• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Indoor practice facility

The evidence would suggest that when you play down against teams with little, slow, weak players, there are less injuries.
 
Player has me concerned with his comments about playing PAC 12 schools relative to injuries. Can we pull out of the Oregon game? Will they just give us the check?
 
kemajic said:
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
PlayerRep said:
It must have been a game with someone other than Wyo. My mistake.

If the current Griz team played in the Pac-12, do you think the Griz would not have anymore injuries than they have playing in the Big Sky?
It's a silly scenario, so I have not thought about it. So I don't know.

It's not a silly scenario. It's a question that absolutely proves my point.
You have done nothing to PROVE your point. A lawyer should know what proof constitutes.

My evidence is that multiple coaches and athletic directors believe that play-up games, especially against top teams, can lead to more injuries, and in fact some have led to more injuries; the injuries at Wyo. including Ah Yat which a UM AD told me may have kept the Griz from getting another national championship; various anecdotal evidence; and my having played 4 years of D-I football.

What's your counter evidence?

Again, do you think the Griz, as presently constituted, would have more injuries if they played a full schedule in the Pac-12? How about if the presently constituted UM played most of its games every year against Alabama or a similar quality team? Same number of injuries?
 
grizindabox said:
sdk.catfish said:
by PlayerRep » Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:56 pm
And 2d teamers playing against 1st teasers is not like playing up against Oregon and Washington in full speed games.

So your saying that the 1st and 2nd teams aren't going full speed in practice? And I was told Hauck was a taskmaster. If that is the case it might explain 6-5. Sure glad you go to practice so that you can tell us these important "facts".

Come on, players never get hurt in practice, especially never in non-contact drills, only when they play up. Montana should quit scheduling FBS teams for the sake of the players health.

Dartmouth has shown the serious injuries drop significantly if there is no live hitting or live contact, like full tackling, in practice.

No one has suggested that UM not play FBS teams. The topic is whether playing up eventually leads to more injuries. Can you really not see the difference?

UM would have fewer injuries if UM didn't go live in practice. That's a fact. Yet, I don't think anyone is suggesting that UM never go live in practice. Get it? Ever play the game?
 
The Griz as presently constituted would not be playing a full schedule in the PAC 12. The Griz would be members of the PAC 12 and have the opportunity to recruit athletes similar in talent to the other members.
 
PlayerRep said:
No one has suggested that UM not play FBS teams. The topic is whether playing up eventually leads to more injuries. Can you really not see the difference?

My point was kids can get hurt under any of many circumstances and that I do not agree with your general premise that the chances increase when playing a FBS team.
 
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
It's a silly scenario, so I have not thought about it. So I don't know.

It's not a silly scenario. It's a question that absolutely proves my point.
You have done nothing to PROVE your point. A lawyer should know what proof constitutes.

My evidence is that multiple coaches and athletic directors believe that play-up games, especially against top teams, can lead to more injuries, and in fact some have led to more injuries; the injuries at Wyo. including Ah Yat which a UM AD told me may have kept the Griz from getting another national championship; various anecdotal evidence; and my having played 4 years of D-I football.

What's your counter evidence?

Again, do you think the Griz, as presently constituted, would have more injuries if they played a full schedule in the Pac-12? How about if the presently constituted UM played most of its games every year against Alabama or a similar quality team? Same number of injuries?

If your “evidence” is talking to coaches, then I would easily provide “evidence” the other way. I have had conversations with college coaches that have the exact opposite opinion. They hate “playing down” for this very reason.

It may be the mentality here (which again is why we are beat before we get off the bus), but you cannot say that thought process is universal amongst all coaches. That is just factually incorrect.
 
Spanky2 said:
The Griz as presently constituted would not be playing a full schedule in the PAC 12. The Griz would be members of the PAC 12 and have the opportunity to recruit athletes similar in talent to the other members.

But that is not the point being discussed. The Griz now are playing against Pac-12, Big 12 and SEC teams. That's my point. If the Griz play enough of those play up games, it will lead to more injuries.

I see that you effectively conceded my point, i.e. that playing up will lead to more injuries eventually.
 
Raider said:
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
PlayerRep said:
It's not a silly scenario. It's a question that absolutely proves my point.
You have done nothing to PROVE your point. A lawyer should know what proof constitutes.

My evidence is that multiple coaches and athletic directors believe that play-up games, especially against top teams, can lead to more injuries, and in fact some have led to more injuries; the injuries at Wyo. including Ah Yat which a UM AD told me may have kept the Griz from getting another national championship; various anecdotal evidence; and my having played 4 years of D-I football.

What's your counter evidence?

Again, do you think the Griz, as presently constituted, would have more injuries if they played a full schedule in the Pac-12? How about if the presently constituted UM played most of its games every year against Alabama or a similar quality team? Same number of injuries?

If your “evidence” is talking to coaches, then I would easily provide “evidence” the other way. I have had conversations with college coaches that have the exact opposite opinion. They hate “playing down” for this very reason.

It may be the mentality here (which again is why we are beat before we get off the bus), but you cannot say that thought process is universal amongst all coaches. That is just factually incorrect.

I call BS on most of your post. Also, UM playing up, is not the same as UM playing down. I truly can't believe how hard it is for some of you to focus on what is being discussed. Correct, I am not saying all coaches feel the same. I'm mainly talking about Griz coaches.
 
grizindabox said:
PlayerRep said:
No one has suggested that UM not play FBS teams. The topic is whether playing up eventually leads to more injuries. Can you really not see the difference?

My point was kids can get hurt under any of many circumstances and that I do not agree with your general premise that the chances increase when playing a FBS team.

Everyone knows that players can get hurt in almost any situation. Why even say that? Not one is doubting that.

You are welcome to your own opinion, and you are welcome to be wrong. You don't think Ah Yat's injury against Wyo. hurt UM that year?
 
SoldierGriz said:
I think there is some evidence players actually heal up while playing down. Anyone got any anecdotes?

They do. They are more likely to be held out of those games if injured, and starters play less because the backups often play alot more.
 
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
It's a silly scenario, so I have not thought about it. So I don't know.

It's not a silly scenario. It's a question that absolutely proves my point.
You have done nothing to PROVE your point. A lawyer should know what proof constitutes.

My evidence is that multiple coaches and athletic directors believe that play-up games, especially against top teams, can lead to more injuries, and in fact some have led to more injuries; the injuries at Wyo. including Ah Yat which a UM AD told me may have kept the Griz from getting another national championship; various anecdotal evidence; and my having played 4 years of D-I football.

What's your counter evidence?

Again, do you think the Griz, as presently constituted, would have more injuries if they played a full schedule in the Pac-12? How about if the presently constituted UM played most of its games every year against Alabama or a similar quality team? Same number of injuries?

By bringing up anecdotal evidence of a player who was hurt in a play up game, you are opening up the door to the idea that every player who DIDN'T get hurt in that same game is anecdotal evidence for the other side. You do understand that, don't you?

What this argument needs is a comparison of injuries in play-up games; play up games, to FCS games, to drop down games. Without that it's all opinion and while some may be more informed than others it is still just well-informed opinion.
 
PlayerRep said:
Raider said:
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
You have done nothing to PROVE your point. A lawyer should know what proof constitutes.

My evidence is that multiple coaches and athletic directors believe that play-up games, especially against top teams, can lead to more injuries, and in fact some have led to more injuries; the injuries at Wyo. including Ah Yat which a UM AD told me may have kept the Griz from getting another national championship; various anecdotal evidence; and my having played 4 years of D-I football.

What's your counter evidence?

Again, do you think the Griz, as presently constituted, would have more injuries if they played a full schedule in the Pac-12? How about if the presently constituted UM played most of its games every year against Alabama or a similar quality team? Same number of injuries?

If your “evidence” is talking to coaches, then I would easily provide “evidence” the other way. I have had conversations with college coaches that have the exact opposite opinion. They hate “playing down” for this very reason.

It may be the mentality here (which again is why we are beat before we get off the bus), but you cannot say that thought process is universal amongst all coaches. That is just factually incorrect.

I call BS on most of your post. Also, UM playing up, is not the same as UM playing down. I truly can't believe how hard it is for some of you to focus on what is being discussed. Correct, I am not saying all coaches feel the same. I'm mainly talking about Griz coaches.

Call BS all you want. It’s pretty much your MO with anyone that disagrees with you. Could care less.

My conversation was not with a Griz coach, but a defensive coordinator at the FBS level. I’m not surprised that your opinion is based on conversations with Griz coaches, based upon the way these “play up” games have been approached in the past. Again, never seems to be an issue with schools like NDSU and EWU......wonder why that is.......
 
PlayerRep said:
You are welcome to your own opinion, and you are welcome to be wrong. You don't think Ah Yat's injury against Wyo. hurt UM that year?

I am not going to say it didn't possibly hurt UM that year, but just because it was against Wyo doesn't prove that injuries are more likely to occur against FBS schools.
 
Funny how a game against lowly Wyoming off all schools has now become the evidence of this issue, from a game 23 years ago.

UW- No major injury issues (Reese leg blowout the next weekend against D2 school)
Tennessee- No major injury issues
Iowa- Swogger breaks a finger, hitting the top of a helmet that could happen in any game.
Oregon- Nothing I recall
 
Raider said:
PlayerRep said:
Raider said:
PlayerRep said:
My evidence is that multiple coaches and athletic directors believe that play-up games, especially against top teams, can lead to more injuries, and in fact some have led to more injuries; the injuries at Wyo. including Ah Yat which a UM AD told me may have kept the Griz from getting another national championship; various anecdotal evidence; and my having played 4 years of D-I football.

What's your counter evidence?

Again, do you think the Griz, as presently constituted, would have more injuries if they played a full schedule in the Pac-12? How about if the presently constituted UM played most of its games every year against Alabama or a similar quality team? Same number of injuries?

If your “evidence” is talking to coaches, then I would easily provide “evidence” the other way. I have had conversations with college coaches that have the exact opposite opinion. They hate “playing down” for this very reason.

It may be the mentality here (which again is why we are beat before we get off the bus), but you cannot say that thought process is universal amongst all coaches. That is just factually incorrect.

I call BS on most of your post. Also, UM playing up, is not the same as UM playing down. I truly can't believe how hard it is for some of you to focus on what is being discussed. Correct, I am not saying all coaches feel the same. I'm mainly talking about Griz coaches.

Call BS all you want. It’s pretty much your MO with anyone that disagrees with you. Could care less.

My conversation was not with a Griz coach, but a defensive coordinator at the FBS level. I’m not surprised that your opinion is based on conversations with Griz coaches, based upon the way these “play up” games have been approached in the past. Again, never seems to be an issue with schools like NDSU and EWU......wonder why that is.......

This. if the griz coaching staff really feels this way they need to recruit bigger, better players or get a better strength program. Pretty sure the MSU coaching staff isn't worried about getting beat up on when we take the field against Texas Tech, at least not any more worried about injuries than any other game. :roll:
 
poorgriz said:
Raider said:
PlayerRep said:
Raider said:
If your “evidence” is talking to coaches, then I would easily provide “evidence” the other way. I have had conversations with college coaches that have the exact opposite opinion. They hate “playing down” for this very reason.

It may be the mentality here (which again is why we are beat before we get off the bus), but you cannot say that thought process is universal amongst all coaches. That is just factually incorrect.

I call BS on most of your post. Also, UM playing up, is not the same as UM playing down. I truly can't believe how hard it is for some of you to focus on what is being discussed. Correct, I am not saying all coaches feel the same. I'm mainly talking about Griz coaches.

Call BS all you want. It’s pretty much your MO with anyone that disagrees with you. Could care less.

My conversation was not with a Griz coach, but a defensive coordinator at the FBS level. I’m not surprised that your opinion is based on conversations with Griz coaches, based upon the way these “play up” games have been approached in the past. Again, never seems to be an issue with schools like NDSU and EWU......wonder why that is.......

This. if the griz coaching staff really feels this way they need to recruit bigger, better players or get a better strength program. Pretty sure the MSU coaching staff isn't worried about getting beat up on when we take the field against Texas Tech, at least not any more worried about injuries than any other game. :roll:

The Griz coaches don’t go into Power 5 games thinking about getting hurt anymore than yours do. It’s just a simple matter of, “over time bigger, stronger players are going to injure smaller, weaker players.” It’s not like every single game or play there’s an injury to a FCS player. Or there’s five FCS injuries to two every game. But over a long period or large number of games injuries will trend this way. It’s self-evident, it’s logic, it’s common sense.
 
getgrizzy said:
poorgriz said:
Raider said:
PlayerRep said:
I call BS on most of your post. Also, UM playing up, is not the same as UM playing down. I truly can't believe how hard it is for some of you to focus on what is being discussed. Correct, I am not saying all coaches feel the same. I'm mainly talking about Griz coaches.

Call BS all you want. It’s pretty much your MO with anyone that disagrees with you. Could care less.

My conversation was not with a Griz coach, but a defensive coordinator at the FBS level. I’m not surprised that your opinion is based on conversations with Griz coaches, based upon the way these “play up” games have been approached in the past. Again, never seems to be an issue with schools like NDSU and EWU......wonder why that is.......

This. if the griz coaching staff really feels this way they need to recruit bigger, better players or get a better strength program. Pretty sure the MSU coaching staff isn't worried about getting beat up on when we take the field against Texas Tech, at least not any more worried about injuries than any other game. :roll:

The Griz coaches don’t go into Power 5 games thinking about getting hurt anymore than yours do. It’s just a simple matter of, “over time bigger, stronger players are going to injure smaller, weaker players.” It’s not like every single game or play there’s an injury to a FCS player. Or there’s five FCS injuries to two every game. But over a long period or large number of games injuries will trend this way. It’s self-evident, it’s logic, it’s common sense.

Jeebus, for the umpteenth time - I don't think this discrepancy is nearly what you all think it is. And again, if that's a real think then you need to get bigger stronger players. The only argument I see here on the other side has to do with depth, and the scholly limited team getting worn down which could lead to mistakes in technique, etc. potentially leading to higher risk of injury later in the game. No idea if stats back that up. I made the point above, I think the starters for MSU are close to the same size across the board as the New England Patriots.
 
As long as we play down most of our games against teams made up of little, slow, weak players, we will be fine with limited injuries. We should consider a Division 2 or NAIA Conference to join, although, teams like Montana Tech and Rocky do have some big, strong players that could hurt us.
The Oregon game is a problem. Do we show up or forfeit? Maybe play our starters only in the first quarter?
 
Back
Top