-
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!
Honest question (I never played the game)...
- Thread starter grizpsych
- Start date
kemajic said:
Ha ha ha. You must be confusing me with someone else as I am neither meek nor mild. And only a blooming idiot would not be concerned about possible injuries in this type of game... But hey if the shoe fits...
Da Boyz Mom said:
Curious, is there empirical evidence that "this type of game" causes more injuries...or is that just a personal hypothesis of yours?
ilovethecats
Well-known member
Exactly. Crazy this has to get rehashed every season.grizindabox said:
grizindabox said:
Good question... Since I don't know of any studies that have been done to prove or disprove it, I am willing to concede that it's merely a personal hypothesis and I could be completely wrong. However, football in general is a dangerous sport and logically it could be argued that when one team has bigger, stronger, and faster players, the chances of injury for the team with smaller players would be higher than if they were playing an equally matched team.
From a personal standpoint, when my sons were playing football (middle school and high school) I did notice an increase in injuries when they played teams from bigger schools. But I can't "prove" that of course.
ilovethecats
Well-known member
And if we were talking about middle school and high school I'd probably be inclined to believe you. I don't want my 8th grade son playing football against juniors and seniors in high school.Da Boyz Mom said:
Go take a peek at your oline and note the heights and weights. Then look at oregons dline and do the same. You might be surprised.
The bigger, faster, stronger argument just doesn't hold water. You guys will have players on your very own little team that will be bigger than Oregon players. What you won't have is the same depth.
I'm not at all worried about my Bobcat defense playing Texas Tech in regards to injuries. We have some big dudes. I still think TT will have their way with us but it won't be because they are just so much bigger and stronger and we'll suffer so many injuries.
As a final note, I know that in college athletics money is the name of the game. These paydays are great. But if any AD or head coach really believed that they were more likely to suffer injuries in these games and ruin their seasons they wouldn't schedule them. If the stats actually backed up the claim that these games provide more injuries, I'd hope that we as fans would be up in arms about it! It would be highly unethical if true...
ilovethecats said:
Great post. I agree. I think the things that will separate Oregon/TTU from UM/MSU won't have much to do with making contact with opposing players.
I still remember when we had a decent opening stand against the Vols in 2011. Peter Nguyen muffed the punt, but I was thinking there might be a chance to keep it close given our opening defensive stand. Then they hit us over the top on a flea-flicker TD on the very next play. The receiver was open by about 30 yards. Their next drive, they hit a pass for 81 yards and a TD where the receiver looked like an Olympic sprinter. I turned to my wife and said, "Welp, that's that." The overall team speed was so different. Oh, BTW, the Vols went 5-7 (1-7) that year.
People on this board rant and rave about Big Sky teams being Division 1 and big time football. Now, when we are scheduled to play Oregon, they surrender and concede the loss before the game is played and talk about the risk of injuries. I guess maybe UM isn’t a Division 1 team nor so called Big Time Football.
ilovethecats
Well-known member
Spanky2 said:
That's pretty subjective. Who gives a fuck what other people think about our league or our favorite teams? Do you watch the Griz because you feel it's bigtime football? If the thought was the Griz are small time would you stop enjoying the games?
Spanky2 said:
Washgrizfan1
Well-known member
grizindabox said:
Yes. It's been mentioned at various times on egriz.
I would ask you whether there is any empirical evidence that lower level teams playing up against big time teams don't sustain any more injuries? If so, call it to the board's attention.
ilovethecats said:
I don't agree with your last para. First, people often take risks for money. If AD's were primarily concerned about injuries, they would schedule the minimum number of games. They would have their coaches give up or deduce tackling in practices, as the Ivy league has done. They would restrict the number and length of practices. Injuries in general and injury in play-up games are just one of many factors.
Spanky2 said:
They do??
UncleRico said:
If Rico is who I think he may be, he has been a coach virtually all of his professional life, including some football head coaching stints.
To me, it's common sense. If you do a study of vehicles and head-ons with these assumptions: Cars are exactly the same kind, but one set in the study weighs 5% more and goes 5% faster in the study. Or, 10% more and faster. Over time, which set ends up with more injuries?
My hope is similar to Rico's. On injuries, I would refine to say that I hope the Griz don't have 10 or 12 people hurt/out the following week, like the last time UM played Oregon and I hope we don't lose a starter for 2 months.
RobertoGato
Well-known member
CDAGRIZ said:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
He went full eGriz.
Never go full eGriz!
RayWill
Well-known member
daGrizJ said:
Many teams, including UM, do not keep or at least do not make public injury statistics. So this is almost impossible to quantify with empirical data. However, according to the NCAA 2/3of injuries occur either during spring ball or fall camp. With the games during the season next highest and postseason or playoff games the lowest percentage of injuries. So players are more likely to get hurt practicing than actually playing any game.
