Imagine you’re at work.  The company has decided to hire someone to work right beside you.  The boss would like your input on this decision because you have been such a valuable and hard working employee.

He describes the two candidates.  Both are equally hard working.  Both are equally motivated to do their best.  They are both the same in age and physicality.  Their only difference is that one applicant is good at only performing one task at a time and the other applicant is great at multitasking (meaning he/she can perform several tasks at the same time).

With that information, which applicant do you want your boss to hire? 

I believe most of us would pick the person who can multitask.

The quarterback of an NFL team is an important position.  A good quarterback can help a team become great.  A struggling quarterback can turn a good team bad.  There are several traits needed to be a good quarterback and these players are measured and scrutinized in the NFL combines and from their past collegiate performances.

This year’s NFL draft highlights two quarterbacks who will be the first and second draft picks overall.  Everyone is in total agreement that quarterback Andrew Luck is a lock to be selected as the first draft pick (he is the son of Oliver Luck, the AD of my Alma Mater, WVU) and that quarterback Robert Griffin, III is equally locked in as the second pick (heading to my favorite team, the Redskins). 

Debate begins when prognosticators ask “who will be the third quarterback chosen?”  The reason for this is because it seems the next four or five quarterbacks are about the same (each having a quality or two better than the other, but not the complete package).

In my book, See To Play, I write about how athletes see differing amounts of the playing field (similar to the way some people can multitask and others can’t).  This is because some athletes have larger areas where they see objects of detail clearly. This area of clear vision is known as the detailed vision zone.  (In See to Play, you learn how to measure this area and the norms.)

Elite athletes have larger detailed vision zones compared to the average athlete.  I use the measurement of this zone to help compare and rank athletes.  It also helps in predicting which athletes have a better chance in becoming elite.  In general, an athlete who sees 40% of the field would be ranked higher than one that sees only 20% of the field.

My contention is that, as more people learn about the detailed vision zone, it can become an important tool in determining which athlete should be drafted over another. 

Who should be the third quarterback drafted this Thursday?

The athlete with the larger detailed vision zone! …we’ve got two days to go test them!

Update 4/26: Ok, I've caught some grief for not giving my pick as the 3rd....I'd pick Michigan State's Kirk Cousins.  I think he'll turn out to be a good NFL quarterback (...and he has the same first name as the new coach of the Carolina Hurricanes!)

Join The Holt Foundation's inaugural Answers for Cancer Walk this weekend, April 21.  Click on  this link to learn more.

As someone with a family member fighting cancer, this event hits close to home.  I applaud all those whose efforts are to fight cancer and support those affected by it. 

I know as I sat in church yesterday, it seems we lifted up many members who were battling personally or supporting a family member with some form of this disease.  We prayed for healing and for finding a cure.

Let's hope it's soon!

As a Sportsvision specialist, most of my work is done preseason.  I make sure the athletes are seeing their best.  I fit them with the most up to date correction and the newest technology in contact lenses or sports eye wear.

I make sure the trainer or trainers of the team are loaded up with essential backup contact lenses for the players that need them and also make sure there are proper medications and solutions available in case of bad luck or catastrophe.

I’m present at the professional hockey home games because the threat of injury is so great.  For the other teams I work with, I'm at the ready with my phone ready for calls from trainers or athletes before, during and after the games.

Today is a fun day, because so many of the teams I work with are playing.  Here is the rundown of my fun day as a sportsvision specialist:

Carolina Hurricanes vs Florida Panthers

Gwinnett Braves vs Durham Bulls

Raleigh Railhawks at Minnesota Stars

Winston-Salem Dash vs Carolina Mudcats

Hats off to Ray Whitney who plays with the Phoenix Coyotes!  Last night, the Coyotes paid tribute to him for scoring his 1000th point in the NHL. 

The question I am asked the most as the eye doctor of a NHL team is: why don’t you get all those guys to wear visors?

That question is usually followed by a statement that goes something like: it’s silly that they don’t or don’t they know they can lose an eye?

Ray Whitney gave us some good insights into which of the athletes choose to wear them and those that don’t.  He stated this in an interview by Luke DeCock of the News and Observer in April 2006.  Basically, he revealed that all the guys smaller in stature (i.e., with eyes closer to the ice) wear the visors because of necessity.  Their eyes are the ones that are closer to the puck and more likely to get whacked by another players stick.

He told me, “Doc, look, it’s only the big guys that don’t wear them.”

I used to target my message at preseason of “Save an eye, wear a shield” to all the players but I’ve learned now to mainly target the taller guys.  In the end, without a mandate, it is impossible to get them all to wear one.

Another note, Joe Vasicek was the tallest player I worked with who chose to play with a visor.  He told me he did that because one of his relatives was an eye doctor and he made a promise to always wear one when playing. 

Joe was my wife’s favorite player.  He gave her a signed stick for her 40th birthday.  We miss #63.

Now, all you tall hockey players, wear your visors!