• 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

Raider said:
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
Jonathon Stewart for UO was injured in that game and missed a couple games as a result.
 
poorgriz said:
getgrizzy said:
poorgriz said:
Raider said:
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.

I don’t think the discrepancy is great. It doesn’t have to be. Good to see that you can recognize that there is a discrepancy. Now you just need to apply physics, logic, common sense and you’re up to speed.

The more FCS teams play Power 5 teams instead of fellow FCS teams the more they’ll get injured. This is due to the reasons I have given and we can add your reasons (depth, scholarships>>>worn down) too.
 
Spanky2 said:
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?

It seems that you consider playing FCS teams scheduling down.
 
getgrizzy said:
The more FCS teams play Power 5 teams instead of fellow FCS teams the more they’ll get injured. This is due to the reasons I have given and we can add your reasons (depth, scholarships>>>worn down) too.

My take is the more a guy plays, no matter if it is a FBS, FCS, D2 or whatever level team, the better chance that they get injured.
 
grizindabox said:
Spanky2 said:
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?

It seems that you consider playing FCS teams scheduling down.
True, I do.
 
Grizbeer said:
Raider said:
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
Jonathon Stewart for UO was injured in that game and missed a couple games as a result.

Yeah, I remember that. Funny and very ironic to this conversation.
 
PlayerRep said:
kemajic said:
PlayerRep said:
Show me that the data that proves your point. You no data either, and less anecdotes. Over the years, I have heard this from multiple coaches and multiple athletic directors.
My point? We're talking about your point. It is you that takes the position that playing up leads to more injuries. I am reacting to your position, challenging your point mostly because you have no data to back it up. I have never seen data myself that supports that point or the reverse, itself suggesting there is little difference. Your point is no more than your opinion. I have seen injuries in play up games, in play down games, in conf. games, in practice, and exercise and weight training. To pull one out of this list like you have done needs believable supporting data, not anecdotes and not opinion because you played the game and listen to coaches and athletic directors. You have established your opinion.

Yes, that's my point. I at least have anecdotal evidence, along with conversations with many coaches and athletic directors. You have nothing.

Again, do you think the Griz would not have more injuries if the team they have now played in the Pac-12? You won't answer that question, because you know damn well that they would have more injuries. Your are absolutely nailed on that question.

What is your "anecdotal evidence"? That players got injured in those games? If THAT'S your proof, then the thousands and thousands of players who played up and DIDN'T get injured is my proof.

I win.
Case closed.
 
getgrizzy said:
poorgriz said:
getgrizzy said:
poorgriz said:
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.

I don’t think the discrepancy is great. It doesn’t have to be. Good to see that you can recognize that there is a discrepancy. Now you just need to apply physics, logic, common sense and you’re up to speed.

The more FCS teams play Power 5 teams instead of fellow FCS teams the more they’ll get injured. This is due to the reasons I have given and we can add your reasons (depth, scholarships>>>worn down) too.

Well it sure as hell has to be material for it to matter. Is it material? Can you even prove there IS a discrepancy?
 
grizindabox said:
getgrizzy said:
The more FCS teams play Power 5 teams instead of fellow FCS teams the more they’ll get injured. This is due to the reasons I have given and we can add your reasons (depth, scholarships>>>worn down) too.

My take is the more a guy plays, no matter if it is a FBS, FCS, D2 or whatever level team, the better chance that they get injured.

Yes, that’s true, too. But that doesn’t replace the fact that I pointed out and poorgriz, unintentionally, added. All those factors increase the possibility of injury. There are laws of physics that mathematically work this out.
 
Man, just how much bigger and stronger do you all think these guys are than our guys. You'd think it was just a bunch of monsters going against some puny girls.

I'm so glad our current coach and his players don't share this line of thinking.
 
Most of these playing up critics are quick to point out that FCS is Division 1 football. Is it really Division 1 or more like Division 2+?
 
getgrizzy said:
grizindabox said:
getgrizzy said:
The more FCS teams play Power 5 teams instead of fellow FCS teams the more they’ll get injured. This is due to the reasons I have given and we can add your reasons (depth, scholarships>>>worn down) too.

My take is the more a guy plays, no matter if it is a FBS, FCS, D2 or whatever level team, the better chance that they get injured.

Yes, that’s true, too. But that doesn’t replace the fact that I pointed out and poorgriz, unintentionally, added. All those factors increase the possibility of injury. There are laws of physics that mathematically work this out.

Curious, how much do those factors increase the chance of injury? 5%? 10%? >.0001%? My guess, all these factors that you and others are trotting out are insignificant when determining the probabilities of a player getting injured playing against a FBS team vs playing against a FCS team.
 
grizindabox said:
getgrizzy said:
grizindabox said:
getgrizzy said:
The more FCS teams play Power 5 teams instead of fellow FCS teams the more they’ll get injured. This is due to the reasons I have given and we can add your reasons (depth, scholarships>>>worn down) too.

My take is the more a guy plays, no matter if it is a FBS, FCS, D2 or whatever level team, the better chance that they get injured.

Yes, that’s true, too. But that doesn’t replace the fact that I pointed out and poorgriz, unintentionally, added. All those factors increase the possibility of injury. There are laws of physics that mathematically work this out.

Curious, how much do those factors increase the chance of injury? 5%? 10%? >.0001%? My guess, all these factors that you and others are trotting out are insignificant when determining the probabilities of a player getting injured playing against a FBS team vs playing against a FCS team.
I can align with that. There is no credible data to suggest otherwise.
 
kemajic said:
grizindabox said:
getgrizzy said:
grizindabox said:
My take is the more a guy plays, no matter if it is a FBS, FCS, D2 or whatever level team, the better chance that they get injured.

Yes, that’s true, too. But that doesn’t replace the fact that I pointed out and poorgriz, unintentionally, added. All those factors increase the possibility of injury. There are laws of physics that mathematically work this out.

Curious, how much do those factors increase the chance of injury? 5%? 10%? >.0001%? My guess, all these factors that you and others are trotting out are insignificant when determining the probabilities of a player getting injured playing against a FBS team vs playing against a FCS team.
I can align with that. There is no credible data to suggest otherwise.

Yes there is, dammit. PR saw somebody get injured once!
 
AZGrizFan said:
kemajic said:
grizindabox said:
getgrizzy said:
Yes, that’s true, too. But that doesn’t replace the fact that I pointed out and poorgriz, unintentionally, added. All those factors increase the possibility of injury. There are laws of physics that mathematically work this out.

Curious, how much do those factors increase the chance of injury? 5%? 10%? >.0001%? My guess, all these factors that you and others are trotting out are insignificant when determining the probabilities of a player getting injured playing against a FBS team vs playing against a FCS team.
I can align with that. There is no credible data to suggest otherwise.

Yes there is, dammit. PR saw somebody get injured once!

And it likely cost the griz the chipper that year, from what a coach told him. That one little opinion right there is what all of this arguing is about.
 
Raider said:
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

You need to do some research. More injuries than that already posted in this thread. Sorry, but your recollection is not going to be accepted.
 
SaskGriz 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?

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.

It's the number who get injured, not whether some did and some didn't. I assume you understand that?

Your second para is what I've been doing all along, based on observation and memory, what coaches and athletic directors have said, anecdotes, etc. I take the well-informed opinion of UM coaches and athletic directors over any of the posters in this thread. Having played D-I football, and having followed several teams including UM closely for decades, I also believe my opinion on the subject is more informed that virtually anyone posting in the thread.

Everyone in the thread is welcome to state how and why they think they are well-informed.
 
reinell30 said:
If you play the sport of football, you are subject to injury at any time during ANY game!

Yes, but does that have anything to do with the discussion of whether there are more injuries playing against bigger, stronger, faster teams?
 
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.

Who said anyone was worried? Don't all FCS teams try to recruit bigger, stronger, faster, better players?

It looks like you agree with the point I've been making.
 
Back
Top