Playing physician as a coach is a near impossible feat, especially when you have
to rely upon your atheletes own statements as to his/her overall health and
well-being. Of course its the coach's job to protect his/her athletes, but
at the same time they are limited to the facts as they are presented. I do not
know all the facts presented to Shanahan or Bronco, so my statements beyond that
point are speculative at best.GO Utes!!
And all became losers for the decisions in the end!
Uteology hit the nail on the head - Shanahan kept playing RGIII because he was
winning. Nelson wasn't winning - in fact, it was due to his play that we
lost more than a few games.
Trust our little troll friends from the hill for not being able to understand
the difference between comparing SITUATIONS versus comparing TALENT.In both SITUATIONS, it was obvious that the QB was injured, and in both
situations, its the responsibility of the coaches to assess whether or not
it's prudent to continuing playing an injured player.btw,
there's a big difference between playing a player who's injured - torn
ligaments, broken/cracked bone, etc, versus playing a player who's hurt. At
this point in the season, EVERY player is hurt - bumps, bruises, sprains, etc.,
The only thing that those two have in common is the "quarterback" label.
All Shanahan and Bronco have in common is the "head coach" label. The
2 that currently work for the Redskins don't deserve the slander that you
have given them in this article. They are light years beyond anything Nelson or
Bronco could even put up.
You have to hand it to the DNews writer to create an article headline about
RGIII that upsets Ute "fans". LOL
Apples and oranges for the most part in this comparison.
Possibly the worst comparison ever made in the game of football.
EliotSantaquin, UTNot one word is used to compare Riley Nelson
to RGIII. Not one. What is being compared is the loyalty of Mike Shanahan to his
quarterback and the loyalty of Bronco Mendenhall to his.----------Yes but the comparison is silly. Why?Shanahan kept playing RG3 because it gave Washington the best chance to
win.Menhenhall kept playing Riley because of his sideline
"leadership" skills. Maybe he'll hire him as an OC in 2 years.
To reiterate Eliot's comment - the comparison was in the situation, not the
personnel. The situation was leaving an injured player in the game to the
detriment of the team. The situation is the coach's loyalty to the player
that may have jeopardized the future results of the team. Nobody seriously
believes that you could compare RGIII and Riley as players, least of all the
writer of this article.
Not one word is used to compare Riley Nelson to RGIII. Not one. What is being
compared is the loyalty of Mike Shanahan to his quarterback and the loyalty of
Bronco Mendenhall to his. Furthermore, in making this very valid comparison the
writer never once crafted a paragraph containing the names of both quarterbacks.
So rest easy children, and stow your silliness for another day.
RG3 and Riley Nelson don't belong in the same paragraph.
Are you seriously comparing RG 3 to Riley? If ANYTHING, you should be comparing
Riley to RG 3. And don't you even dare...
laughable to compare RG3 and Nelson.
'cept RG3 has talent.
this was sickening. RG3 should have been taken out at half time. He re injured
his knee in the 2nd qtr and wasn't able to run or throw from that point on.
I fear the beating he took in the 4th qtr might have torn his ACL or worse which
could mean a complete knee reconstruction. This was insane to leave this kid out
there taking the beating he was taking on one leg. The NFL has turned into a
blood sport and resembles more the old Roman Gladiators than anything else. What
a shame to waste RG3 like this.