I will never understand it. Never.
It was a circular argument. If you have a guy his age on the roster, he should be contributing on the field in some fashion. If he isn't good enough to, why is he on the roster? That's without even factoring in the fact that virtually every time we asked him to make a play, he did and looked dominant - like "most physically imposing and intimidating player on the field" dominant - while doing so. And if his seizures were a factor, again, why have him active at all? Why not come out and say we want to limit him?
Just a bizarre situation all around. It almost felt like he was being kept on the bench out of protest of the signing or something.