Grant Newsome news and its good
October 6th, 2016 at 10:19 AM ^
October 6th, 2016 at 10:19 AM ^
Glad to hear that the kid will live to fight another day. His presence on the line in the next 2 years will be big.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:20 AM ^
Webb mentioned that it's still a possiblility he could be back by spring ball.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:21 AM ^
The article I read said the same thing also, obviously they are going to hold him out until fall camp even if he is a full go by spring
October 6th, 2016 at 10:49 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2016 at 11:50 AM ^
Yes. more like a direct qoute from an isndier at the Wolverine website ethe source is the very reliable Chris Balas
October 6th, 2016 at 10:49 AM ^
Hey man, this article sounds pretty great. Can you add to the post?
October 6th, 2016 at 11:51 AM ^
Pay site,so can I do that here?
October 6th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
You can (and should) provide a link to the article, but copy-pasting the content is frowned upon.
October 6th, 2016 at 11:08 AM ^
why would they hold a player out who is ready?
and why is it obvious that they would?
October 6th, 2016 at 1:10 PM ^
"Physically able to play" and "fully recovered" are different things. If he's functional but not 100%, no reason to force the issue in spring ball and risk reinjury, developing bad technique/habits to accomodate injury, or delaying full recovery for the fall.
October 6th, 2016 at 1:29 PM ^
I assume he meant they'd hold him out until he was 100% full go as a precaution but idk.
October 6th, 2016 at 2:40 PM ^
What does it mean to "be back by spring ball" but held out until fall? If you're not practicing you're not really back.
October 6th, 2016 at 3:17 PM ^
October 6th, 2016 at 10:20 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2016 at 10:21 AM ^
Good for him; glad that this worked out well. Sounds like he very much deserves a decent turn of events on this front.
October 6th, 2016 at 2:27 PM ^
Agreed, it is really good news. So much so it left me wondering why anyone who is a UM fan could downvote this thread.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:22 AM ^
Great news, thanks for posting it.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^
Did your source say exactly what the injury was? Still curious.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:25 AM ^
Thank goodness!
October 6th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^
where is this article?
October 6th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^
Where are you reading this? Is there a link?
October 6th, 2016 at 10:37 AM ^
think the OP was reading directly from Newsome's medical records.
(Actually I think he just read this little tid bit from a thread a little further down and decided to start a full thread about it).
October 6th, 2016 at 11:25 AM ^
is just extraordinarily good news and we can only hope that Grant heals well and can make it back by next fall, no matter what the recovery timetable turns out to be.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:23 AM ^
I thought he was REALLY progressing.
Does anyone know what the injury was? I assumed it was ACL until I heard it could be career ending.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:24 AM ^
Also...what's the consensus? Legal or dirty play? Or both?
October 6th, 2016 at 10:29 AM ^
Both. Legal, but don't aim at the knees of a 6'7 315 lb offensive tackle.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:33 AM ^
C'mon. If it's legal, it's not dirty. Injuries happen in football. There doesn't always have to be an enemy.
October 6th, 2016 at 11:08 AM ^
I think the point that Kalis is probably making is that cut-blocking is legal but launching yourself directly at the knee perhaps should not be. Watching that again, I can't imagine any human knee that could withstand serious injury at that angle of impact. Anything guaranteed to injure should be illegal (like a chop block).
October 6th, 2016 at 11:55 AM ^
I don't disagree. But right now, it's legal. I don't see how you can call any football player "dirty" by executing a perfectly legal football play. If we, as a collective, had decided it was dirty, or dangerous, or whatever, it would not be legal. Maybe that will change. But as of now, I can't assign any blame to the Wisconsin player.
If Harbaugh found a loophole in the rules that allowed him to have 12 players on the field, would you call that dirty? Of course not. Maybe the rule is dumb and should be changed, but he's going to look for every advantage possible within the rules, as any competitor would.
October 6th, 2016 at 12:56 PM ^
You were probably addressing others, but I didn't say it was dirty. I said it should be illegal because it is highly likely to injure.
October 6th, 2016 at 1:23 PM ^
My point was originally responding to Elmer. It sounds like you and I fully agree.
October 6th, 2016 at 1:48 PM ^
"Legal, therefore okay" isn't a very compelling argument.
Both from like a "let's debate this" standpoint, because plenty of terrible things (slavery) were legal at the time, and from a common decency standpoint: a player just suffered a year-long injury because a full-grown man violently hurled himself at his knees with no other purpose than to take him out of the play.
I think the distinction you're missing is between "part of the game, but violent" (e.g., big shoulder-pad to chest hits) and "violent, but technically permissible" (e.g., targeting a dude's knees).
October 6th, 2016 at 2:59 PM ^
On a football field, yes, I think "legal" and "okay" are pretty much synonymous. You really expect players to impose additional rules on themselves -- placing themselves at a competitive disadvantage -- just to decrease the chance that opposing players get hurt?
Again, I'm not saying the rule is good. I'm saying I don't expect players to make that decision. Their job is to play within the rules, and they're not somehow dirty players for not restricting themselves beyond the rules.
October 6th, 2016 at 11:27 AM ^
Listen to the Chris Howard section on WTKA yesterday for a former Michigan RBs thoughts.
http://www.wtka.com/2012/09/06/podcasts/
October 6th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
does they play - a giant tackle rumbling round the edge trying to crush anyone in his path, place the OL at a great risk?
is this a disincentive to run these types of plays?
October 6th, 2016 at 10:30 AM ^
Read an article in the Daily the other day which had a quote from Kalis - basically saying he thought it was legal (but cheap). The rationale it seems was that guys are taught to go for the ankles to take the O-lines legs out, whereas Grant was hit higher.
October 6th, 2016 at 11:05 AM ^
You watch where he impacts Newsome—he is two feet off the ground and directly on the knee. Cut blocking a player, I would guess, is going lower than that (although it's tough to be precise at speed). That looks like intent to injure, but probably is the result of a high-speed train wreck.
October 6th, 2016 at 11:13 AM ^
if you go low they jump over your block
good for OL bad for the defense.
October 6th, 2016 at 1:51 PM ^
that goign for the knees means less chance the OL steps over you and greater chance you knock him out of the game. Same could be said for going for a QBs head. Restrict his path of vision and possibly knock him out. The point I think a lot of people are making is that plays with such high probably of injury should be outlawed for the good of the game.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:35 AM ^
It was legal and all DB's are taught to do it including ours. Just like we have seen all our OL dive at the legs of dlinemen and linebackers to cut them too. If you are a DB your choices are to get crushed, not attempt to make a play, or take out the OL. Football is a somewhat violent sport, sure the db hit him a little higher than is probably taught or ideal but it wasn't a dirty play and mostly bad luck he got hit right as his leg was getting planted so there was no give.
October 6th, 2016 at 11:38 AM ^
The announcers said corners are taught to hit linemen in their lower legs (not knee) to take them out.
I would think if this is the case coaches would teach linemen to go low on their blocks for smaller defenders.
What do coaches tell them to do in these scenarios?
October 6th, 2016 at 12:57 PM ^
I dont see the point of "taking out" the pulling OL. Isn't that just blocking yourself? Why not, you know, try to avoid the block and tackle the ball carrier or at least squeeze the space.
October 6th, 2016 at 1:54 PM ^
play in which he blows through multiple guys to open up the long run? When it's a 300lb OL (or 280 lb TE) against a 200lb DB, the defenses best bet is cancel those guys out and let the next level tacklers get the ball carrier. Otherwise, the likely scenario is the OL runs through the DB and is able to also block the next level to spring a longer run.
October 6th, 2016 at 10:24 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2016 at 10:37 AM ^
Then it's unfortunate that Newsome is a human, not a bee
October 6th, 2016 at 10:59 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2016 at 11:04 AM ^
fight one bee the size of a horse, or 100 horses the size of bees?
October 6th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2016 at 11:06 AM ^
Big ass bees you say?
