Writer: "Bryce Love should NOT play in the Big Game!"

8,094 Views | 38 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by Big C
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision." The writer also believes that the precedent for sitting out a game like this was set by the Stanford rugby team that forfeited their game against Cal, citing safety concerns and was further cemented when Love's predecessor, Christian McCaffrey, sat out their bowl game only last year, to rest and prepare for the NFL.

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from such people as doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
ducky23
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm waiting to watch the 30 for 30 exposing all the illegal crap furd gives to their players in the locker room.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Bear8
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It sounded by Malcolm Gladwell who has written extensively on the brain injuries incurred by players. He usually writes in The New Yorker. But the more I read it sounded like someone with a large sports background which Gladwell doesn't have and the clues about the publication, other than SI, make it very mysterious. JMO
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There's absolutely no chance that Bryce Love won't play on Saturday, as much as I'd like to see him sit it out.
Oski87
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Excellent article by Big C
gobears725
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I probably said the same thing last year with Mccaffery but there's a lot of reasons why you play, mostly because theres a lot of sacrifice that goes into it from the teammates, coaches, support staff etc. to put help him in this position where hes one of the top players.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
ducky23
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
I'm not a doctor, but how career threatening is it really to play with an ankle injury? I mean, if it was a concussion, then that's a different story.

Furd will just shoot him up with whatever they gave him during halftime of the UW game and he'll be running around like he's 100% against us.

The real question is how the warriors and Steph can get a hold of whatever magical concoction furd has for whenever steph gets another sprained ankle. Because it usually takes Steph weeks to get over his ankle injuries. But there's Love, just running around, getting tackled by 300 pound men, like its nothing.
Bear19
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, all the Furd starters should rest this week. Hahaha.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
Stanford has a medical staff. If they clear Love to play you are suggesting that Shaw sit him anyway? Sounds to me that what you are suggesting is that football no longer be played. All participants risk injury every time they play. Why is it Love that should not play? There are of course protocols for injury and re entry to a game.

His injury which he had vs UW as well did not seem to put him into too much risk. Every time you are on the field injury is a possibility. So when should a player be allowed to play?

Placing blame on David Shaw is a huge reach. If Love believes he is hurt or the Stanford Medical staff feels he is to injured to play then he will not play. He will not play just because Shaw hopes he can.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
Stanford has a medical staff. If they clear Love to play you are suggesting that Shaw sit him anyway? Sounds to me that what you are suggesting is that football no longer be played. All participants risk injury every time they play. Why is it Love that should not play? There are of course protocols for injury and re entry to a game.

His injury which he had vs UW as well did not seem to put him into too much risk. Every time you are on the field injury is a possibility. So when should a player be allowed to play?

Placing blame on David Shaw is a huge reach. If Love believes he is hurt or the Stanford Medical staff feels he is to injured to play then he will not play. He will not play just because Shaw hopes he can.
Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting: Shaw should sit Bryce Love for the Big Game, no matter what reasons the Stanford "medical staff" might be able to concoct that indicate he can or should play. Let's show a little concern for the young man's future, rather than dwelling on one college football game. For me, it's a matter of perspective, of humanity.
jy1988
How long do you want to ignore this user?
well, he will be a marked man, as I'm sure JW is thinking about shutting down the run (which will do the most damage to us in this game) and making Costello et al beat us through the air.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
Stanford has a medical staff. If they clear Love to play you are suggesting that Shaw sit him anyway? Sounds to me that what you are suggesting is that football no longer be played. All participants risk injury every time they play. Why is it Love that should not play? There are of course protocols for injury and re entry to a game.

His injury which he had vs UW as well did not seem to put him into too much risk. Every time you are on the field injury is a possibility. So when should a player be allowed to play?

Placing blame on David Shaw is a huge reach. If Love believes he is hurt or the Stanford Medical staff feels he is to injured to play then he will not play. He will not play just because Shaw hopes he can.
Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting: Shaw should sit Bryce Love for the Big Game, no matter what reasons the Stanford "medical staff" might be able to concoct that indicate he can or should play. Let's show a little concern for the young man's future, rather than dwelling on one college football game. For me, it's a matter of perspective, of humanity.
Then lets just ban football. It is a hard game and people get injured. I cannot believe you are serious. Patrick Laird carried the ball 31 vs OSU, should he sit as well?
gobears725
How long do you want to ignore this user?
well an ankle injury wouldnt really put him at risk if he wants to become a doctor, not unless you mean by having ankle injury then he is more vulnerable to a head injury but i think it would be a stretch to connect that. Ankle makes you think combine/pro day issues that would come up that you want to rest for.
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So you think that it's over, say your love has finally reached the end
Any time you call, night or day, I'll be right there for you
If you need a friend

It's gonna take a little time, time is sure to mend your broken heart
But don't you even worry, pretty darlin', 'cos I know you'll find love again

Love is all around you, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

Love is all around you, yeah yeah, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

It's all around
It's all around

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - so look around, open your eyes
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah yeah yeah

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - oh just look around, look around
Open up your eyes now, honey
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah, I know

Cal8285
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

So you think that it's over, say your love has finally reached the end
Any time you call, night or day, I'll be right there for you
If you need a friend

It's gonna take a little time, time is sure to mend your broken heart
But don't you even worry, pretty darlin', 'cos I know you'll find love again

Love is all around you, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

Love is all around you, yeah yeah, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

It's all around
It's all around

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - so look around, open your eyes
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah yeah yeah

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - oh just look around, look around
Open up your eyes now, honey
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah, I know


Is this your subtle way of telling us you bought a Tesla?
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

IA veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision." The writer also believes that the precedent for sitting out a game like this was set by the Stanford rugby team that forfeited their game against Cal, citing safety concerns and was further cemented when Love's predecessor, Christian McCaffrey, sat out their bowl game only last year, to rest and prepare for the NFL.

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
(Deleted)
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
Stanford has a medical staff. If they clear Love to play you are suggesting that Shaw sit him anyway? Sounds to me that what you are suggesting is that football no longer be played. All participants risk injury every time they play. Why is it Love that should not play? There are of course protocols for injury and re entry to a game.

His injury which he had vs UW as well did not seem to put him into too much risk. Every time you are on the field injury is a possibility. So when should a player be allowed to play?

Placing blame on David Shaw is a huge reach. If Love believes he is hurt or the Stanford Medical staff feels he is to injured to play then he will not play. He will not play just because Shaw hopes he can.
Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting: Shaw should sit Bryce Love for the Big Game, no matter what reasons the Stanford "medical staff" might be able to concoct that indicate he can or should play. Let's show a little concern for the young man's future, rather than dwelling on one college football game. For me, it's a matter of perspective, of humanity.
Then lets just ban football. It is a hard game and people get injured. I cannot believe you are serious. Patrick Laird carried the ball 31 vs OSU, should he sit as well?
Believe it: I do not want to ban football. I like football. And Patrick Laird should definitely play, unless somehow ruled out by our staff (unlikely... he seems at the top of his game). However, Bryce Love should not play.

I'm all for sportsmanship, but c'mon, man. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Aren't SEVEN consecutive freaking Big Game losses enough for you?!?

Bryce Love should not play this Saturday! Why? Because I care!

Go Bears!
Rbears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Everyone knows he's going to play in the end, why speculate?
Cal8285
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
Stanford has a medical staff. If they clear Love to play you are suggesting that Shaw sit him anyway? Sounds to me that what you are suggesting is that football no longer be played. All participants risk injury every time they play. Why is it Love that should not play? There are of course protocols for injury and re entry to a game.

His injury which he had vs UW as well did not seem to put him into too much risk. Every time you are on the field injury is a possibility. So when should a player be allowed to play?

Placing blame on David Shaw is a huge reach. If Love believes he is hurt or the Stanford Medical staff feels he is to injured to play then he will not play. He will not play just because Shaw hopes he can.
Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting: Shaw should sit Bryce Love for the Big Game, no matter what reasons the Stanford "medical staff" might be able to concoct that indicate he can or should play. Let's show a little concern for the young man's future, rather than dwelling on one college football game. For me, it's a matter of perspective, of humanity.
Then lets just ban football. It is a hard game and people get injured. I cannot believe you are serious. Patrick Laird carried the ball 31 vs OSU, should he sit as well?
Believe it: I do not want to ban football. I like football. And Patrick Laird should definitely play, unless somehow ruled out by our staff (unlikely... he seems at the top of his game). However, Bryce Love should not play.

I'm all for sportsmanship, but c'mon, man. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Aren't SEVEN consecutive freaking Big Game losses enough for you?!?

Bryce Love should not play this Saturday! Why? Because I care!

Go Bears!
You are correct, but I believe that the entire starting Stanford OL and DL should also sit, I care about them, too.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Look, I watched every episode of MASH ever made, about half of Marcus Welby M.D., a fair amount of Chicago Hope, some St. Elswhere and at least two episodes of Scrubs. Given the extensive medical insights I gained from this, as well as my ability to consistently remove the funny bone from the patient with the giant red nose in Operation without hitting the electric buzzer, I can conclusively say Love should not play in our game. If that's not enough for you, then I just don't know what to tell you.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Spoken like a true veteran observer of the college football scene.
calgldnbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sebastabear said:

Look, I watched every episode of MASH ever made, about half of Marcus Welby M.D., a fair amount of Chicago Hope, some St. Elswhere and at least two episodes of Scrubs. Given the extensive medical insights I gained from this, as well as my ability to consistently remove the funny bone from the patient with the giant red nose in Operation without hitting the electric buzzer, I can conclusively say Love should not play in our game. If that's not enough for you, then I just don't know what to tell you.
But .... Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night???
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal8285 said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

6956bear said:

Big C said:

A veteran observer of the college football scene states, in no uncertain terms, that Stanford star running back Bryce Love should not play in this Saturday's Big Game against California, citing concerns for, among other things, the player's health and well-being.

The comments are being made in a respected on-line publication that, while usually concentrating on college football, often deals with greater societal issues and is read by -- and features contributions from -- a cross-section of learned, successful, good-looking individuals from all walks of life.

"Bryce Love has a brilliant future in front of him, yet he has been hampered by injuries lately", the writer notes. "He has nothing left to prove this week and should rest his body and begin to prepare for his career at the next level. It's a fifty-year decision."

While acknowledging no formal training in medicine or football, the writer has personally TAKEN medicine hundreds of times and played tackle football on numerous occasions at the sandlot level. The publication, however, features daily writings from doctors, past and present football coaches and at least one physical therapist for college athletics and each written submission often goes through something of a peer-review critiquing process, which could maybe conceivably be compared to that of respected medical journals such as the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, though with a much broader perspective. The writer's comments about Bryce Love, as of this writing, have sailed through without objection.

As mainstream sports journalists have been known to mine this publication for ideas and information, we can no doubt expect Stanford Coach David Shaw to be soon publicly confronted with the following question: "Coach, when deciding if Bryce Love will play this Saturday, how do you balance one football game against a young man's future?" Shaw, increasingly dismissive in the face of any criticism, may finally be forced to come forward and explain his ever-more-erratic decision-making. Meanwhile, his star player mulls over the life that awaits him.
Does this writer have any input from Bryce Love? What does Love want to do? Seems to me he has a lot of control over whether he plays or not. So easy to cast blame on the coach. I doubt Stanford puts any player in harms way deliberately. Football by its very nature is a dangerous game and injuries are a part of it. Many players play this game with some sort of injury or pain.

I do not like Shaw and his arrogance any more than anybody else does, but Love is on scholarship to play football and there is a certain risk inherent to playing. It is always really easy for outsiders to decide what is proper.

Again, has anybody asked Love for his opinion? What does he want to do? And BTW pro scouts do want to know if the player has the ability to play through some pain, as that is an expectation for the pro game. As a Cal fan I would be happy if Love sits out the Big Game. Not rooting for an injury, just know that if he does not play it improves the Bears chances for winning.

Pretty sure that Love wanted to play vs UW. And that he will want to play vs the Bears. Shaw of course hopes he can play, but I doubt seriously he would "force" a player onto the field against that players wishes.
Players often want to go back in, even when they shouldn't. That's why we have concussion protocols and the like. Love supposedly wants to become a doctor after his football career is over. All the more reason to sit this one out, thus lessening the accumulation of hits that any football player takes, especially a running back.

David Shaw needs to step up and do the right thing in this case.
Stanford has a medical staff. If they clear Love to play you are suggesting that Shaw sit him anyway? Sounds to me that what you are suggesting is that football no longer be played. All participants risk injury every time they play. Why is it Love that should not play? There are of course protocols for injury and re entry to a game.

His injury which he had vs UW as well did not seem to put him into too much risk. Every time you are on the field injury is a possibility. So when should a player be allowed to play?

Placing blame on David Shaw is a huge reach. If Love believes he is hurt or the Stanford Medical staff feels he is to injured to play then he will not play. He will not play just because Shaw hopes he can.
Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting: Shaw should sit Bryce Love for the Big Game, no matter what reasons the Stanford "medical staff" might be able to concoct that indicate he can or should play. Let's show a little concern for the young man's future, rather than dwelling on one college football game. For me, it's a matter of perspective, of humanity.
Then lets just ban football. It is a hard game and people get injured. I cannot believe you are serious. Patrick Laird carried the ball 31 vs OSU, should he sit as well?
Believe it: I do not want to ban football. I like football. And Patrick Laird should definitely play, unless somehow ruled out by our staff (unlikely... he seems at the top of his game). However, Bryce Love should not play.

I'm all for sportsmanship, but c'mon, man. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Aren't SEVEN consecutive freaking Big Game losses enough for you?!?

Bryce Love should not play this Saturday! Why? Because I care!

Go Bears!
You are correct, but I believe that the entire starting Stanford OL and DL should also sit, I care about them, too.
That's what I'm talkin' 'bout!

We've got caring, yes we do! We've got caring, how 'bout YOU, David Shaw?
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal8285 said:

BearsWiin said:

So you think that it's over, say your love has finally reached the end
Any time you call, night or day, I'll be right there for you
If you need a friend

It's gonna take a little time, time is sure to mend your broken heart
But don't you even worry, pretty darlin', 'cos I know you'll find love again

Love is all around you, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

Love is all around you, yeah yeah, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

It's all around
It's all around

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - so look around, open your eyes
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah yeah yeah

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - oh just look around, look around
Open up your eyes now, honey
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah, I know


Is this your subtle way of telling us you bought a Tesla?
No, I don't make enough money as a pedantic hausfrau to spend 85k$ on an experiment
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He will play and ge will kick our ass. I inagine by half time
Go Bears!
CaliforniaEternal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wouldn't furd prefer to rest Love so he can be ready for their primary rivalry game vs Notre Dame the following week?
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

He will play and ge will kick our ass. I inagine by half time
That's the spirit. Maybe you can turn this into a cheer for our sideline at the game.
72CalBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No doubt he plays. What a waste of typing.
Cal8285
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

Cal8285 said:

BearsWiin said:

So you think that it's over, say your love has finally reached the end
Any time you call, night or day, I'll be right there for you
If you need a friend

It's gonna take a little time, time is sure to mend your broken heart
But don't you even worry, pretty darlin', 'cos I know you'll find love again

Love is all around you, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

Love is all around you, yeah yeah, love is knockin' outside your door
Waitin' for you is this love made just for two
Keep an open heart and you'll find love again, I know

It's all around
It's all around

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - so look around, open your eyes
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah yeah yeah

Love will find a way - darlin', love is gonna find a way
Find its way back to you
Love will find a way - oh just look around, look around
Open up your eyes now, honey
Love is gonna find a way - love is gonna, love is gonna
Love is gonna, love is gonna find a way, yeah
Love will find a way - love is gonna find a way back to you, yeah, I know


Is this your subtle way of telling us you bought a Tesla?
No, I don't make enough money as a pedantic hausfrau to spend 85k$ on an experiment
Well, it could have been a Model 3.

But since that wasn't it, was it your subtle way of telling us you are getting restless with your life as a pedantic hausfrau and you are going to be in a production of the opera, "Tesla -- Lightning in his Hand"??
Yogi58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sebastabear said:

oskidunker said:

He will play and ge will kick our ass. I inagine by half time
That's the spirit. Maybe you can turn this into a cheer for our sideline at the game.
Boom bam bee
Kick us in our knee
Boom bam bass
Kick us in our other knee
Calcoholic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OP just went over a lot of people's heads
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's some graduate level trolling. I laughed.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In all seriousness, I firmly believe that David Shaw should sit Bryce Love for the Big Game. Without Love we got a 50/50 chance, maybe even a tad better. With Love, we have our work cut out for us, to say the least.

Ideally, we would beat them at full strength, but I'll take any advantage we can get, short of breaking rules or wishing a serious injury on any player.

Go Bears! Take back The Axe!!!
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.