Indoor practice facility

Get the low down on Griz Football and the FCS
Post Reply
tourist
Posts: 1550
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:20 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by tourist » Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:25 pm

Yukon, all that would be unnecessary. Just get getgrizzy to change the title of the thread. The addition of " 'n Stuff" would do nicely.

User avatar
SoldierGriz
eGriz Club
Posts: 3224
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:59 am
Location: Displaced from the Last Best Place

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by SoldierGriz » Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:09 pm

Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:47 pm
This. Is. Gold.

So what if the injury that occurred happens as a result of non contact? IE landing wrong and tearing an ACL. Is this accounted for in all of this “data” being spewed everywhere?

I would presume a non contact injury wouldn’t have much to do with the fact a team is playing up, down or equal to their level.

Better run a full report on this and get at least 20 years of data, the injuries that occurred in every game, if they were playing up or down, what kind of injury it was (non contact or contact related), was the injured player a starter, did they come back after one game, 2 games or were they lost for the season?
Then we can actually compare some relevant data instead of cherry picking a handful of games, point out a couple injuries and then extrapolate that out to all college football games ever and call the conclusion “obvious”.

Can you get all that gathered PR?
Thanks
PR already posted lists and anecdotes, but I agree a few more will definitely get us to 17 pages, which is the topic of this thread.
FTc, FTv, FTmissoulian

grizindabox
eGriz Club
Posts: 15175
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by grizindabox » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:04 pm

PlayerRep wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 10:05 pm
grizindabox wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:47 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:55 pm
Spanky2 wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:43 pm
Well anyway, you get the idea. Bottom line, Player is wrong.😈
The information shows that I was absolutely right. As usual.
PR, did you go back through every game for the past 20 years and note all the injuries and then separate them up by opponent level....or did you only pick a few FBS games and use that as the basis for your argument?
I have played and watched the sport. I have talked to coach and AD's. I have sampled the other evidence and stats.

What have you done? I know you have done nothing.
So no...
One of the definitions of privilege is, thinking “the system works” because it worked FOR YOU.

PlayerRep
Posts: 25190
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by PlayerRep » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:47 pm
This. Is. Gold.

So what if the injury that occurred happens as a result of non contact? IE landing wrong and tearing an ACL. Is this accounted for in all of this “data” being spewed everywhere?

I would presume a non contact injury wouldn’t have much to do with the fact a team is playing up, down or equal to their level.

Better run a full report on this and get at least 20 years of data, the injuries that occurred in every game, if they were playing up or down, what kind of injury it was (non contact or contact related), was the injured player a starter, did they come back after one game, 2 games or were they lost for the season?
Then we can actually compare some relevant data instead of cherry picking a handful of games, point out a couple injuries and then extrapolate that out to all college football games ever and call the conclusion “obvious”.

Can you get all that gathered PR?
Thanks
All done. Risk of injury against top FBS conference teams and other non-bad FBS teams is is considerably higher.

Catsrgrood
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 4:39 pm

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by Catsrgrood » Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm

PlayerRep wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:10 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:47 pm
This. Is. Gold.

So what if the injury that occurred happens as a result of non contact? IE landing wrong and tearing an ACL. Is this accounted for in all of this “data” being spewed everywhere?

I would presume a non contact injury wouldn’t have much to do with the fact a team is playing up, down or equal to their level.

Better run a full report on this and get at least 20 years of data, the injuries that occurred in every game, if they were playing up or down, what kind of injury it was (non contact or contact related), was the injured player a starter, did they come back after one game, 2 games or were they lost for the season?
Then we can actually compare some relevant data instead of cherry picking a handful of games, point out a couple injuries and then extrapolate that out to all college football games ever and call the conclusion “obvious”.

Can you get all that gathered PR?
Thanks
All done. Risk of injury against top FBS conference teams and other non-bad FBS teams is is considerably higher.
Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?

User avatar
kemajic
eGriz Club
Posts: 12295
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Columbus

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by kemajic » Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm

Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:10 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:47 pm
This. Is. Gold.

So what if the injury that occurred happens as a result of non contact? IE landing wrong and tearing an ACL. Is this accounted for in all of this “data” being spewed everywhere?

I would presume a non contact injury wouldn’t have much to do with the fact a team is playing up, down or equal to their level.

Better run a full report on this and get at least 20 years of data, the injuries that occurred in every game, if they were playing up or down, what kind of injury it was (non contact or contact related), was the injured player a starter, did they come back after one game, 2 games or were they lost for the season?
Then we can actually compare some relevant data instead of cherry picking a handful of games, point out a couple injuries and then extrapolate that out to all college football games ever and call the conclusion “obvious”.

Can you get all that gathered PR?
Thanks
All done. Risk of injury against top FBS conference teams and other non-bad FBS teams is is considerably higher.
Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?
Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
"I woke up still not dead again today." - Willie Nelson

PlayerRep
Posts: 25190
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by PlayerRep » Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:47 am

Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:10 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:47 pm
This. Is. Gold.

So what if the injury that occurred happens as a result of non contact? IE landing wrong and tearing an ACL. Is this accounted for in all of this “data” being spewed everywhere?

I would presume a non contact injury wouldn’t have much to do with the fact a team is playing up, down or equal to their level.

Better run a full report on this and get at least 20 years of data, the injuries that occurred in every game, if they were playing up or down, what kind of injury it was (non contact or contact related), was the injured player a starter, did they come back after one game, 2 games or were they lost for the season?
Then we can actually compare some relevant data instead of cherry picking a handful of games, point out a couple injuries and then extrapolate that out to all college football games ever and call the conclusion “obvious”.

Can you get all that gathered PR?
Thanks
All done. Risk of injury against top FBS conference teams and other non-bad FBS teams is is considerably higher.
Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?
The "sample size" of 7 is all of UM's FBS games against good (meaning non-bad like Idaho) FBS teams in the past 25 years or so, I believe. That's more than a sample of UM games against good FBS teams.

Feel free to call our attention to any of UM's FCS or D-II games that had even close to the number of injuries as the prior Oregon. My guess is that your sample size is zero.

After the Hawaii game, Fitzgerald, Hancock (2 weeks), Oliver (2 weeks), and Richardson (3 week) didn't play. No qb lost or hurt bad. No players out for season. Not a huge number missing the next game. Not as tough of a team as the Pac-12 and Big 10 teams UM played.

PlayerRep
Posts: 25190
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by PlayerRep » Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am

kemajic wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:10 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:47 pm
This. Is. Gold.

So what if the injury that occurred happens as a result of non contact? IE landing wrong and tearing an ACL. Is this accounted for in all of this “data” being spewed everywhere?

I would presume a non contact injury wouldn’t have much to do with the fact a team is playing up, down or equal to their level.

Better run a full report on this and get at least 20 years of data, the injuries that occurred in every game, if they were playing up or down, what kind of injury it was (non contact or contact related), was the injured player a starter, did they come back after one game, 2 games or were they lost for the season?
Then we can actually compare some relevant data instead of cherry picking a handful of games, point out a couple injuries and then extrapolate that out to all college football games ever and call the conclusion “obvious”.

Can you get all that gathered PR?
Thanks
All done. Risk of injury against top FBS conference teams and other non-bad FBS teams is is considerably higher.
Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?
Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.

SaskGriz
Posts: 2135
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 10:55 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by SaskGriz » Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:08 pm

PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am
kemajic wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:10 pm


All done. Risk of injury against top FBS conference teams and other non-bad FBS teams is is considerably higher.
Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?
Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.
I might be a fool for trying to keep doing this, it must be the educator in me. So here goes one last time.

I have provided evidence and data to the contrary. Your assertion is that playing up results in more injuries than would be expected from FCS or playing down.

I looked at the last 5 FBS games (UW, Wyoming, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oregon) The breakdown is in an earlier post.

These are the FACTS.

1. In all 5 of those games put together we lost ONE starter for more than ONE game. That was Loren Utterbeck who missed half the season.

2. We lost our punter for a whole season in one of those years.

3. We lost a back up safety on special teams for the rest of the season in one of those years.

4. We WON all FIVE of the games we played in the week following those 5 play up games.

Pick any other randomly selected 5 games and you will see similar injury patterns.

And no matter what press secretaries may say, there is no such thing as alternative facts, there are just facts.

User avatar
Paytonlives
Moderator
Posts: 15518
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:31 pm
Location: MT!!!!!

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by Paytonlives » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:23 pm

So how did this get from an indoor practice facility to FBS game injuries?
Bobby Hauck 2008 (After beating the kittens)

"I wish there were 5 quarters in this game, so we could kick their asses some more!"

User avatar
kemajic
eGriz Club
Posts: 12295
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Columbus

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by kemajic » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:55 pm

Paytonlives wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:23 pm
So how did this get from an indoor practice facility to FBS game injuries?
An indoor practice facility doesn't provide such argument opportunity.
"I woke up still not dead again today." - Willie Nelson

User avatar
kemajic
eGriz Club
Posts: 12295
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:18 pm
Location: Columbus

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by kemajic » Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:57 pm

SaskGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:08 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am
kemajic wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm


Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?
Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.
I might be a fool for trying to keep doing this, it must be the educator in me. So here goes one last time.

I have provided evidence and data to the contrary. Your assertion is that playing up results in more injuries than would be expected from FCS or playing down.

I looked at the last 5 FBS games (UW, Wyoming, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oregon) The breakdown is in an earlier post.

These are the FACTS.

1. In all 5 of those games put together we lost ONE starter for more than ONE game. That was Loren Utterbeck who missed half the season.

2. We lost our punter for a whole season in one of those years.

3. We lost a back up safety on special teams for the rest of the season in one of those years.

4. We WON all FIVE of the games we played in the week following those 5 play up games.

Pick any other randomly selected 5 games and you will see similar injury patterns.

And no matter what press secretaries may say, there is no such thing as alternative facts, there are just facts.
That's a well-done challenge which will keep this going.
"I woke up still not dead again today." - Willie Nelson

PlayerRep
Posts: 25190
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by PlayerRep » Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:10 pm

SaskGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:08 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am
kemajic wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm
Catsrgrood wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 8:41 pm


Outside of your sample size of about 5, the proof is where again?
Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.
I might be a fool for trying to keep doing this, it must be the educator in me. So here goes one last time.

I have provided evidence and data to the contrary. Your assertion is that playing up results in more injuries than would be expected from FCS or playing down.

I looked at the last 5 FBS games (UW, Wyoming, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oregon) The breakdown is in an earlier post.

These are the FACTS.

1. In all 5 of those games put together we lost ONE starter for more than ONE game. That was Loren Utterbeck who missed half the season.

2. We lost our punter for a whole season in one of those years.

3. We lost a back up safety on special teams for the rest of the season in one of those years.

4. We WON all FIVE of the games we played in the week following those 5 play up games.

Pick any other randomly selected 5 games and you will see similar injury patterns.

And no matter what press secretaries may say, there is no such thing as alternative facts, there are just facts.
Your "data" is incorrect. Filled with mistakes.

You think losing an all-conference punter for the season isn't missing a starter for more than one game?

You think that the injuries at Oregon weren't significant?

You don't think losing the starting qb in 3 of the 7 games isn't significant?

You don't think Ah Yat's injury, which impacted him for the rest of the season, wasn't significant?

Feel free to show any UM game in the last 25 years where there were more injuries than Oregon.

Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. Clearly, you don't understand the game.

PlayerRep
Posts: 25190
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by PlayerRep » Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:11 pm

kemajic wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:57 pm
SaskGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:08 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am
kemajic wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm

Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.
I might be a fool for trying to keep doing this, it must be the educator in me. So here goes one last time.

I have provided evidence and data to the contrary. Your assertion is that playing up results in more injuries than would be expected from FCS or playing down.

I looked at the last 5 FBS games (UW, Wyoming, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oregon) The breakdown is in an earlier post.

These are the FACTS.

1. In all 5 of those games put together we lost ONE starter for more than ONE game. That was Loren Utterbeck who missed half the season.

2. We lost our punter for a whole season in one of those years.

3. We lost a back up safety on special teams for the rest of the season in one of those years.

4. We WON all FIVE of the games we played in the week following those 5 play up games.

Pick any other randomly selected 5 games and you will see similar injury patterns.

And no matter what press secretaries may say, there is no such thing as alternative facts, there are just facts.
That's a well-done challenge which will keep this going.
He made up most of his "facts". He didn't gather correct info.

Hey Kem, did you ever play D-I ball, or just Small College?

SaskGriz
Posts: 2135
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 10:55 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by SaskGriz » Sat Jun 15, 2019 7:52 pm

PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:10 pm
SaskGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:08 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am
kemajic wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:45 pm

Because he said so, he played the game and he talks to coaches.
And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.
I might be a fool for trying to keep doing this, it must be the educator in me. So here goes one last time.

I have provided evidence and data to the contrary. Your assertion is that playing up results in more injuries than would be expected from FCS or playing down.

I looked at the last 5 FBS games (UW, Wyoming, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oregon) The breakdown is in an earlier post.

These are the FACTS.

1. In all 5 of those games put together we lost ONE starter for more than ONE game. That was Loren Utterbeck who missed half the season.

2. We lost our punter for a whole season in one of those years.

3. We lost a back up safety on special teams for the rest of the season in one of those years.

4. We WON all FIVE of the games we played in the week following those 5 play up games.

Pick any other randomly selected 5 games and you will see similar injury patterns.

And no matter what press secretaries may say, there is no such thing as alternative facts, there are just facts.
Your "data" is incorrect. Filled with mistakes.

You think losing an all-conference punter for the season isn't missing a starter for more than one game?

You think that the injuries at Oregon weren't significant?

You don't think losing the starting qb in 3 of the 7 games isn't significant?

You don't think Ah Yat's injury, which impacted him for the rest of the season, wasn't significant?

Feel free to show any UM game in the last 25 years where there were more injuries than Oregon.

Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. Clearly, you don't understand the game.
No my data is not incorrect and no it is not full of mistakes. I will try to clarify it further.

Your assertion is that playing FBS teams leads to more injuries. Therefore I looked at sample size of 5 games and it appears it hasn't led to more injuries than any other 5 randomly selected games. You have to show that these five games lead to more injuries. Not that one game against Oregon had a lot of injuries, that would only prove your point if your assertion had been playing Oregon leads to more injuries.

You are confusing the definitions of significance - being worthy of note or important with significance; the extent to which a result deviates from the norm. Of course an injury to an all-conference punter is important but a single injury does not deviate from the norm.

Is losing your starting QB in a game against Iowa more significant than losing your starting QB against Savanah State? Neither one is more significant in either definition of significance.

User avatar
AZGrizFan
eGriz Club
Posts: 24668
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by AZGrizFan » Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:29 pm

Paytonlives wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:23 pm
So how did this get from an indoor practice facility to FBS game injuries?
You’re welcome. We’re gettin’ this bitch to 17 pages com Hell or high water!!!
Guns kill people like spoons make you fat.

User avatar
AZGrizFan
eGriz Club
Posts: 24668
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by AZGrizFan » Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:31 pm

kemajic wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:55 pm
Paytonlives wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:23 pm
So how did this get from an indoor practice facility to FBS game injuries?
An indoor practice facility doesn't provide such argument opportunity.
:lol: :lol:

I made a tongue-in-cheek comment about things that get repeated despite their untruthfulness and PR took the bait and ran with it.

You don’t hit a home run every time up, but this was a doozie. 8-) 8-)
Guns kill people like spoons make you fat.

User avatar
SoldierGriz
eGriz Club
Posts: 3224
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:59 am
Location: Displaced from the Last Best Place

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by SoldierGriz » Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:35 pm

This bitch is going to 17 pages because PR is getting schooled by a Canadian and a genius who apparently played "small school ball."

I've seen some douchnozzle posts on this board, and there are a bunch in this one....

17 pages...get er done.
FTc, FTv, FTmissoulian

User avatar
IdaGriz01
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 3:44 pm
Location: Idaho Falls

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by IdaGriz01 » Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:14 pm

SoldierGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:35 pm
This bitch is going to 17 pages because PR is getting schooled by a Canadian and a genius who apparently played "small school ball."

I've seen some douchnozzle posts on this board, and there are a bunch in this one....

17 pages...get er done.
Doing my part ... three to go :lol: :lol: :lol:

PlayerRep
Posts: 25190
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:06 am

Re: Indoor practice facility

Post by PlayerRep » Sat Jun 15, 2019 9:54 pm

SaskGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 7:52 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 6:10 pm
SaskGriz wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:08 pm
PlayerRep wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:57 am


And the evidence and data from UM's tougher FBS support the assertion. And, no one has provided any evidence or data to the contrary.
I might be a fool for trying to keep doing this, it must be the educator in me. So here goes one last time.

I have provided evidence and data to the contrary. Your assertion is that playing up results in more injuries than would be expected from FCS or playing down.

I looked at the last 5 FBS games (UW, Wyoming, Tennessee, Iowa, and Oregon) The breakdown is in an earlier post.

These are the FACTS.

1. In all 5 of those games put together we lost ONE starter for more than ONE game. That was Loren Utterbeck who missed half the season.

2. We lost our punter for a whole season in one of those years.

3. We lost a back up safety on special teams for the rest of the season in one of those years.

4. We WON all FIVE of the games we played in the week following those 5 play up games.

Pick any other randomly selected 5 games and you will see similar injury patterns.

And no matter what press secretaries may say, there is no such thing as alternative facts, there are just facts.
Your "data" is incorrect. Filled with mistakes.

You think losing an all-conference punter for the season isn't missing a starter for more than one game?

You think that the injuries at Oregon weren't significant?

You don't think losing the starting qb in 3 of the 7 games isn't significant?

You don't think Ah Yat's injury, which impacted him for the rest of the season, wasn't significant?

Feel free to show any UM game in the last 25 years where there were more injuries than Oregon.

Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. Clearly, you don't understand the game.
No my data is not incorrect and no it is not full of mistakes. I will try to clarify it further.

Your assertion is that playing FBS teams leads to more injuries. Therefore I looked at sample size of 5 games and it appears it hasn't led to more injuries than any other 5 randomly selected games. You have to show that these five games lead to more injuries. Not that one game against Oregon had a lot of injuries, that would only prove your point if your assertion had been playing Oregon leads to more injuries.

You are confusing the definitions of significance - being worthy of note or important with significance; the extent to which a result deviates from the norm. Of course an injury to an all-conference punter is important but a single injury does not deviate from the norm.

Is losing your starting QB in a game against Iowa more significant than losing your starting QB against Savanah State? Neither one is more significant in either definition of significance.
Sorry, but your data was wrong for all or most of the games. You either made mistakes or just lied.

Feel free to pull your data into one thread, and I I will show you where it was wrong.

Losing 3 qb’s in your 5 games is huge. UM doesn’t lose qb’s in 60% of its games. Do you not understand percentages? Do you not understand that getting your all-American QB who took you to the national championship hurt, is a big deal, when the AD and coach say it may have cost a national championship is strong evidence?

It’s hard to argue with someone like you who insists that up is really down, and east is really west.

I’m sorry but your stats combined with mine, clearly show that I, and others in this thread, are right.

Post Reply