Alabama wins

[gollum83]

PS: I'm a bit disturbed by this quote, which I hope is somehow out of context:

""That was great because it was a great change in momentum and really made the game a different game," Saban said at halftime. "It was a great hit on Colt McCoy. He's a great player, and it sort of made them change their offense."

For some reason, that strikes me as endorsing hits that injure players?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/01/07/bcs.championship.game/index.html?eref=sihp#ixzz0bzsYUjOa

I hope not, but he has a point. It did change the momentum of the game, although I personally wouldn't have said it was great because when is it ever great that a player gets injured? Regardless of what he exactly meant, Texas was looking pretty darn good there up until that hit. I don't think anyone could tell you for sure if that hit on Colt McCoy cost Texas the game, but I think the game would have been a little closer. Still, all things considered it was a darn good game.

I'm sure it was, and I would have preferred to watch 'Bama beat Texas with Colt McCoy. However, McElroy took way more hits than McCoy did and played the whole game. Toughness is a part of the game, and I hate for a team to blame their loss on any one player. After McCoy came out, Texas receivers dropped something like 4 or 5 straight passes that hit them in the hands. Football is a team sport, and the backup QB is a part of the team.

That being said, that young kid played a terrific game after he settled down. I hope he feels good about his performance.

Adam, it's not about who takes the most hits. Sure taking hits is part of the game, but if a player get hit just the right way that it cause an injury doesn't make that player any more or less tough. If anything it is just unfortunate.

 

[Argonaut]

It might have been a factor, yes, though we will never know. However, injuries happen, and I don't think Texas fans would want to add an asterisk to (or give back) their victory in this year's Red River Shootout because of Sam Bradford's injury.

Bingo! OU lost 4 games by less than 5 points without Bradford, including the texas game, sorry there's no consolation prize for best excuse. Unless mack brown declares themselves champions anyway like he did last year for the Big 12 conference. By the way I am a Sooner fan, and pulling for a rival to win a national championship is crazy, we have to recruit against those guys. Congratulations 'Bama, hard fought well played game, except for the first and third quarters.

 

[Mr. Clean]

No doubt I was pulling for Texas to win last night. But they didn't and life will go on. I'm not going to blame the loss on the loss of McCoy because as it has already been stated, the back-up QB Gilbert is on the team and in a physical game like football players can be injured. Would it have been a different game had McCoy played the entire game? Of course it would. Would the final results been different? Who knows and it is a mute point.

Questioning McCoy's toughness mental or physical is outrageous though. It appeared to be a fluke play as the hit didn't look to be that hard. As he has said his arm did not hurt (no pain) but rather it is a "dead/asleep" feeling. He could grip the ball and throw the ball (reportedly playing catch with his Dad to try to overcome the sensation, or lack thereof) but he had no power nor control of direction. This guy came back for his senior year of eligibility for the chance of this game, it is inconceivable to believe that he would not do everything and anything within his control to have returned to the game.

I thought Saban was very sportsman-like in his win and Brown was likewise in defeat. I thought McCoy's post game comments showed great maturity. That Dareus was as giddy as a school girl, I assumed it might be more than a bit shy.

 

[Protocol]

Colt McCoy going out was a bit of a heartbreaker, but, like others have mentioned, that 's part of the game. The fact that the Longhorns only had a true freshman with 23 snaps backing up someone who is graduating and entering the draft, however, tells me that Texas was outcoached and outprepared. Great teams find a way to win.

As my coworker mentioned, "which of the four Alabama offensive touchdowns do you think Colt McCoy would have prevented?". I get that the shovel pass interception was a fluke, but if you're the #1 ranked defense, you find a way to keep the other team out of the endzone.

Credit where it is due. Alabama won because they were the better team.

 

[jadam318]

Adam, it's not about who takes the most hits. Sure taking hits is part of the game, but if a player get hit just the right way that it cause an injury doesn't make that player any more or less tough. If anything it is just unfortunate.

But that is also part of the game, and a player that is less prone to injury has more of a chance to contribute.

Besides that, I still don't think it's fair to blame a loss on the absence of one player. It is a team sport.

Anyway, all I'm really saying is that I hate for McCoy's injury to add an asterisk to 'Bama's win. 'Bama played hard, and they earned their 14-0 season, their SEC title, and their BCS title. I know the game would have been different if McCoy had stayed in, but teams have to be prepared for that kind of stuff. Ingram missed nearly the entire 3rd quarter due to cramps or something, and 'Bama didn't miss a beat.

 

[Mr. Clean]

Colt McCoy going out was a bit of a heartbreaker, but, like others have mentioned, that 's part of the game. The fact that the Longhorns only had a true freshman with 23 snaps backing up someone who is graduating and entering the draft, however, tells me that Texas was outcoached and outprepared. Great teams find a way to win.

As my coworker mentioned, "which of the four Alabama offensive touchdowns do you think Colt McCoy would have prevented?". I get that the shovel pass interception was a fluke, but if you're the #1 ranked defense, you find a way to keep the other team out of the endzone.

Credit where it is due. Alabama won because they were the better team.

Have to disagree with you on being outcoached and outprepared. Had the tables been turned and McElroy went out, Alabama would have been in a similar pickle. Their back-up for the game was also a true freshman (McCarron) who wasn't their back-up on their depth chart (red-shirt freshman Jackson).

As for your co-worker...McCoy plays on the offensive side of the ball, so it would be the rare occasion that he would be called up to stop an offensive play by the opposing team. But seriously, you have to consider that with McCoy in there might not have been 4 turnovers by interception which certainly aided Alabama's scoring opportunities.

 

[gollum83]

But that is also part of the game, and a player that is less prone to injury has more of a chance to contribute.

Besides that, I still don't think it's fair to blame a loss on the absence of one player. It is a team sport.

Anyway, all I'm really saying is that I hate for McCoy's injury to add an asterisk to 'Bama's win. 'Bama played hard, and they earned their 14-0 season, their SEC title, and their BCS title. I know the game would have been different if McCoy had stayed in, but teams have to be prepared for that kind of stuff. Ingram missed nearly the entire 3rd quarter due to cramps or something, and 'Bama didn't miss a beat.

Is part of the game? Sure. Players have been getting injured since football, well, has been football. But sometimes all it takes to get injured is getting hit in just the right way, if you understand what I'm trying to say.

Furthermore, I never said it diminished Alabama's win in anyway. Both teams played a great game and in the end Alabama was better.

 

[jadam318]

Furthermore, I never said it diminished Alabama's win in anyway. Both teams played a great game and in the end Alabama was better.

Take a look at what Mr. Clean said up there. That's what I'm talking about when I say "an asterisk".

Have to disagree with you on being outcoached and outprepared. Had the tables been turned and McElroy went out, Alabama would have been in a similar pickle. Their back-up for the game was also a true freshman (McCarron) who wasn't their back-up on their depth chart (red-shirt freshman Jackson).

As for your co-worker...McCoy plays on the offensive side of the ball, so it would be the rare occasion that he would be called up to stop an offensive play by the opposing team. But seriously, you have to consider that with McCoy in there might not have been 4 turnovers by interception which certainly aided Alabama's scoring opportunities.

The fact is, the tables weren't turned. Perhaps McElroy was better conditioned and less prone to injury, or perhaps 'Bama was just 'lucky'. Maybe even 'Bama would have been better prepared should their starting QB have come out of the game. Maybe Texas shouldn't have bet the farm on Colt McCoy, and maybe their receivers should have been prepared mentally to catch a ball from someone other than McCoy. How many dropped passes were there in the second quarter?

I just don't think anyone should put all the "ifs" on McCoy's absence.

Let's also not forget that 'Bama's star player (Ingram) did miss a lot of the game due to hamstring cramps. That didn't seem to affect 'Bama's game at all, so yeah. I'd say they were better prepared.

 

[Mr. Clean]

But that is also part of the game, and a player that is less prone to injury has more of a chance to contribute.

Besides that, I still don't think it's fair to blame a loss on the absence of one player. It is a team sport.

Anyway, all I'm really saying is that I hate for McCoy's injury to add an asterisk to 'Bama's win. 'Bama played hard, and they earned their 14-0 season, their SEC title, and their BCS title. I know the game would have been different if McCoy had stayed in, but teams have to be prepared for that kind of stuff. Ingram missed nearly the entire 3rd quarter due to cramps or something, and 'Bama didn't miss a beat.

Come on now, you don't set the career wins record at UT and most career wins in major college football by a starting QB by being injury prone.

 

[Mr. Clean]

Take a look at what Mr. Clean said up there. That's what I'm talking about when I say "an asterisk".



The fact is, the tables weren't turned. Perhaps McElroy was better conditioned and less prone to injury, or perhaps 'Bama was just 'lucky'. Maybe even 'Bama would have been better prepared should their starting QB have come out of the game. Maybe Texas shouldn't have bet the farm on Colt McCoy, and maybe their receivers should have been prepared mentally to catch a ball from someone other than McCoy. How many dropped passes were there in the second quarter?

I just don't think anyone should put all the "ifs" on McCoy's absence.

Let's also not forget that 'Bama's star player (Ingram) did miss a lot of the game due to hamstring cramps. That didn't seem to affect 'Bama's game at all, so yeah. I'd say they were better prepared.

What did I say that would lead anyone to believe that I thought this game deserved an asterisk?

As far as tables being turned comment, I was debating Protocol's comment that Texas was outcoached and outprepared because they had a freshman backup QB when in fact Alabama was in the same situation.

I don't know what you mean by Texas shouldn't have bet the farm on McCoy??? He was their starting QB for 4 seasons, what else do you do? Pull him and start someone else?

 

[jadam318]

Come on now, you don't set the career wins record at UT and most career wins in major college football by a starting QB by being injury prone.

I never said McCoy was injury prone. I was just suggesting that perhaps McElroy was less so in this game. McElroy got sacked 4 or 5 times in the first quarter and never even got up slow. I'm just sayin'.....

 

[gollum83]

I never said McCoy was injury prone. I was just suggesting that perhaps McElroy was less so in this game. McElroy got sacked 4 or 5 times in the first quarter and never even got up slow. I'm just sayin'.....

Yeah, but you're saying this about a guy that doesn't miss games. If you ask me, your assertion that McCoy isn't tough is unfounded.

 

[soapbox]

Dad just emailed me this from today's paper:

 

[jadam318]

Yeah, but you're saying this about a guy that doesn't miss games. If you ask me, your assertion that McCoy isn't tough is unfounded.

Bottom line: a routine hit put him out of the game, and the rest of the team wasn't prepared to deal with it.

 

[Mr_Amazing]

Bottom line: a routine hit put him out of the game, and the rest of the team wasn't prepared to deal with it.

Honestly, questioning a player's toughness because they got injured early in a game is ridiculous. It could have happened at any time during the season or any time during the game. By your logic, Ingram isn't tough because he got cramps, which aren't even caused by contact.

An injury can happen at any time. You don't need to be hit to twist your ankle or tear an ACL. Some of the most horrendous injuries (involving the neck/spine) have occurred on what appears to be a "routine" play. To justify a player's toughness based on the kind of hit they took is simply wrong.

In the case of McCoy, you have to look at the hit itself. He was hit with a helmet on the sweet spot of the upper arm. I think most people know about the area and how much it hurts to get hit there.

I agree that the win by Alabama shouldn't be diminished. Certainly, the Texas receivers didn't make plays they should have. That said, I think the game would have been much closer and Texas might have had a shot at winning had McCoy been able to play. Injuries are just part of the game.

 

[Bristlingbeardofodin]

Perhaps the Freshman QB for Texas should have had more snaps earlier in the season when Texas was playing weaker teams or clearly blowing teams out? Hard to say. Good game though.

 

[Swampfox]

Let's all face the facts. The real national championship game was played between Alabama and Florida.

 

[jadam318]

By your logic, Ingram isn't tough because he got cramps, which aren't even caused by contact.

Agreed. Ingram could have adjusted his diet, water intake, pregame warm-ups, or something to prevent that. He didn't, so he missed a lot of the game because of it. Props to 'Bama and Ingram's backup for not losing it mentally when the trainers were checking him out on the sidelines.

An injury can happen at any time. You don't need to be hit to twist your ankle or tear an ACL. Some of the most horrendous injuries (involving the neck/spine) have occurred on what appears to be a "routine" play. To justify a player's toughness based on the kind of hit they took is simply wrong.

In the case of McCoy, you have to look at the hit itself. He was hit with a helmet on the sweet spot of the upper arm. I think most people know about the area and how much it hurts to get hit there.

So, am I wrong in thinking that a player can diminish the risk of injury through conditioning? Maybe McCoy would not have been injured if he had spent a little more time in the weight room.

If toughness has nothing to do with injury, then what is "toughness"?

I agree that the win by Alabama shouldn't be diminished. Certainly, the Texas receivers didn't make plays they should have. That said, I think the game would have been much closer and Texas might have had a shot at winning had McCoy been able to play. Injuries are just part of the game.

If you're saying that Texas had no shot at winning without McCoy, then you are diminishing Alabama's win. Furthermore, if injuries are part of the game, and everyone seems to agree that they are, then Texas should have been prepared for something like McCoy's injury. The fact is that they were not. If you want to say that Texas got beat because they weren't prepared for the necessary aspects of the game, I'm fine with that. What I'm uncomfortable with is saying that the absence of one player, when there are 10 others on the field and 11 others on the other side of the ball, caused their loss.

 

[jadam318]

Let's all face the facts. The real national championship game was played between Alabama and Florida.

 

[Mr. Clean]

...So, am I wrong in thinking that a player can diminish the risk of injury through conditioning? Maybe McCoy would not have been injured if he had spent a little more time in the weight room.

If toughness has nothing to do with injury, then what is "toughness"?

...

It is unlikely that anyone questions the benefits of conditioning. But you seem intent on inferring that McCoy was out out of condition and injury prone. Facts point to the contrary, yet you continue.

His injury, as fluky as it was, still was evidently debilating enough that his return to the game would not have proved beneficial to the team. It had nothing to do with McCoy's toughness mental or physical. His want to could not change his can do.