poorgriz said:Jeebus, for the umpteenth time -
So you repeat it again? :roll:
poorgriz said:Jeebus, for the umpteenth time -
Jonathon Stewart for UO was injured in that game and missed a couple games as a result.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
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.
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?
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.
True, I do.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.
Grizbeer said:Jonathon Stewart for UO was injured in that game and missed a couple games as a result.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
PlayerRep said:kemajic said: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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I can align with that. There is no credible data to suggest otherwise.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.
kemajic said:I can align with that. There is no credible data to suggest otherwise.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.
AZGrizFan said:kemajic said:I can align with that. There is no credible data to suggest otherwise.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.
Yes there is, dammit. PR saw somebody get injured once!
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
SaskGriz said:PlayerRep said:kemajic said:You have done nothing to PROVE your point. A lawyer should know what proof constitutes.PlayerRep said:It's not a silly scenario. It's a question that absolutely proves my point.
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.
reinell30 said:If you play the sport of football, you are subject to injury at any time during ANY game!
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.