usual.

http://accountability.universityofcalifo...ter-3.html

But then again, I'm a bit defensive of the UC system since I earned my doctoral degree from UCLA, my wife is a Bruin, and I married into a C.al family...

[BostonCard]

The latter is as much because I don't think Berkeley is the kind of city where I want my kids living, due to both political and safety issues.

The city of Berkeley is fine from a safety perspective (2.3 violent crimes per 1000 residents in 2015); violent crime there is about average from a California perspective (https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr...15/home).  It's safer than Pomona, for example, if you were considering sending your kids there, and certainly safer than Los Angeles, if USC were a consideration.

While I understand the feelings about the political leanings of the city of Berkeley, I will say it is a shame.  Your kids would probably benefit from exposure to a broad range of political perspectives, and the City of Berkeley would definitely benefit from having more conservative voices.  I find it one of the contributors to the political dialogue (or lack thereof) that liberals only want to associate with other liberals and don't want to hear conservatives while conservatives only want to maintain dialogue with other conservatives and nobody seems to want to have anything to do with people on the opposite end of the political spectrum.

BC

[BostonCard]

The latter is as much because I don't think Berkeley is the kind of city where I want my kids living, due to both political and safety issues.

The city of Berkeley is fine from a safety perspective (2.3 violent crimes per 1000 residents in 2015); violent crime there is about average from a California perspective (https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr...15/home).  It's safer than Pomona, for example, if you were considering sending your kids there, and certainly safer than Los Angeles, if USC were a consideration.

While I understand the feelings about the political leanings of the city of Berkeley, I will say it is a shame.  Your kids would probably benefit from exposure to a broad range of political perspectives, and the City of Berkeley would definitely benefit from having more conservative voices.  I find it one of the contributors to the political dialogue (or lack thereof) that liberals only want to associate with other liberals and don't want to hear conservatives while conservatives only want to maintain dialogue with other conservatives and nobody seems to want to have anything to do with people on the opposite end of the political spectrum.

BC

[terry]

I think Berkeley can be an interesting, fun place for a young person to live. It's probably better for grad students than undergrads. Different from Stanford, but getting a different perspective can be a good thing.

[terry]

I think Berkeley can be an interesting, fun place for a young person to live. It's probably better for grad students than undergrads. Different from Stanford, but getting a different perspective can be a good thing.

[yvonne]

Wow - what a mess and a very, very sad story for the family. 

Yvonne, I couldn't agree with you more.  Every time I go to that site it makes me sick.  Clearly having a losing program has made these people even worse.  CalVata (sp?) and wifeisaf*rd come off as very, very bitter, angry people.  They are what is worst in UCB fans.  I feel sorry for the guy's wife...talk about making a poor lifetime decision.  Yes, Stanford grads can make some big mistakes.  I saw some of this mentality with younger high school friends that went there after being denied by Old Union.    My kids picked up on the Low APR U chip on  the shoulder when they took college visits at UCB as Stanford was mentioned negatively multiple times.     

Most of us that grew up in NorCal, applied to both schools.  UCB is a great school (and a good bargain) and I would be happy if my children chose to go there.    The thin envelope can make haters out of people and that's sad.    These people deserve their crappy football team and a lifetime with no Rose Bowl.

It might be an age thing. A friend in the over 60 crowd is a UCB alumna, the daughter of a Stanford alumna, and the ex-wife of a Stanford alumnus. Recently she asked, "When was it that we had to hate Stanford?"

I think it was around the time of Mike Palowski, but maybe it goes as far back as when Joe Kapp coached there. I hear he cut off a reporter's red tie.

[yvonne]

Wow - what a mess and a very, very sad story for the family. 

Yvonne, I couldn't agree with you more.  Every time I go to that site it makes me sick.  Clearly having a losing program has made these people even worse.  CalVata (sp?) and wifeisaf*rd come off as very, very bitter, angry people.  They are what is worst in UCB fans.  I feel sorry for the guy's wife...talk about making a poor lifetime decision.  Yes, Stanford grads can make some big mistakes.  I saw some of this mentality with younger high school friends that went there after being denied by Old Union.    My kids picked up on the Low APR U chip on  the shoulder when they took college visits at UCB as Stanford was mentioned negatively multiple times.     

Most of us that grew up in NorCal, applied to both schools.  UCB is a great school (and a good bargain) and I would be happy if my children chose to go there.    The thin envelope can make haters out of people and that's sad.    These people deserve their crappy football team and a lifetime with no Rose Bowl.

It might be an age thing. A friend in the over 60 crowd is a UCB alumna, the daughter of a Stanford alumna, and the ex-wife of a Stanford alumnus. Recently she asked, "When was it that we had to hate Stanford?"

I think it was around the time of Mike Palowski, but maybe it goes as far back as when Joe Kapp coached there. I hear he cut off a reporter's red tie.

[washingtonismoney]

*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

[washingtonismoney]

*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

[CTcard]

*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

In real life, UC-B.erkeley is extremely high on the list of institutions of higher education that I admire, I have great professional contacts there, the city is interesting and rather fun, and most grads from that place that I know are top notch.

In sports-internet life B.erkeley is is the spawn of the devil, filled with massively underperforming teams, home to sniveling weenies and I revel in their angst over our success.

[CTcard]

*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

In real life, UC-B.erkeley is extremely high on the list of institutions of higher education that I admire, I have great professional contacts there, the city is interesting and rather fun, and most grads from that place that I know are top notch.

In sports-internet life B.erkeley is is the spawn of the devil, filled with massively underperforming teams, home to sniveling weenies and I revel in their angst over our success.

[Mick]

*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

Agree with everything CT Card said.  Reasonable mind, disagreeing with WIM right here.  I like the mix and proximity offered by Palo Alto.  I don't like the East Bay as much (though I still find it preferable to non-Nor-California environs), though my Mom lived in Oakland by Jack London Square for years.

[Mick]

*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

Agree with everything CT Card said.  Reasonable mind, disagreeing with WIM right here.  I like the mix and proximity offered by Palo Alto.  I don't like the East Bay as much (though I still find it preferable to non-Nor-California environs), though my Mom lived in Oakland by Jack London Square for years.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=14508.msg155457#msg155457 date=1454532962]
*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

In real life, UC-B.erkeley is extremely high on the list of institutions of higher education that I admire, I have great professional contacts there, the city is interesting and rather fun, and most grads from that place that I know are top notch.

In sports-internet life B.erkeley is is the spawn of the devil, filled with massively underperforming teams, home to sniveling weenies and I revel in their angst over our success.
[/quote]

Bingo!

And WIM is also potentially right, depending on age.  If I were a 20-something unmarried recent grad, I'd rather live in Berkeley than Palo Alto.  With a young family, Palo Alto is probably a nicer (and safer) place to be.  Once you have kids in high school, I would vote neither.  Berkeley High is meh (literally, it rank as a 5/10; http://school-ratings.com/school_details...77.html).  On the other hand, the pressure and lack of diversity at Paly and/or Gunn would make them less attractive for me to send my kids.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=14508.msg155457#msg155457 date=1454532962]
*whispers*

I actually find Berkeley to be more interesting than Palo Alto and would rather live there, everything else being equal.

In real life, UC-B.erkeley is extremely high on the list of institutions of higher education that I admire, I have great professional contacts there, the city is interesting and rather fun, and most grads from that place that I know are top notch.

In sports-internet life B.erkeley is is the spawn of the devil, filled with massively underperforming teams, home to sniveling weenies and I revel in their angst over our success.
[/quote]

Bingo!

And WIM is also potentially right, depending on age.  If I were a 20-something unmarried recent grad, I'd rather live in Berkeley than Palo Alto.  With a young family, Palo Alto is probably a nicer (and safer) place to be.  Once you have kids in high school, I would vote neither.  Berkeley High is meh (literally, it rank as a 5/10; http://school-ratings.com/school_details...77.html).  On the other hand, the pressure and lack of diversity at Paly and/or Gunn would make them less attractive for me to send my kids.

BC

[Papa John]

I think you misread winflop, Papa John. He wasn't criticizing the graduation rate, but the time it takes to achieve. And the numbers you cite are based on a six-year cohort, not four.

The numbers include both six- and four-year cohorts. The graphs are a bit hard to read, but the UC-system six-year graduation rate has remained pretty constant over the past 15 years--in the 80% range--while the four-year grad rate has improved a lot--from the mid-40% to low-60%. (If you are a California taxpayer, you should care.)

Berkeley's 4-year grad rate is just below 80%, which is much better than the other UCs and the typical public AAU member. And UCLA is looking good at a bit above 70%.

I was talking recently with someone who graduated from Berkeley in the mid-1990s. She was talking about how tough it was to get through C.al in four years, and just assumed it was the same story today. For a variety of reasons, all of the UC campuses--including the Santa Barbara campus where I work--have worked hard since 2000 to improve the retention and grad rates.

[Papa John]

I think you misread winflop, Papa John. He wasn't criticizing the graduation rate, but the time it takes to achieve. And the numbers you cite are based on a six-year cohort, not four.

The numbers include both six- and four-year cohorts. The graphs are a bit hard to read, but the UC-system six-year graduation rate has remained pretty constant over the past 15 years--in the 80% range--while the four-year grad rate has improved a lot--from the mid-40% to low-60%. (If you are a California taxpayer, you should care.)

Berkeley's 4-year grad rate is just below 80%, which is much better than the other UCs and the typical public AAU member. And UCLA is looking good at a bit above 70%.

I was talking recently with someone who graduated from Berkeley in the mid-1990s. She was talking about how tough it was to get through C.al in four years, and just assumed it was the same story today. For a variety of reasons, all of the UC campuses--including the Santa Barbara campus where I work--have worked hard since 2000 to improve the retention and grad rates.

[Rally]

[quote author=garvin link=topic=14508.msg155295#msg155295 date=1454459541]
I think you misread winflop, Papa John. He wasn't criticizing the graduation rate, but the time it takes to achieve. And the numbers you cite are based on a six-year cohort, not four.

The numbers include both six- and four-year cohorts. The graphs are a bit hard to read, but the UC-system six-year graduation rate has remained pretty constant over the past 15 years--in the 80% range--while the four-year grad rate has improved a lot--from the mid-40% to low-60%. (If you are a California taxpayer, you should care.)

Berkeley's 4-year grad rate is just below 80%, which is much better than the other UCs and the typical public AAU member. And UCLA is looking good at a bit above 70%.

I was talking recently with someone who graduated from Berkeley in the mid-1990s. She was talking about how tough it was to get through C.al in four years, and just assumed it was the same story today. For a variety of reasons, all of the UC campuses--including the Santa Barbara campus where I work--have worked hard since 2000 to improve the retention and grad rates.
[/quote]. When we took each child off to college, one to UCSB the other to USD, in the 90s, we heard the same lecture at each school:  parents, don't expect your child to graduate in 4 years because of impacted classes, etc, etc, etc.  our solution, which worked, was to tell each child we would pay for four years, period.  God bless them, each received their degree after 4 years.  As a family we take our motivation where we find it.

[Rally]

[quote author=garvin link=topic=14508.msg155295#msg155295 date=1454459541]
I think you misread winflop, Papa John. He wasn't criticizing the graduation rate, but the time it takes to achieve. And the numbers you cite are based on a six-year cohort, not four.

The numbers include both six- and four-year cohorts. The graphs are a bit hard to read, but the UC-system six-year graduation rate has remained pretty constant over the past 15 years--in the 80% range--while the four-year grad rate has improved a lot--from the mid-40% to low-60%. (If you are a California taxpayer, you should care.)

Berkeley's 4-year grad rate is just below 80%, which is much better than the other UCs and the typical public AAU member. And UCLA is looking good at a bit above 70%.

I was talking recently with someone who graduated from Berkeley in the mid-1990s. She was talking about how tough it was to get through C.al in four years, and just assumed it was the same story today. For a variety of reasons, all of the UC campuses--including the Santa Barbara campus where I work--have worked hard since 2000 to improve the retention and grad rates.
[/quote]. When we took each child off to college, one to UCSB the other to USD, in the 90s, we heard the same lecture at each school:  parents, don't expect your child to graduate in 4 years because of impacted classes, etc, etc, etc.  our solution, which worked, was to tell each child we would pay for four years, period.  God bless them, each received their degree after 4 years.  As a family we take our motivation where we find it.