More Fiedler

In a Q&A with the Sun-Sentinel, Jay Fiedler spoke about his decision to retire from the NFL. Fiedler told Ethan J. Skolnick:

"It was pretty simple. I had a banged-up shoulder that needed two surgeries from the injury that I had in 2005 with the New York Jets. I tried rehabbing, I tried coming back for a year and a half to two years. It got to the point where I could get my shoulder back to 80 percent, but never beyond that. So my shoulder told me to retire."

Fielder has always been a lightning rod for Miami Dolphin fans. Along with the Q&A the Sun-Sentinel has a poll question: How do you look back at Jay Fiedler's time as the Dolphins quarterback? As of this morning, 83.6 percent of the responses are somewhat positive. That's not the case on the reader comment section at the end of the story where Jay is largely taking a beating.

For the Sun-Sentinel's Jay Fiedler photo album, click here.

A Sports Network column about possibly expanding the FCS (I-AA) playoffs includes these thoughts:

It has always seemed somewhat hypocritical to this writer and many FCS fans that the presidents of the Ivy League allow postseason competition for its athletes in every sport but football.

and ...

There is reason to believe that the Ivy League's postseason football ban will become as much a part of history as those hallowed ivy-covered buildings when several influential presidents finally retire in the next few years.

I've got a couple of my own thoughts on those thoughts. First, it's more than "somewhat" hypocritical that every other Ivy League sport can go on to the postseason. It is the very definition of hypocritical.

I'm also not sold on the idea that changes in Ivy League presidents will lead to the end of the ban. Dartmouth President Jim Wright is one of those presidents who will be leaving and while I'm a little cloudy on his personal opinion about football and the postseason, except for one highly charged incident, he's been a very football friendly president.

I'll repeat what I've said before. Some combination of the following three things would go a long way toward ending the ban:

1. Legal action, or simply the threat of legal action by some of the many former Ivy League players who have gone on to successful law careers.
2. A relentless PR campaign that would effectively and completely convey the particulars of the ban to the mainstream media and thereby the general public. Remember the PR splash when the endangered Dartmouth swim program was put up for sale on eBay?
3. Athletes in other Ivy League sports falling on their swords and saying if their classmates – their fellow student-athletes who happen to play football – are treated differently than they are and are not allowed to go on to the postseason, they won't represent the league either.

I'm certainly no lawyer but the guess here is that while No. 1 has been talked about in the past, it wouldn't go anywhere. As for a boycott of other postseason events, it would be hard to ask other athletes, particularly seniors, to forgo the NCAA's.

But the threats of legal action and a boycott could be valuable pieces in a PR campaign aimed at forcing the Ivy League presidents to publicly defend for the first time what seems to a lot of people to be an indefensible position. If they can successfully defend their position, fine. But if they can't – and obviously you can count me among those who don't believe they can – they will have little choice but to make a change that would allow football to do what every other Ivy League sport can do.

End rant.