McCombs: Clemson's decision to play Watson vs. USC stirs debate among fans
It’s the most talked-about knee in South Carolina.
The discussion has died down somewhat in the days since Clemson’s 35-17 victory over rival South Carolina on Saturday.
But not entirely.
And given how heated this rivalry can be, it likely won’t die anytime soon.
In the aftermath of Deshaun Watson’s four-touchdown performance in the Tigers’ win to end the Gamecocks’ five-game winning streak in the newly christened Palmetto Bowl, Clemson head coach Dabo Swinney disclosed after the game that Watson played the game with a torn ACL in his knee.
Fans and observers quickly took up sides on social media. Many claimed Swinney and the Tigers’ staff were reckless with Watson’s health and future to win one meaningless game, while many others defended the decision and praised Watson’s performance and courage. In most cases, those opinions were, not surprisingly, neatly divided by team allegiance, as well.
Pro Football Hall of Fame running back Emmitt Smith, whose brother Emory played at Clemson, was appalled by the decision.
“Did I hear correctly @ClemsonTigers had a freshman quarterback playing with a torn ACL? If so, that’s not right,” he posted on Twitter. He later said someone needed to protect Watson from himself.Ironically, a Gamecock was one of Watson’s biggest defenders.
Former USC quarterback and current Union County High School head football coach Steve Taneyhill joined the discussion. “If he said he was good then he was good. Much respect for Mr. Watson,” Taneyhill posted.
He later added, “Y’all need to chill out. If the dr. said he is good and the player said he is good he plays. Football is a tough guys sport,” and “If it was me I play no question. Can’t hold me out of this game.”
So who’s right?
How about we ask a doctor.
Dr. Douglas Scott, an orthopedic surgeon with Orthopedic Associates of the Lowcountry, is the head team physician for USC Beaufort athletics.
Scott, who works mostly at Hilton Head Hospital, has never treated Watson so he can’t speak specifically to his case. But he can talk in general terms about the risks of an athlete competing with a torn ACL.
“With an isolated ACL tear, the knee is prone to some element of rotational instability,” Scott said. “And a proper brace specifically customized and designed to treat that one condition, fitted properly and applied properly ..., would afford an athlete to be able to function with a reasonable amount of stability in the knee. And that really is illustrated by Watson’s performance on Saturday.”
The brace Watson wore, Scott said, stabilized the rotational instability of the knee, allowing him to perform athletically.
Some have argued that once Watson’s ACL was torn, he could do no more damage to his knee by playing on it. That’s not entirely true, but Scott says he believes it would be rare.
“I think it would be hard to quantify how much risk there would be compared to a native, normal knee. That is, I think it would be very rare to cause further damage without another injury,” Scott said. “So, that being said, you’re talking about another injury having to happen anyway, so in some ways the risk of him doing further damage to that knee is the same as the risk of him breaking his collarbone or tearing something in the other knee, something like that.”
Scott said it’s rare to have an athlete play on a torn ACL -- he’s never had one do so -- but in the sports medicine field, you deal with highly competitive athletes. Sometimes given the caliber of athletes and the importance to them of the events they are competing in, doctors would do things and treat athletes sometimes differently than an ordinary patient.
“What you’re doing is balancing the risks, and I’m sure that the medical staff and the coaches and Watson himself knew there would be some inherent risks in playing,” Scott said, “but if they all agreed that the risks were less than the potential benefits, then they went for it.”
About the debate, Scott said seeing the patient and having a good physical evaluation is key and there are obviously a lot of testing and protocols the Clemson staff would have to go through to determine if Watson could play.
And though Scott has no experience with an athlete playing on a torn ACL, a couple of players with ties to Clemson have done it before Watson.
Former Clemson quarterback Tajh Boyd led his Virginia high school team to a state championship and played in the Army All-American Bowl me while playing on a torn ACL.
And according to Clemson spokesperson Tim Bourret, quarterback Mike Eppley played the entire 1983 season with a torn ACL. The Tigers went 9-1-1 that season and beat South Carolina, 22-13.
In the professional ranks, in recent memory, San Diego Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers played the 2007 AFC Championship (Jan. 22, 2008) with a torn ACL, and Tiger Woods competed for an unknown amount of time during the 2007 and 2008 seasons with a torn ACL.
Scott stresses that every athlete is different and two different athletes can react differently to the same injury.
“You’re treating the athlete and the patient rather than the MRI,” he said.
Given the nature of the Palmetto State rivalry, none of what Scott said will change some fans’ beliefs that Swinney and the Clemson staff was wrong to play Watson on Saturday. And nothing Steve Taneyhill tweets will likely sway Emmitt Smith, either.
And maybe they shouldn’t.
But one thing is for sure. Watson turned in a performance -- on one ACL -- that won’t be forgotten anytime soon in South Carolina.
“It would take quite a competitor,” Scott said, “especially at the collegiate level, to play through that.”
This story was originally published December 4, 2014 at 2:21 AM with the headline "McCombs: Clemson's decision to play Watson vs. USC stirs debate among fans."