Carvin Johnson Injury
September 4th, 2010 at 7:19 PM ^
But from what I saw, Prison Abs looked more than adequate as his replacement. No gaping mistakes.
EDIT: From Tim
Rodriguez doesn't know Carvin Johnson's status next week. JR Hemingway should play. Terry Talbott still working on a clearinghouse issue.
September 4th, 2010 at 7:20 PM ^
I f*cking love that nickname!!
September 4th, 2010 at 7:20 PM ^
It didn't seem horribly serious, but hopefully RR will address in the presser.
September 4th, 2010 at 7:24 PM ^
he was limping pretty bad, hopefully it ain't too serious
September 4th, 2010 at 8:43 PM ^
Per Rivals. Supposedly he's day to day.
September 4th, 2010 at 8:44 PM ^
...he said he was week to week. (according to another website)
It sound's like he'll be back but probably not for awhile.
September 5th, 2010 at 2:49 PM ^
Perhaps we can find a third website to find him classified as minute to minute.
I have full confidence in the Prison Abs.
September 4th, 2010 at 10:33 PM ^
...at least based on admittedly terrible evidence: a Google search on "sprained MCL week." But it really depends on how badly he sprained it, of course.
Knee injuries are not fun (I had my ACL surgically replaced four weeks ago).
September 4th, 2010 at 11:04 PM ^
6-8 weeks with sprained MCL currently. Now sprains very in severity, but I expect soonest we see him back is after the BG game - hope I am wrong.
September 5th, 2010 at 2:46 AM ^
Did anyone else freak the hell out when he went down? And then again when Molk went down?
September 5th, 2010 at 9:45 AM ^
I was freaking badly. Then Denard and Molk both went back in. I think Carvin's was the only injury that's going to keep someone out against ND.
If Denard or Molk were injured bady, well, I don't even want to speculate [throws salt backwards over shoulder, knocks wood, waves incense, circles three times backwards around statute of Jobu] . . . .
September 5th, 2010 at 2:45 PM ^
was the one play of the day that really bothered me on numerous levels.
I don't know, but can anybody explain why it would not have been good for a defensive timeout there? Our defense was not set. They were confused; I am not sure if Carvin Johnson's injury related to his not being set. Maybe somebody who saw it on tv will know better what happened on the play itself.
But having been there, the whole down looked just awful. We have got to have a defensive QB on the field who can call a timeout in that situation.
On a day when I was relieved and proud of the way our defense played for the most part -- great credit to Greg Robinson -- that play stood out as one where we were not ready, and apparently caught in a sidlines oversight or some on-field confusion.
It seemed to me that that was a very bad, very ugly coaching lapse that must be ultimately attributed to Robinson.
Am I mistaken here? I know what I saw, but I'd like to make sure I know all the facts.
September 5th, 2010 at 3:19 PM ^
No, you're not mistaken. You're completely right. There definitely should have been a timeout taken on that play. Players were switching from left to right and weren't even close to being in place at the time of the snap.