Leach detractors- have you seen IT?

[dgibbons]

Really, someone said he would be as good as Andrew Luck? No, I am asking about what a coach would do, and which better coach to ask than one that is the current coach. You take it as Leach vs. Wulff because you have to pit the two together. It is what the coaching profession would do and if it is a legit criticism.

Why Play Tuel at all then? If Wulff held him out of the ISU game, he should have held him out of the UNLV game as well. Maybe play him when they only think they can risk an injury when they need a performance. They play them because they need to get live reps. They need to play to get the rust off. Coaches make these TYPE of decisions all the time.

Do you have any other imponderables for today, other than WWMLD?

Sure, coaches make these kinds of decisions all the time. That one blew up in Wulff's face. And Wulff was the one that said Tuel was at least as good as Luck, and did so at Pac-12 media day in 2011.

 

[dgibbons]

What point? That every time you look in the mirror you see a fool?

No, that's what happens when you look in the mirror.

 

[kayak15]

Not to get into the CML vs. Wulff thing but I gotta say, anyone that thinks the flu doesn't cause issues mentally, is just plain wrong. Sorry Sponge. Think of managers at any given workplace. Trying to get work out of someone that is sick is like telling a stoner to focus. A person with the flu has a foggy mind, who could argue that?

In "heavy equipment" jobs, there are many shops that don't ALLOW operators to work equipment if they come to work sick. Sometimes they're sent home. Being sick and at work is a recipe for mistakes

To think that doesn't equate for those on the field is ignoring reality. Thus, mistakes equate to injuries… in so many ways. Example that isn't QB related: Don't feel good, technique goes out the door for tackling. Don't get low enough, you get smashed. OR you lower your head, concussion time… I just don't even understand this argument, Sponge.

Don't need an algorithm. Need Common Sense.

Carry on…

Congratulations, man2, you win the stuffed animal. I've been meaning to post something along this line but you did it for me.

My background is in toxicology and I can tell you that recreational drug users are more prone to accidents and more serious accidents than non-users. This is not my opinion; this is a fact. A mind impaired to a degree by physiological factors is more likely to make mistakes, to not follow the thought process through fully. Most backpacking injuries occur near the end of the hike or the day. Early in the day one sees a stream that requires crossing, sees a log spanning that stream and then questions whether the log will hold their weight, whether it is stable, how slippery does it look, what is the current and depth of the water below the log in case of slippage etc. Later in the day when one is exhausted the thought process is reduced to stream, log, do it.

In Tuel's case I do not know whether this factored in or not and neither does anyone else, probably including Tuel. I certainly didn't help and increased the probability of the result.

Ed, you state that the "QB is feeling better" and that he was "cleared by the doc". But how do we know if someone is 'feeling better'? Because they say so. Kids at this age feel indestructible and players are competitive. "Hell, yes, I feel fine!" should be taken with a grain of salt by a coaching staff. "Cleared by the doc"? O.K., but able to play at what level and is he thinking clearly? And the fact that he required an IV of fluids is a red flag. Administration of fluids for dehydration caused by excess sweating can clear up the problem quickly but in Tuel's case this wasn't environmental heat related but due to an ongoing problem.

Sponge, you questioned whether the flu causes injuries. No, it doesn't- at least not directly- but it and other causes of mental fatigue increase the probability of those injuries. "The flu didn't cause Tuel to stay inbounds. His bad decision did." The flu causes a degree of mental languor. Mental languor contributes to those bad decisions.

Does any of this explain why Tuel's collarbone was broken? No, it might have still happened if he had been totally healthy. But, as I have tried to explain, it increased the probability of the occurrence. A good coach should take this into consideration. Putting the blame on the kid- "I feel better"- or the medical staff- "he can play"- is weak because of the previously mentioned factors. Staffs need to consider both physical ability and mental alertness before sending a kid onto the field. Pros and cons/ risks and rewards need to be weighed cautiously and carefully. Was this done in Tuel's case? Who knows? I don't.

Some have questioned whether Leach would have done the same thing. Frankly, I think that he might very well have done so. Don't get me wrong. I like leach and think the program's progress is on track for future success. But I can envision a scenario where his "pedal to the metal" philosophy results in a similar situation. Where he rejects Aliotti's advice, "just give up", and we end up with a QB getting injured in a game that was already out of hand. Whether the positive aspects of going "pedal to the metal" outweigh any adverse consequence is a question for which I have no answer. But, regrettably, I would be willing to wager a beer with any of you that we have a future Leach/player X thread similar to the current Wulff/Tuel discussion. That is a bummer and I regret stating it but that is my thinking and worry.

 

[CougEd]

Acknowledging that being sick affects your body... you wouldn't think you're breaking major ground here, right?

Not at the start of the game. But the flu usually can go away in ten minutes.

Congratulations, man2, you win the stuffed animal. I've been meaning to post something along this line but you did it for me.

My background is in toxicology and I can tell you that recreational drug users are more prone to accidents and more serious accidents than non-users. This is not my opinion; this is a fact. A mind impaired to a degree by physiological factors is more likely to make mistakes, to not follow the thought process through fully. Most backpacking injuries occur near the end of the hike or the day. Early in the day one sees a stream that requires crossing, sees a log spanning that stream and then questions whether the log will hold their weight, whether it is stable, how slippery does it look, what is the current and depth of the water below the log in case of slippage etc. Later in the day when one is exhausted the thought process is reduced to stream, log, do it.

In Tuel's case I do not know whether this factored in or not and neither does anyone else, probably including Tuel. I certainly didn't help and increased the probability of the result.

Ed, you state that the "QB is feeling better" and that he was "cleared by the doc". But how do we know if someone is 'feeling better'? Because they say so. Kids at this age feel indestructible and players are competitive. "Hell, yes, I feel fine!" should be taken with a grain of salt by a coaching staff. "Cleared by the doc"? O.K., but able to play at what level and is he thinking clearly? And the fact that he required an IV of fluids is a red flag. Administration of fluids for dehydration caused by excess sweating can clear up the problem quickly but in Tuel's case this wasn't environmental heat related but due to an ongoing problem.

Sponge, you questioned whether the flu causes injuries. No, it doesn't- at least not directly- but it and other causes of mental fatigue increase the probability of those injuries. "The flu didn't cause Tuel to stay inbounds. His bad decision did." The flu causes a degree of mental languor. Mental languor contributes to those bad decisions.

Does any of this explain why Tuel's collarbone was broken? No, it might have still happened if he had been totally healthy. But, as I have tried to explain, it increased the probability of the occurrence. A good coach should take this into consideration. Putting the blame on the kid- "I feel better"- or the medical staff- "he can play"- is weak because of the previously mentioned factors. Staffs need to consider both physical ability and mental alertness before sending a kid onto the field. Pros and cons/ risks and rewards need to be weighed cautiously and carefully. Was this done in Tuel's case? Who knows? I don't.

Some have questioned whether Leach would have done the same thing. Frankly, I think that he might very well have done so. Don't get me wrong. I like leach and think the program's progress is on track for future success. But I can envision a scenario where his "pedal to the metal" philosophy results in a similar situation. Where he rejects Aliotti's advice, "just give up", and we end up with a QB getting injured in a game that was already out of hand. Whether the positive aspects of going "pedal to the metal" outweigh any adverse consequence is a question for which I have no answer. But, regrettably, I would be willing to wager a beer with any of you that we have a future Leach/player X thread similar to the current Wulff/Tuel discussion. That is a bummer and I regret stating it but that is my thinking and worry.

Kayak, I suppose you have to ask the doc and training staff what tests were administered. The fact a doc was there, unlike the backpackers and other examples, you have a qualified medical staff on the sideline at the time determining he was physically and mentally fit to play. My guess is that there is a sideline protocol probably similar to a concussion protocol that would determine his mentally capacity and fatigue. Tuel was able to call plays on the field, and was aware enough to escape the pocket to me indicates his capacity to think wasn't impaired. People polay all the time with similair circumstances. Marshawn Lynch last fall missed the first two series of the game because he was puking. And you are spot on as to what Leach would have done. All coaches would have, which is the point. Not whether Leach would have been the lone wolf to hold out his starter after being up 14 zip. Like you mentioned Halliday was exposed to risk in a meaningless 4th quarter. Gronk was exposed to risk when hwe played in the last 4 minutes of a blowout in which he broke his arm. The greater point is this is how coaches think. They don't believe because you have a 14 zip lead on a weak team it is time to not play your starters if deemed ready, especially in the first game of teh year. Like I said, we were 4-4 when Leach exposed Halliday to injury, and Halliday was the only QB capable of taking us to a bowl game. It only takes one play to take him out, and he was exposed to 20 throws when it was 64-24. Fortunately he was hit in a way he was injured, and fortunately he remained healthy to see us to a bowl game.

 

[CougEd]

Do you have any other imponderables for today, other than WWMLD?

Sure, coaches make these kinds of decisions all the time. That one blew up in Wulff's face. And Wulff was the one that said Tuel was at least as good as Luck, and did so at Pac-12 media day in 2011.

Yes it blew up in his, but it was not a "bad" decision in that it was counter to what is the norm. By being the norm of what others would do, and what quality coaches would do, it is a normal decision that had a bad outcome. Ah, coaches hyperbole. Check.

 

[Coug95man2]

Kayak, I suppose you have to ask the doc and training staff what tests were administered. The fact a doc was there, unlike the backpackers and other examples, you have a qualified medical staff on the sideline at the time determining he was physically and mentally fit to play. My guess is that there is a sideline protocol probably similar to a concussion protocol that would determine his mentally capacity and fatigue. Tuel was able to call plays on the field, and was aware enough to escape the pocket to me indicates his capacity to think wasn't impaired. People polay all the time with similair circumstances. Marshawn Lynch last fall missed the first two series of the game because he was puking. And you are spot on as to what Leach would have done. All coaches would have, which is the point. Not whether Leach would have been the lone wolf to hold out his starter after being up 14 zip. Like you mentioned Halliday was exposed to risk in a meaningless 4th quarter. Gronk was exposed to risk when hwe played in the last 4 minutes of a blowout in which he broke his arm. The greater point is this is how coaches think. They don't believe because you have a 14 zip lead on a weak team it is time to not play your starters if deemed ready, especially in the first game of teh year. Like I said, we were 4-4 when Leach exposed Halliday to injury, and Halliday was the only QB capable of taking us to a bowl game. It only takes one play to take him out, and he was exposed to 20 throws when it was 64-24. Fortunately he was hit in a way he was injured, and fortunately he remained healthy to see us to a bowl game.

Again... Missing the point. Kayak was braver than I to start walking in the weeds. Bring up any player you want, like Lynch. He probably played well. That doesn't mean he wasn't affected by the flu. It's done all the time. OK. Doctors have protocols. Sure, whatever you say. Again, the statement that Kayak and I are disputing is Sponges, "the flu didn't injure Tuel". Directly? No. But I can guarantee the flu affected his judgement. It HAD to. It's a virus. Again, your guys argument of whether it affected him ON THAT PLAY.

 

[dgibbons]

Yes it blew up in his, but it was not a "bad" decision in that it was counter to what is the norm. By being the norm of what others would do, and what quality coaches would do, it is a normal decision that had a bad outcome. Ah, coaches hyperbole. Check.

If the coach goes on to blame the mounting number of losses on the injured QB, then the coach basically blames himself.

Wulff is not a quality coach, by the way.

 

[wulffui]

The lone Wulff is the guy who made a decision which is, evidently, singular in football history in its misfortune- there's evidently not a single other "he was too sick to start the game, and now we're kicking the ass of a weak lower division team, so now let's bring him in and get him injured... and now he's injured." Tuel was injury prone in normal circumstances...

A guy who wins four Super Bowls having a healthy TE get injured- NOT the same.

A guy leading a bowl team having a healthy QB NOT get injured- again, NOT the same.

Wulff isn't Leach, he isn't Fazio, and he certainly isn't Belichick. Tuel isn't Ray Lewis, Rob Gronkowski, Joe Haden or Marshawn Lynch.

When you REALLY consider this situation, if you insist on going to the NFL for examples, you'd need to find someone making the decision in a PRESEASON game. Which you'd never find... but then there's Wulff.

 

[Cougatron]

The reality is Tuel was really really sick. We were up 14-0 Lobbestael had us up 14-0 and was a perfect 6/6. There was no need to play Tuel if he claimed to be ready. This was against an FCS opponent it was Idaho State.

If it looked like we were going to lose then yeah that risk could have been assessed, but there was absolutely nothing that pointed to that.

And the whole "We needed to give Tuel reps" is total bs. Halliday played that game he was in need of more reps than Tuel. There was no good logical reason to put Tuel in. The game was definitely in our favor. There was a 5th year Senior and Redshirt Freshmen who could benefit from playing, and ensuring that your prized QB is healthy for conference play / FBS opponents is the right move considering he was very ill prior to the game.

Wulff opted to let Tuel play for whatever reason, and the result was an injury that was costly.

There is no logic considering the opponent, we were winning, and how crucial it would be to have Tuel healthy for the season. Flu, Collarbone, whatever it was he needed to be at his best, and Wulff didn't let him be at his best and it was a mistake.

 

[spongebob11]

The lone Wulff is the guy who made a decision which is, evidently, singular in football history in its misfortune- there's evidently not a single other "he was too sick to start the game, and now we're kicking the ass of a weak lower division team, so now let's bring him in and get him injured... and now he's injured." Tuel was injury prone in normal circumstances...

A guy who wins four Super Bowls having a healthy TE get injured- NOT the same.

A guy leading a bowl team having a healthy QB NOT get injured- again, NOT the same.

Wulff isn't Leach, he isn't Fazio, and he certainly isn't Belichick. Tuel isn't Ray Lewis, Rob Gronkowski, Joe Haden or Marshawn Lynch.

When you REALLY consider this situation, if you insist on going to the NFL for examples, you'd need to find someone making the decision in a PRESEASON game. Which you'd never find... but then there's Wulff.

Here is where the fact you never played a down of football really shines. They are the same football decisions!

Wulff never said "Let bring him in and get him injured." And coaches never say "Well, we are playing a shitty opponent...so we are just going to take it easy today and play our backups."

If that was the case, Alabama and the rest of the SEC would never play their starters when the play their annual cupcake games.

It would have been interesting to hear your response if Halliday broke his leg in that Oregon game as opposed to USC.

 

[wulffui]

Here is where the fact you never played a down of football really shines. They are the same football decisions!

Wulff never said "Let bring him in and get him injured." And coaches never say "Well, we are playing a shitty opponent...so we are just going to take it easy today and play our backups."

If that was the case, Alabama and the rest of the SEC would never play their starters when the play their annual cupcake games.

It would have been interesting to hear your response if Halliday broke his leg in that Oregon game as opposed to USC.

Uhh, do you ever WATCH an Alabama game? They certainly don't BRING IN SICK starters for the Chattanooga game. But you being wrong about that is probably related to MY football experience. Again, it's a move that, until shown otherwise (and you haven't), is a singular kind of Paul Wulff failure.

Here's where the fact that, for whatever football you played, you obviously paid no attention. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME DECISION AT ALL, no matter how much you Wulff disciples wish they were. You haven't even really gotten close.

 

[kayak15]

Ed, you state that Tuel could call plays and knew to leave the pocket when under pressure therefore his thinking appeared to you not to be impaired. I disagree. One does not go from so debilitated from vomiting and/or diarrhea that you need intravenous infusion to "unimpaired" an hour later. Tuel could probably call plays in his sleep at that stage and how many functioning brain cells does it take to see a 300 lb. Dl closing in on you and realize that it is time to get out of Dodge. He was functional but these are certainly not proof that he was hitting on all cylinders. Tuel was apparently cleared by the medical staff. Fine, but those sideline appraisals are rudimentary at best. Eye ball analyses. Kid looks and seems O.K. But I doubt that any medical staff would call his condition unimpaired. And that leads to a greater chance of some faulty and imperfect reasoning.

Putting Tuel or any other athlete onto the field under these conditions comes down to risk/reward analysis. The risk is obvious- increased chance of injury due to impaired judgment. The reward in Tuel's case- or halliday's, if you like- is practically zero. The ratio increases to a point where one has to logically conclude that it is not worth the gamble. Yes, coaches make these decisions quite often and they are often faulty. Usually nothing happens and they escape without consequence but now and then they end up standing in some hospital hallway that night mumbling 'WTF was I thinking?'. Or at least the objective ones must do so. Some others may be oblivious to their own poor judgment, chalk it up to bad luck and go on their way.

Tuel was functional but impaired; the reward was negligible. In retrospect, it would have been better not to have taken that gamble.

(None of this flu discussion concerns those in Wulffui's locality, where the viruses are of the girly man variety and one can usually recover in ten minutes.)

Sponge, I have not watched any of Alabama's cupcake matches as they are not on national television. Undoubtedly, they start their front line unless injured or infirm and let those rest and recuperate. I suspect that the Chattanooga and Georgia State type games degenerate into scrimmages by the end of the first quarter with the backups finishing out the contest. Some of the underclass starters probably get a few more reps but I doubt that Saban is foolish enough to take a chance on aggravating further damage to an impaired starter. Those are better served by resting, recovering and getting ready for more challenging contests down the road.

 

[spongebob11]

Uhh, do you ever WATCH an Alabama game? They certainly don't BRING IN SICK starters for the Chattanooga game. But you being wrong about that is probably related to MY football experience. Again, it's a move that, until shown otherwise (and you haven't), is a singular kind of Paul Wulff failure.

Here's where the fact that, for whatever football you played, you obviously paid no attention. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME DECISION AT ALL, no matter how much you Wulff disciples wish they were. You haven't even really gotten close.

And that is where you are wrong. I am not a Wulff disciple(I'm not the one with his name in my handle). I just call out idiotic statements when I see them.

Wulff had nothing to do with Tuel staying inbounds...and Wulff had nothing to do with "ruining Gibson's draft stock.

The funny part about the later is that you have no idea where Gibson was projected to be drafted after his junior year...so it's another bs statement by you.

 

[spongebob11]

Ed, you state that Tuel could call plays and knew to leave the pocket when under pressure therefore his thinking appeared to you not to be impaired. I disagree. One does not go from so debilitated from vomiting and/or diarrhea that you need intravenous infusion to "unimpaired" an hour later. Tuel could probably call plays in his sleep at that stage and how many functioning brain cells does it take to see a 300 lb. Dl closing in on you and realize that it is time to get out of Dodge. He was functional but these are certainly not proof that he was hitting on all cylinders. Tuel was apparently cleared by the medical staff. Fine, but those sideline appraisals are rudimentary at best. Eye ball analyses. Kid looks and seems O.K. But I doubt that any medical staff would call his condition unimpaired. And that leads to a greater chance of some faulty and imperfect reasoning.

Putting Tuel or any other athlete onto the field under these conditions comes down to risk/reward analysis. The risk is obvious- increased chance of injury due to impaired judgment. The reward in Tuel's case- or halliday's, if you like- is practically zero. The ratio increases to a point where one has to logically conclude that it is not worth the gamble. Yes, coaches make these decisions quite often and they are often faulty. Usually nothing happens and they escape without consequence but now and then they end up standing in some hospital hallway that night mumbling 'WTF was I thinking?'. Or at least the objective ones must do so. Some others may be oblivious to their own poor judgment, chalk it up to bad luck and go on their way.

Tuel was functional but impaired; the reward was negligible. In retrospect, it would have been better not to have taken that gamble.

(None of this flu discussion concerns those in Wulffui's locality, where the viruses are of the girly man variety and one can usually recover in ten minutes.)

Sponge, I have not watched any of Alabama's cupcake matches as they are not on national television. Undoubtedly, they start their front line unless injured or infirm and let those rest and recuperate. I suspect that the Chattanooga and Georgia State type games degenerate into scrimmages by the end of the first quarter with the backups finishing out the contest. Some of the underclass starters probably get a few more reps but I doubt that Saban is foolish enough to take a chance on aggravating further damage to an impaired starter. Those are better served by resting, recovering and getting ready for more challenging contests down the road.

There is a difference between someone who say has a sprained ankle vs someone who was sick earlier and feels better to play. The former is a risk as the injury can be aggravated.

Not sure how you aggravate a flu "injury".

 

[wulffui]

And that is where you are wrong. I am not a Wulff disciple(I'm not the one with his name in my handle). I just call out idiotic statements when I see them.

If this were really your priority, you'd spend 90% of the time calling out what you say the other 10% of the time.

As for your other issues, as you're pretty much the only one who fails to acknowledge that the flu affects your body, and that a player getting an IV at kickoff is someone clearly "still affected by the flu", I'm going to chalk that one up.

Since you (or anyone) can't find an example of anything close to a sick starting QB brought into a non-competitive game when he couldn't go at kickoff, I'll take a point for that, too. Once you find it, though, I'll be the first to say "hey, other coaches make Wulffish mistakes".

As for Gibson, he was projected as a late 2/early 3- you could have looked for that really easy- it's way more available than a parallel for Wulffs bad decision.(and no one said anything about it being based on what he'd do in a Todd Sturdy offense, haha.)

So, yet again, rather than BS, it's easily verified fact- like Tuel being too sick to go at kickoff- that you choose to ignore with a "nuh-uh! ...because I said so!"

 

[spongebob11]

If this were really your priority, you'd spend 90% of the time calling out what you say the other 10% of the time.

As for your other issues, as you're pretty much the only one who fails to acknowledge that the flu affects your body, and that a player getting an IV at kickoff is someone clearly "still affected by the flu", I'm going to chalk that one up.

Since you (or anyone) can't find an example of anything close to a sick starting QB brought into a non-competitive game when he couldn't go at kickoff, I'll take a point for that, too. Once you find it, though, I'll be the first to say "hey, other coaches make Wulffish mistakes".

As for Gibson, he was projected as a late 2/early 3- you could have looked for that really easy- it's way more available than a parallel for Wulffs bad decision.(and no one said anything about it being based on what he'd do in a Todd Sturdy offense, haha.)

So, yet again, rather than BS, it's easily verified fact- like Tuel being too sick to go at kickoff- that you choose to ignore with a "nuh-uh! ...because I said so!"

The flu did not cause Tuel to stay in bounds. If you think it did, you have rocks in your head.

Your stupid argument of find a qb who didn't start, felt better, came in the game, against an FCS opponent, stayed in bounds because he had the flu, broke a collar bone has so many variables to it that of course no one is going to find another scenario.

News Flash: Coaches can't predict if a player is going to get hurt.

Halliday, an injury prone QB easily could have broke his leg in that Oregon game that was a blow out where he passed 500 times.

And who projected Gibson to be drafted that high? Just like you never saw Wilson being projected as a early 2nd round pick, I never saw Gibson being projected that high.

Keep on giving yourself a point, though. You are only playing with yourself.

 

[wulffui]

Your stupid argument of find a qb who didn't start, felt better, came in the game, against an FCS opponent, stayed in bounds because he had the flu, broke a collar bone has so many variables to it that of course no one is going to find another scenario.

Just Paul Wulff. And that's what I'm saying. There's a lot of "with all those variables, you'd never see it!..." Unless you watched Paul Wulff.

 

[wulffui]

And here, do it with ONLY two variables: "a QB unable to start for physical reasons" and "entered midgame against an FCS team".

I'm guessing, I'll still wait.

 

[spongebob11]

And here, do it with ONLY two variables: "a QB unable to start for physical reasons" and "entered midgame against an FCS team".

I'm guessing, I'll still wait.

I'm reminded of that scene in Deuce Bigalow where the heavy set gal was all excited to play Cakes and Pies. Except with you, its Stats and Algorithms.

He was medically cleared!

And you still haven't answered the question as to why you have Wulff in your handle.

 

[wulffui]

I'm reminded of that scene in Deuce Bigalow where the heavy set gal was all excited to play Cakes and Pies. Except with you, its Stats and Algorithms.

He was medically cleared!

And you still haven't answered the question as to why you have Wulff in your handle.

Lots of words for "nope, just Wulff."

 

[spongebob11]

Lots of words for "nope, just Wulff."

Lets see go to google and search in quotes "QB's who were sick with the flu but then felt better and came back in the game while playing an FCS school and broke his collar bone while stepping out of bounds"

Wulff had nothing to do with Tuel taking on a Linebacker. Get it?

 

[wulffui]

Lets see go to google and search in quotes "QB's who were sick with the flu but then felt better and came back in the game while playing an FCS school and broke his collar bone while stepping out of bounds"

Wulff had nothing to do with Tuel taking on a Linebacker. Get it?

Wulff was the coach who put his QB in against an FCS team at less than 100% and exposed him to injury, when he didn't need to, and shouldn't have, based on the actual result. Get it? One of the many stupid decisions that got him to 9-40, but to hear you tell it, he's never done a thing wrong- the first perfect coach to lose 80% of his games.

 

[spongebob11]

Wulff was the coach who put his QB in against an FCS team at less than 100% and exposed him to injury, when he didn't need to, and shouldn't have, based on the actual result. Get it? One of the many stupid decisions that got him to 9-40, but to hear you tell it, he's never done a thing wrong- the first perfect coach to lose 80% of his games.

Wrong. I have criticized Wulff many times when warranted. Blaming him for Tuel taking on a linebacker or your Gibson is just idiotic.

Tuel could have gotten hurt the following week. Halliday could have gotten hurt in the Oregon game. You keep mentioning FCS and Idaho St. Lobster didn't get hurt while playing the majority of the game. So FCS and Idaho St has nothing to do with his injury. A bad decision by Tuel did.

 

[wulffui]

Wrong. I have criticized Wulff many times when warranted. Blaming him for Tuel taking on a linebacker or your Gibson is just idiotic.

Tuel could have gotten hurt the following week. Halliday could have gotten hurt in the Oregon game. You keep mentioning FCS and Idaho St. Lobster didn't get hurt while playing the majority of the game. So FCS and Idaho St has nothing to do with his injury. A bad decision by Tuel did.

The healthy QB stayed healthy. The sick QB got more injured. One healthy, one sick. One not injured, one injured. Yeah, it's a real mystery.

Tuel couldn't have gotten injured the next week- by then, he was too injured. And a HEALTHY Halliday DIDN'T get injured, so that's just your "hate Leach" crusade, wishing fiction were fact.

 

[spongebob11]

No, its your hate Wullf and blame him for everything including flat tires even though his name is in your handle crusade.

So now we are back to the Flu causes QB's to take on linebackers. I would pay good money to have you in the room with a coach and a camera. It would make for great reality television.

And a "Healthy" Halliday did in fact get injured..in the USC game. You see, injuries can happen at any time, Flu or no Flu.

 

[wulffui]

No, its your hate Wullf and blame him for everything including flat tires even though his name is in your handle crusade.

So now we are back to the Flu causes QB's to take on linebackers. I would pay good money to have you in the room with a coach and a camera. It would make for great reality television.

One of us is discussing a thing that ACTUALLY HAPPENED as a result of a poor decision by a former coach.

The other is spinning furiously to compare that thing to several things that DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN to our current coach, to make a failure look better, and claiming that blaming him for bad coaching decisions he made is like blaming him for a flat tire!?!

You're the second guy.

 

[wulffui]

No, its your hate Wullf and blame him for everything including flat tires even though his name is in your handle crusade.

So now we are back to the Flu causes QB's to take on linebackers. I would pay good money to have you in the room with a coach and a camera. It would make for great reality television.

And a "Healthy" Halliday did in fact get injured..in the USC game. You see, injuries can happen at any time, Flu or no Flu.

USC isn't Idaho State. It's as though, given how proficient he was at putting QB's in position to get injured, he shouldn't have played one at less than 100% against the worst team in the Big Sky.

 

[spongebob11]

One of us is discussing a thing that ACTUALLY HAPPENED as a result of a poor decision by a former coach.

The other is spinning furiously to compare that thing to several things that DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAPPEN to our current coach, to make a failure look better, and claiming that blaming him for bad coaching decisions he made is like blaming him for a flat tire!?!

You're the second guy.

You don't get the fact that Tuel took on a linebacker.

It had nothing to do with Wulff. It had nothing to do with the Flu. You don't get that. And you never will.

USC isn't Idaho State.

WTF does the opponent have to do with it? If he got his collar bone broken against Idaho St, what do you think would have happened if he took on a linebacker from freakin' USC?!

 

[wulffui]

You don't get the fact that Tuel took on a linebacker.

It had nothing to do with Wulff. It had nothing to do with the Flu. You don't get that. And you never will.

WTF does the opponent have to do with it? If he got his collar bone broken against Idaho St, what do you think would have happened if he took on a linebacker from freakin' USC?!

The guy who is denying that the flu has impact on human capabilities has no right to tell anyone what they do or don't get. Because you don't get anything.

 

[spongebob11]

The guy who is denying that the flu has impact on human capabilities has no right to tell anyone what they do or don't get. Because you don't get anything.

So, now you are on record for saying that the flu caused Jeff Tuel to take on a linebacker instead of getting out of bounds. Too funny.

And btw, we aren't talking about human capabilities, we are talking decision making. Its not like the flu impaired his judgment like drinking a 40oz of malt liquor.

 

[wulffui]

This is from WebMD, I know they're not the authority you are, but let's see if your "flu = nothing" theory holds up:

. With the flu, though, you are likely to run a high fever for several days and have body aches, fatigue, and weakness.

NO WAY! Fatigue, weakness, body aches- those are all GREAT for football though, right? And the IV- that's what you get when you're TOTALLY healthy, right?

 

[wulffui]

So, now you are on record for saying that the flu caused Jeff Tuel to take on a linebacker instead of getting out of bounds. Too funny.

I'm shocked you took something I didn't say and made up what you wished I'd say. Like your flu diagnosis, not the best.

 

[spongebob11]

This is from WebMD, I know they're not the authority you are, but let's see if your "flu = nothing" theory holds up:

. With the flu, though, you are likely to run a high fever for several days and have body aches, fatigue, and weakness.

NO WAY! Fatigue, weakness, body aches- those are all GREAT for football though, right? And the IV- that's what you get when you're TOTALLY healthy, right?

Again, WTF does that have to do with his decision making?

He felt better and requested to go in the game. And TONS of football players have played with the flu so your Web MD reference doesn't help you.

Go watch Junction Boys again. I would love to eves drop on this convo between you and the Bear.

 

[wulffui]

Again, WTF does that have to do with his decision making?

He felt better and requested to go in the game. And TONS of football players have played with the flu.

Go watch Junction Boys again. I would love to eves drop on this convo between you and the Bear.

Fatigue and weakness don't affect decision making? That's what you decided on?

Can you even read? I mean "eves drop" obviously means you can't write, but man...

 

[spongebob11]

Fatigue and weakness don't affect decision making? That's what you decided on?

Can you even read? I mean "eves drop" obviously means you can't write, but man...

Yes or no. Did the flu cause Jeff Tuel to take on a linebacker?

And you know one has lost the argument when all he can do is point out typos.

 

[wulffui]

Yes or no. Did the flu cause Jeff Tuel to take on a linebacker?

Yes or no- has any coach ever made the decision Paul Wulff did?

 

[spongebob11]

Yes or no- has any coach ever made the decision Paul Wulff did?

I am going to keep repeating this until it sticks in your head. Paul Wulff did not cause Jeff Tuel to be an idiot and take on a linebacker. Nor did the Flu.

I'm done arguing with someone who has Wulff in their handle(and has never played a down of football)...yet blames Wulff for everything from Tuel taking on a linebacker to ruining Gibson.

 

[wulffui]

I am going to keep repeating this until it sticks in your head. Paul Wulff did not cause Jeff Tuel to be an idiot and take on a linebacker. Nor did the Flu.

I'm done arguing with someone who has Wulff in their handle(and has never played a down of football)...yet blames Wulff for everything from Tuel taking on a linebacker to ruining Gibson.

SO, NO, THEN?

 

[spongebob11]

Yes or no- has any coach ever made the decision Paul Wulff did?

And yes, I have seen players over the years, not just in football, come back into the game after feeling better.

 

[wulffui]

And yes, I have seen players over the years, not just in football, come back into the game after feeling better.

Different circumstances entirely, I'm sure. Of course, you COULD back up what you say- but that's not your style. You say foolish, easily disproven things, then, when they're disproven, you toss out personal insults. That's fine.