OT: Whitlock Calls for Kelly's Head in Student Death
In his article posted today, Jason Whitlock calls out Brian Kelly for the tragedy that occured during a Notre Dame practice this week.
What I want know is - what do you guys think about this?
My initial reaction was "that's ridiculous". But the more I think about it, the following probably fall on Kelly:
- The day before the winds were so bad that they had to move the practice inside
- The next day, Kelly moves the practice outside
- As the coach, you know you have a kid 50-feet in the air (with nothing to block the wind) in an unsecured lift (ESPN made it known that many programs have these lifts bolted to the ground)
- The practice had been going on for at least long enough for Swarbrick to take a conference call, walk to the practice field, and stand around for ~5 minutes.
- Kelly is the CEO - he has the power to take the practice inside (like Whitlock mentioned that sweater vest did)
In the end - it's a tough call. Whitlock is probably going a little overboard here to get page hits, but he does mention some good points. I have to believe if this happened at Michigan, I wouldn't want RR to be fired for it. But then again, I'm pretty sure RR wouldn't have left a student 50-feet in the air with howling winds, either.
Link Below:
October 29th, 2010 at 12:20 PM ^
everytime an auto worker gets hurt.
Brian Kelly is supposed to be an expert on securing sissor lifts?
Will he get fired if the lawn man runs over his own foot?
October 29th, 2010 at 12:23 PM ^
Only partially. Ford Motor Company and every other large industrial concern takes great concern in worker safety. You don't fire Mr. Ford if he's take reasonable precautions for worker safety. If Swarbrick and/or Kelly did not take reasonable precautions or ignored them, they deserve to be fired, or if they have any honor, resign.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:26 PM ^
I get your point, but the analogy doesn't quite work for me.
Ford employs 178,000 people. Notre Dame football employs a few hundred. Not exactly apples and apples here.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^
They don't make anyone put together a carburetor in a wind storm at high altitude. There is a big difference between the kid falling off the platform accidentally and sending him up there in unsafe conditions.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:06 PM ^
He never should have been up there. I believe this is similar to the lift at ND.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^
I have been up in one of these before (friend's dad owns a company that uses them). I would like to preface this statement by saying that i am by no means a sissy - but those things are scary as hell. Scary as hell even in calm winds. 50 MPH winds? My pants would be saturated.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
We use both scissor lifts and manlifts at my work. When the wind is a minimum of 20mph, we are not allowed to use them under any circumstances. This is my company's rule, not OSHA. Also, we are required, per company rules, to wear a full body harness with a lanyard that attaches to the safety latches that are mounted on the lifts. These things sway like a mother the higher they are, that's with no wind. Add a slight breeze and watch as you bowels try escaping!
edit: I just looked at OSHA's site and all they really require is that if a guardrail is not in place, then the employer must provide alternate means of fall protection.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
I remember painting the support beams in the warehouse at my college job on one of those. Indoors they're freaky. When I moved it outside and there was a light breeze i was freaked out by it. Everytime I needed to move, I would lower the thing, move it, and raise it back up again. I don't know how those things are OSHA approved at all.
And I wasn't wearing a harness, which, apparently I should've been.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
Dead is dead if you work at Ford or ND, have 100,000 employees or 1. It seems to me that in a smaller organization (such as ND's football operations) with fewer layers of management and less complexity there is even more responsibility placed on the leader of that organization for safety.
Someone sent that kid up there in gale force winds. Which means that someone made a very, very bad decision. The athletic director and coach have the basic responsiblity to see to it that people don't die. As leaders they set appropriate policies, ensure they are communicatated to and understood by managers and workers, and later compel compliance. They cannot be all places at all times, sure, but they certainly hire managers and should expect them to follow procedures or at a minimum use good judgement.
If there were no safety policies, then they must resign. If they allowed policies to be ignored, they must resign. If they hired people who willfully circumvented policies, then they have terrible judgement and must resign. A kid is dead here because someone didn't have the intelligence or the balls to say no.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^
First paragraph - that is my point. The fewer employees = the more micro-management necessary. There are only 24 hours in a day. Presumably Kelly could oversee an issue such as this, while the CEO of Ford would not have the time.
Second - I think the investigation is checking into whether or not the winds were "gale force" when he was sent up there. I know in the articles I've seen, they've quote Swarbrick as mentioning the gatorade jugs toppling over, then hearing a loud crash. I haven't seen a definitive "they sent him up there with howling winds" or "they sent him up there when it was very calm outside, then the winds began to gust" judgment yet.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:08 PM ^
If the tweets and FB updates the kid made are credible, he certainly knew that the potential for gale-force winds were there (tweeted prior to heading in that there would be 60mph winds, and tweeted - or maybe updated FB - WHILE ON THE LIFT that it was scary as s***).
I also think it was foolish of Swarbrick to come out and state that things seemed calm up until that single gust of wind that toppled the lift. He's basically exonerating his staff before any investigation has taken place. I understand supporting them, but that was just foolish.
And not that this has anything to do with anything, but the kid is from the town in which we live.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:24 PM ^
The first thing I thought of after reading the transcript of that kid's twats is that he was one heck of a dedicated employee/student! If I were in that situation, I have to think that I would have gotten down off that lift the second I felt as scared as this kid apparently was (based on his twats). It makes me wonder what kind of pressure the video kids are under in a football program. Would he have been ostracised or looked down upon for calling it a day while the practice continued? Or was he really just a dedicated employee/student whereas I am a slacker? Regardless, its a horribly tragic thing to have happen.
October 29th, 2010 at 7:37 PM ^
The storm system which caused all of this set a record for minimum pressure in recorded meteorological history. For non-science or weather folk out there, the lower the pressure in a low pressure system, the higher the winds for the most part. It was a historic event in meteorology, and it was forecasted a week in advance. Every single news outlet and weather predicting entity in the country knew well in advance that winds would be strong across the whole midwest that day. If any one of the people who were in charge of making this happen even so much as glanced at the morning weather that day, they would have known that the winds would most likely be strong all day. Not to mention, after watching this thing develop from Tuesday through Thursday, there is about a .01% chance that the winds were calm at any point during practice, as Swarbick claims. Granted, the winds were not howling at 60 mph for an sustained period of time, but there is no doubt in my mind that they were consistently strong enough to preclude operating a lift like that. Make no mistake, this was completely preventable and completely unacceptable.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
Bullshit. Nobody disputes there were gale force winds. Nobody disputes the poor student was sent up there. If there were not gale force winds when he was sent up there were before he crashed and died. Where were the damn adults?? Brian Kelly goes into the homes of high school kids and tells the parents he will look after their child. But I guess that care and oversight only extends to those who play football and not those who merely undertake tasks for the football program. And I think we can legitimately wonder if it even extends that far. This is not complicated. It is malfeasance. And some unfortunate kid paid for it with his life. If Kelly and Swarbrick had any honor they would resign. I have no idea how they can look at themselves in the mirror.
October 29th, 2010 at 6:27 PM ^
that's the crux of the issue. i doubt he was "sent" up there. he probably went up there because he thought he had to. it was his job. and that job is probably taken for granted, so nobody had the foresight to tell the kid not to. to expect the coach to have that on his priority list is, unfortuneately, unreasonable.
October 29th, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^
college football is not one of them. Someone made a bad call here and needs to step up and take the bullet. If this happens at Michigan - I would expect a sincere mea culpa and resignations up to the AD level (depending on circumstance.) I'm not an insider but I can't imagine the HC is very far from the management chain wrt practice film.
ND is not getting special treatment here in my opinion. This is basic leadership. If you don't make safety an organizational first priority - torts will make your organization change that (I would hope.)
Comparing this to an industrial accident is ridiculous. There isn't a Russel 2000 company without worker safety as its primary operational focus.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:35 PM ^
October 29th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
the lift bolted down in the first place. Nobody in authority cared enough to even think about it. Some kid is dead and half the people discussing this treat it as if he just broke a leg.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:51 PM ^
If whoever made this decision knew the kid would be endangered being up there that's satisfies intent and means he was reckless. If he didn't then he (or the person decided they should go up) was just negligent.
I'm not familiar with Indiana's caselaw on the subject, but in some states this could give rise to a homicide charge. It's that serious.
October 29th, 2010 at 5:15 PM ^
Just last year in Toronto there was a well-publicized incident of a scaffold collapsing on Christmas Eve when proper saety measures were not followed. That incident (http://www.thestar.com/printarticle/876394) has led to criminal negligence charges against the company owners. Obviously, this is Canada and the story is totally different but it does indicate that in some jurisdictions you don't even have to be present to be criminally liable and responsibility goes all the way to the top. Note: I am not saying Brian Kelly is responsible, I'll let OSHA decide.
October 29th, 2010 at 5:45 PM ^
Yeah I have no idea whether Kelly is the one this might fall on. I'm not sure if Indiana has adopted this to any extent, but under the (influential) Model Penal Code, if you kill someone in the course of consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that's involuntary manslaughter. And if you don't realize the risk, but should have, that's negligent homicide.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^
At every place of employment, worker safety is someone's job. At Ford it is not Bill Ford's job. He has delegated it. If he hasn't, then he is ultimately responsible, but I assure you he has delegated it. Whatever the case, someone is going to be accountable if someone dies on the job. You can't just say that it was no one's job so no one is responsible.
In this case, I have a feeling it was no one's job. So it does fall on the "CEO", whether that's Swarbrick or Kelly or the director of video operations. Whoever this falls on, I can't help but feel bad for him, because obviously no one wanted this to happen.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
No, this is like firing Alan Mulally because one of his plants burned to the ground, killing everyone inside.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:40 PM ^
Or firing Tony Heyward because one of his oil rigs blew out...
October 29th, 2010 at 10:24 PM ^
Can I fire you for that avatar? <shudder>
October 29th, 2010 at 5:52 PM ^
It seems to me that one of the coaches (preferably the head coach) would look at the kid up in the scissor lift with 50 mph winds and say, "he shouldn't be up there, get him down." Besides the fact that they have warnings on the machines that say not to be up that high with half that wind speed.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:21 PM ^
My initial reaction was that both the coach and the AD should tender registrations. Fiascos like this demand taking responsibility; even if either had no idea the kid was in the tower both are responsible for a cultural atmosphere that did not value safety
October 29th, 2010 at 12:30 PM ^
The AD comes off like a total sleazeball trying to pass the buck with his "Well, I wasn't really there" comments followed by "Then this crazy unexpected super-powerful wind came out of nowhere."
October 29th, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
are they registering?
October 29th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^
No, I think the poster is right in that they are "tendering" registrations (i.e. handing them in) and not registering tenders. My reading is that they are tendering registrations for their cultural atmospheres. What I'm not sure about is where they register something like that. The USP&TO?
October 29th, 2010 at 12:43 PM ^
...And what I think is even further damning to Kelly is Jim Tressel's comments. They show that at least one coach in America was thinking about this exact problem. Why wasn't Kelly?
Another poster below mentioned that they would withhold judgement until all the facts are in, which I think is extremely fair. However I do think a criminal investigation needs to take place here. I want to know if someone should be charged with negligent homocide b/c there is no reason that that student should have lost his life.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:06 PM ^
The Tressel quote is incredibly damning.
“It looks a little nasty. I worry about our cameramen, their well-being up there 50 feet in the air.”
This is the money quote. I imagine it will come up again and again, and it will haunt Brian Kelly and this poor kid's family forever.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^
but I respect him as a man. THAT is how a responsible person looks at a situation like this.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
Did Tressel do anything other than worry? Was the OSU lift bolted down? Was the grad assistant up in it or not?
October 29th, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^
and read he moved the practice indoors. I could be mistaken though.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:52 PM ^
The head football coach has final say over everything that transpires on the practice field. Everything. That’s why Ohio State’s Jim Tressel moved the Buckeyes’ practice inside on Tuesday when wind gusts made conditions unsafe.
October 29th, 2010 at 5:25 PM ^
No, I didn't. I wasn't trying to be snarky, just curious. I've been reading grad school texts all day and haven't really had much time to read any news. I got sucked into the thread and curious about it, but figured I should get back to reading. Which I shuold actually do now, too. Sorry for asking easily answerable questions.
October 29th, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^
Uh, tender resignations.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:22 PM ^
With my meager knowledge of how practices and programs are run (in the sense of who is responsible for what), I wouldn't put the blame on Kelly. It seems like it's more of an equipment failure (e.g. the lift isn't bolted down, I'm sure Kelly has no idea what kind of force is necessary to tip it over, etc) than recklessness on the part of the coaching staff.
Regardless of who is to blame (if any one person can be blamed for it), what a horrible tragedy. Hopefully programs will be much more careful and cognizant of the danger in the future.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^
from what i've read online regarding this issue - he is under the management of Kelly.
October 29th, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^
Yeah, its the coaches program. The AD can't be out monitoring every videographer and grad student at a top flight athletic school. Coaches are responsible for those that support and volunteer for their program.
October 29th, 2010 at 2:48 PM ^
Wouldn't that be the job of the Director of Football Operations?
October 29th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^
Those lifts specify that they should not be used in winds over “25MPH” Kelly moved practice in the day before due to the winds over 25mph. So what changed? Nothing, I would not blame it on the equipment at all. Just a DUMB call by Kelly! But what else is new?
October 29th, 2010 at 2:44 PM ^
It seems like it's more of an equipment failure.
"Equipment failure" implies that the equipment didn't do what it was designed to do. It was designed to withstand the force of 25 MPH winds. The winds were twice that high, meaning the tower was subjected to 4 times the designed tolerances.
That's like jamming Charlie Weis into a pair of jeans with a 32-inch waist, and then blaming Levi Strauss when the seam gives way.
October 29th, 2010 at 3:09 PM ^
"Failure" was a bad choice of words on my part, I didn't mean it was the lift's fault or that there was a problem with the lift. "Issue" or "usage" might be better terms. I meant that Kelly's not an expert on lifts, and the issue was the safe use of the lift.
Then again, going by everyone's responses, it sounds like people more in the know than me are saying this is directly within Kelly's realm of responsibility. So it sounds like I'm just flat out wrong from the get go.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:31 PM ^
Well, I don't think you're flat-out wrong.
I dislike Kelly as much as anyone, but his responsibilities are numerous. Like any head coach. He's got to know the playbook, the rules, the NCAA regulations on everything down to the decibel of fart he can crack off in a recruits house..... He's overseeing the development of all the kids on his roster, their equipment needs, the training regimen, their opponents, his staff & position coaches, whether those kids are going to class, their upcoming court hearings (if you're Dantonio, har), the facilities, who's injured and whether they can play, the story you're going to spin for playing your obviously concussed QB, recruiting, the upcoming prospect visits.... I mean the list goes on and on. Is Kelly supposed to be directly in charge of all of this? Of the filming crew? Of the various equipment on the sidelines? It's an unrealistic expectation.
Yes, Kelly has staff to help with a lot of that. Including someone else who presumably knows how to safely operate (or NOT operate) a lift when you're going to put one of your young videographers up there. I don't expect Kelly to know that any more than I expect him to know what size batteries went into the camera the young man was operating for the football program.
That this happens is a black mark on Kelly, no doubt. I wish to god he'd looked up and said "Who sent that kid up in this wind? Get him down." But how much he's personally and directly accountable for the tragic decision here is a real question, and so I think your comments were sensible.
October 29th, 2010 at 6:14 PM ^
I disagree with you. The lift was swaying. If the coaches lacked common sense and technical knowledge of the lift in 50 mph winds, a coach, any coach, should have noticed the lift swaying and then called the kid down.
October 29th, 2010 at 4:07 PM ^
That Weis-Levis analogy could be one of the best analogies I've ever read. Outstanding sir!