B they have been good against the good competition we have faced but not dominant. This is due largely to the lack of depth but that is something that needs to be fixed because it is the biggest obstacle holding our line back.
We will see hope the best for the kid. I have no idea about he appeal process and whether his reinstatement is likely or a long shot.
I'm not trying to take choice away, I'm saying it should not be reinforced. The same way people have a right to smoke but smoking is discouraged. I think the players can play hurt if they want to but I would like to see it be discouraged for the sake of the players health and the future of the sport.
I think Corey Smith is going to get some flack for that interception. To me it looked like he gave up on his route which I consider a lack of effort.
I agree with accountability. As far as you dissatisfaction with the "i won't let my kid play football" It is a real problem that is growing. Whether we like it or not this is how many parents feel and it is why I think the sport could decline significantly in the future. You can take the stance that players are responsible for their own bodies and it should be their choice whether they play hurt but it will most definitely push some parents and kids away from the sport. For the survival of football I think some past views and attitudes have to change there is no way around it. Whether you agree or not I would feel uneasy about my kid playing football knowing all the risks. If he is expected to play while hurt or injured there is no way in hell I would let him play. Many parents share this sentiment.
completely different than what I am talking about. I'm talking about playing hurt. A runner who sprains his ankle or pulls a hamstring doesn't go on to try to force the issue. That happens in football and that is where the most serious injuries occur. If a player who is hurt goes back out and gets lit up and injured the staff comes under heavy fire. If they go back out and win the game everyone is a hero for believing they could play through. It is hypocritical and needs to stop.
Sorry if that was a misconception. I am not trying to give blame. This is something that is viewed as acceptable, no one is in the wrong here. IMO this is something that should change and everyone, players and others have a part in it. It sounds like most agree that it is wrong to ridicule guys for stepping off the field due to injury. However celebrating those that play through it by the same coin still put a similar pressure on the players, this makes it seem like the expectation. Ultimately I think this will hurt the sport just like it hurt boxing. So for the future of football and players health this is a change I would like to see. I am not trying to assign blame since this is not viewed as wrong. I think it is hypocritical and something that should change but right now that is just my opinion. And while it can be viewed as a players right to play on if they choose, many players who are suffering from the effects later in life have said they have come to regret the decision. You can say it was their choice, but I don't think there should be added incentive from the public for them to make that choice.
I'm am surprised how many people are against this so let me clarify. I am specifically talking about when the players are hurt and the coaches, fans, everyone KNOWS they are hurt like in the case of JT or Braxton. I'm talking about how they wanted to play and they did play and were later celebrated for it. These are instances when I think they should not play, where it is known that the players are hurt and putting them back in risks them being hurt even more. Football most definitely has an issue right now with health concerns I think it is affecting parents decisions for their children to play and I think longterm it may very well affect the future of the sport. There are lawsuits against the NFL from players seeking compensation for injury. Hoke and other coaches are vilified for playing concussed players or when players playing hurt suffer another injury and make things worse. There is a large hypocrisy going on here and it needs to be reconciled. I don't understand how you can treat concussions differently which coaches can lose their head over, whereas an injured knee that could tear and affect that limb for the rest of the players life is all on the player and not the staff. It is not a wussification of the sport it is a real issue and I think for the health of the players and the future of the sport in these instances it is better for them not to play.
I'm arguing because there is a giant hypocrisy that goes with saying the player's health is our number 1 concern and then glorifying playing through injury. The NFL players are in this predicament right now because they are suing on account of their health while they also admit to covering up injuries so they can play in the game. This is most definitely affecting football. I think it is affecting kids playing the sport. It is something that has to be reconciled and I would prefer they air on the side of caution.
That is the flipped. That's another viewpoint that has to change. I won't ever criticize a player for not playing because he is hurt and other fans should not either.
I'm saying the reason it occurs and is allowed to occur with such frequency is in part due to the way it is viewed by coaches media and the public. If we shift the way we view playing hurt/injured I think it will have an effect on the field. And in the cases I mentioned it was clear they were not okay. We could see it and many of us were not at the game.
When fans tweet how much heart you have, when coaches laud you as a champion, when the media talks about how impressive it was it all plays into the mentality of the player. I'm not saying fans are the only ones responsible, I'm saying this behavior is viewed as acceptable because multiple facets of the sport say it is. Some players may always have that mentality, but others will engage in it because it is deemed acceptable and we as fans have a role in that.
That is why I would not let my kid play football.
Do you think these players can tell the difference? Braxton played hurt and who knows what damage it did to his shoulder. JT was clearly affected by the sprain but played through it. You need a trained medical professional to identify the extent of injury and that usually takes more than a quick check on the sideline.
I disagree. I think attitudes like this is another part of the reason football is declining in High Schools. What would you do if your kid decided to try to play in a game when he was injured. I personally would smack him upside the head and let him know how stupid that was. Also while they choose to play now how many of them regret it later. How many pros who are currently suing the NFL suspected they had a concussion but tried to stay quiet and play anyway. I would liked to have seen Meyer say something like "But I let them know never do that again. It is not worth putting yourself in jeopardy."
You forgot the other dozen or so years he has been on the staff.
I don't know about Durkin that much. I do know Fickell can coach a damn good LB. He has presided over some of the greats in OSU history so I have to go with Fickell.
I would guess Dixon but that all depends on how he comes back. If not someone else will we have a lot of talent there now.
1. Ohio State is not a blue blood basketball program. This is an inherent disadvantage recruiting wise Ohio State has that UK, Duke, and others don't have.
2. You seem to like Calipari a lot. While he hasn't necessarily been directly linked, I believe he played a role in the violations at Memphis. Basically I think he cheats and so do many others. Thad strikes me as a by the book kind of guy which I have a lot of respect for especially considering the state the NCAA is in.
3. Thad did have a few shortcomings in recruiting but he seems to be on the upswing. This year's class looks great and next year's looks just as good if not better. The guy can recruit.
Definitely top ten arguably top 5
Just because he was healthy doesn't mean he was ready. Thad most likely meant with the time he missed his game was not ready for college level. We have seen a bit of Cam now with 2 offseasons and one season's worth of work and practice. We don't know how effective he would have been if he had been used January but I trust Thad's judgement. Also while he looked sharp shooting his defense and other aspects left much to be desired like most others on the team. I doubt he was ready then, I'm glad he took the RS.
At this point he has locked his spot for next year barring some unexpected event. Do you think Conley will start opposite to replace Grant or will it go to someone else?
I get your point what I forgot to say is that they were all wide open bunnies that the same players were not missing in the tourney last year.