Story Poster
Photo by © Kelley L Cox USA Today
Cal Football

Wilcox Press Conference: Injury update and some thoughts

October 5, 2021
5,516

Head coach Justin Wilcox had a Zoom press conference on Tuesday, he offered an update on injuries and discussed some areas where they Bears desperately need to improve.

The most distressing news is that nose guard Stanley McKenzie, who was injured ten days ago against Washington and did not play in the loss to Washington State on Saturday, would not be back this season. 

He also said that linebacker Kuony Deng, who has missed three games, will be out, “for the foreseeable future.” Deng, the senior who is one of Bears' key defenders, was hurt against TCU on Sept, 11.

The other injury updates were more encouraging. 

Running back DeCarlos Brooks will be week to week. Wide receiver Nikko Regmigio, who had to leave the WSU game, “is feeling better. He’s day to day.”

Offensive tackle Will Craig, “got nicked up earlier in the game. Tried to continue to go and couldn’t quite do that. It will ge a day-by-day assessment for Will. He was out there getting some exercise yesterday.”

Linebacker Evan Tattersall was injured last week, but was given clearance to play. However he never saw the field.

The pass rush against Washington State was virtually non-existant. WSU had 42 pass attempts, but the Bears managed but one sack.

Wilcox said the Bears are doing pretty much all they can. He said better effort is needed from both players and coaches.

“We’ll put the guys that we think can best help us win on the field we’re not hiding anybody, or holding anybody back from the personnel,” Wilcox said. “The pass rush, there are times when we are going to bring three rushers, four rushers, five rushers, even six rushers. And we did that during the game at different moments. We need to be better at pass rush. The other teams have schemes, too. They have protections and there is only so many times when you are going to get free runners with pressure. Most times when you affect the quarterback you are winning the one-on-one in some way, shape or form. We need to do a better job in some of those one-on-one situations in affecting the quarterback. Getting him off this spot, sacking him, getting him on the ground. We didn’t do a good enough job of that.

“I don’t know that we’ve done a great job.. There have been spurts during the year when we’ve done better than others. But as a whole that’s an area we should certainly improve upon. Again, it’s the coaches providing instruction and the players being accountable to doing that on Saturday.”

And the reverse is true. Cal has had trouble protecting Chase Garbers, and that was especially true against Washington State.

“I felt like we took a step backwards,” Wilcox said of the offensive line. “We didn’t protect real well. We didn’t block the run game real well. Across the board we didn’t block real well.”

For the third time this year, there was an issue with the snap on a placement try. This was a low snap on a PAT that holder Jamieson Sheahan could not handle. 

When asked if there might be personnel changes, Wilcox took a long time to give a non-answer.

“Specialists have a unique job in football. It is a repetitive skill different than some of the position players because it is one thing they are asked to do over and over again,” he said. “ We’ve had some guys who have been really good at it, and there are times in people’s careers when they are just a little bit off. And we’ve got to help them in every way possible. Whether it’s our meetings, or the drill work, or putting them at ease so they can trust their technique, their training and their ability to get that job done again.

“We are going to work with all the specialists, based on what they need as individuals. It is a different skill than some of the position players because it is over and over again. Sometimes you get a little bit off. You can try too hard.”

 

 

Discussion from...

Wilcox Press Conference: Injury update and some thoughts

5,072 Views | 50 Replies | Last: 3 days ago by mbBear
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's a whole lot of nothing, other than the obvious. Wilcox has no answers for fixing the disaster that is the Cal football team. And yet, Knowlton thinks he's doing a great job!
fat_slice
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He has no clue what's going on. I am beginning to think his secrecy around injuries is more a function of him and his staff actually not knowing about what the injuries are either.

#HotMess
remb8888
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't even care anymore what he has to say.

Get rid of him. 5 years in and he's totally clueless.

Unless he's going to tell us that he decided to cash in on his medical benefits and get elective foot surgery during football season in case he's fired because he saw the writing on the wall.
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Best thing for Slater Zellers is to take a week off and get away from football. Prior to this year 99% of Cal fans would not have recognized the name because he was flawless for the prior two seasons. He is good but is in a bad funk, kinda like a golfer that has lost his swing and has no idea where his drive will go on the 1st tee.
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsineMaximus said:

Best thing for Slater Zellers is to take a week off and get away from football. Prior to this year 99% of Cal fans would not have recognized the name because he was flawless for the prior two seasons. He is good but is in a bad funk, kinda like a golfer that has lost his swing and has no idea where his drive will go on the 1st tee.

The holder is also an enormous problem. For the love of god use a backup QB instead of the punter.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sounds like a guy who's done. No spark at all.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sounds like Deng and McKenzie are looking to redshirt this year.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I appreciate Wilcox's attempt at honesty. Obviously the situation is pretty ugly and he's not denying that.
But I find his comments about the ST roll absolutely maddening. Sheahan has never been good at holding and the problems started with him. Unless his parents are about to make a major donation to the football program, I find his loyalty to his punter pretty insane.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KenBurnski said:

UrsineMaximus said:

Best thing for Slater Zellers is to take a week off and get away from football. Prior to this year 99% of Cal fans would not have recognized the name because he was flawless for the prior two seasons. He is good but is in a bad funk, kinda like a golfer that has lost his swing and has no idea where his drive will go on the 1st tee.

The holder is also an enormous problem. For the love of god use a backup QB instead of the punter.


Or a walk-on. Just someone who can practice, practice, practice with the long snapper on doing one thing and being excellent at it.
SanseiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
heartofthebear said:

I appreciate Wilcox's attempt at honesty. Obviously the situation is pretty ugly and he's not denying that.
But I find his comments about the ST roll absolutely maddening. Sheahan has never been good at holding and the problems started with him. Unless his parents are about to make a major donation to the football program, I find his loyalty to his punter pretty insane.
Also, Sheahan is more valuable to the team as the punter, and he could easily get hurt when he mishandles the snap or it's a bad snap.
LunchTime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He is right: players need to win their one v ones. They are not.

But that is a setup for the excuses the rest of the season: Wilcox players, aside from maybe the first string, after 5 years in his system, cant compete with the one guy on the other side of the ball. That wont change with the few weeks we have left.

He just needs another 5 years of recruiting to plug the hole that a few injuries created. THEN we will be back to the 5-7 wins we deserve.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LunchTime said:

He is right: players need to win their one v ones. They are not.

But that is a setup for the excuses the rest of the season: Wilcox players, aside from maybe the first string, after 5 years in his system, cant compete with the one guy on the other side of the ball. That wont change with the few weeks we have left.

He just needs another 5 years of recruiting to plug the hole that a few injuries created. THEN we will be back to the 5-7 wins we deserve.
Super seniors must be given a chance to super.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There are many problems on offense. The biggest is the one some of us identified in the first game: Pass protection is really poor. It looked even worse in the Wazzu game, with Garbers getting hit a few times right after he secured the snap. Either the playcalling is going to have to emphasize getting the ball out very very quickly for the rest of the season, or Garbers is going to absorb a truckload of hard hits. The run game is slightly better, but there's no RB quick enough to turn the corner before being hit consistently on a pitch out or any other off tackle run, and no one who can get big gains between the tackles, either. Seems like most of the Bears' best runs are when Garbers takes off after the play breaks down because four or five defenders are already in the backfield.

Did the staff have a much too optimistic assessment, in the offseason, of how good the offensive players are? So after five games, reality has set in, and the staff now realizes they have to adjust to a talent level that is lower than what they mistakenly thought they had?
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

There are many problems on offense. The biggest is the one some of us identified in the first game: Pass protection is really poor. It looked even worse in the Wazzu game, with Garbers getting hit a few times right after he secured the snap. Either the playcalling is going to have to emphasize getting the ball out very very quickly for the rest of the season, or Garbers is going to absorb a truckload of hard hits. The run game is slightly better, but there's no RB quick enough to turn the corner before being hit consistently on a pitch out or any other off tackle run, and no one who can get big gains between the tackles, either. Seems like most of the Bears' best runs are when Garbers takes off after the play breaks down because four or five defenders are already in the backfield.

Did the staff have a much too optimistic assessment, in the offseason, of how good the offensive players are? So after five games, reality has set in, and the staff now realizes they have to adjust to a talent level that is lower than what they mistakenly thought they had?
The glaring issue is RT. Daltoso has no business out there - he lacks the quickness and strength to handle fast DEs. What is more glaring is that the staff has had at least two years to recruit and develop a capable RT. They saw this coming.

As to RBs, the speed issue has been another glaring issue for just as long. The 3-deep doesn't have it on this score. We were alerted to the arrival of Street and Stredick (a surprise, at least to us, late entry into his class). We saw Stredick for one series a few games ago and Street for only one carry in the WSU game. They both looked faster than any of the others.

Bear Bryant, I think it was, is quoted as saying, "It's not the ones you don't get, its the ones you get who can't play." Hate to say it, but...
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rushinbear said:

BearSD said:

There are many problems on offense. The biggest is the one some of us identified in the first game: Pass protection is really poor. It looked even worse in the Wazzu game, with Garbers getting hit a few times right after he secured the snap. Either the playcalling is going to have to emphasize getting the ball out very very quickly for the rest of the season, or Garbers is going to absorb a truckload of hard hits. The run game is slightly better, but there's no RB quick enough to turn the corner before being hit consistently on a pitch out or any other off tackle run, and no one who can get big gains between the tackles, either. Seems like most of the Bears' best runs are when Garbers takes off after the play breaks down because four or five defenders are already in the backfield.

Did the staff have a much too optimistic assessment, in the offseason, of how good the offensive players are? So after five games, reality has set in, and the staff now realizes they have to adjust to a talent level that is lower than what they mistakenly thought they had?
The glaring issue is RT. Daltoso has no business out there - he lacks the quickness and strength to handle fast DEs. What is more glaring is that the staff has had at least two years to recruit and develop a capable RT. They saw this coming.

As to RBs, the speed issue has been another glaring issue for just as long. The 3-deep doesn't have it on this score. We were alerted to the arrival of Street and Stredick (a surprise, at least to us, late entry into his class). We saw Stredick for one series a few games ago and Street for only one carry in the WSU game. They both looked faster than any of the others.

Bear Bryant, I think it was, is quoted as saying, "It's not the ones you don't get, its the ones you get who can't play." Hate to say it, but...
Dang Rushin, you've been reading my posts. The OT issue and team speed, especially at RB are significant problems (Daltoso is a guard masquerading as an OT with predictable results). Yep, it always comes back to recruiting…..

By the way, Street had eight carries v. WSU. And I agree, he did look a step quicker than his counterparts in the backfield who have seen action this year. That takes us to play calling - Cal should stop running sweeps, they do not have the speed necessary to get around the corner. Thus they are bottled up at the LOS. Who is calling the plays? He should be sent back to play calling school for some remedial lessons. Oh yeah, that's right - the vagabond OC, a guy who has been unable to hold a steady job.

Lastly, it was Bill McCartney at Colorado not Bear Bryant who came up with that great line…..
3146gabby
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Any thoughts on what happened since the Ilinois game, when the entire team looked quite good.

Yes some losses - Weaver et al - and change in coaches. But that cannot explain fully the free fall.

fat_slice
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The fact that it takes 5 games to find a faster running back is outright weird. They must be horrible at talent assessment, let alone player development.

Given that Ragle is still not fired, I think we are resigned to no major changes this season. I would love to see a turnaround but
I have no confidence in this coach's ability to do anything different (definition of crazy) to improve outcomes.

How you can not identify weaknesses in the off-season is beyond me.
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RB is the least of our problems. I also think WRs are solid

OL, TE and QB all have deficiencies, with OL being the biggest problem (along with coaching)
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

Rushinbear said:

BearSD said:

There are many problems on offense. The biggest is the one some of us identified in the first game: Pass protection is really poor. It looked even worse in the Wazzu game, with Garbers getting hit a few times right after he secured the snap. Either the playcalling is going to have to emphasize getting the ball out very very quickly for the rest of the season, or Garbers is going to absorb a truckload of hard hits. The run game is slightly better, but there's no RB quick enough to turn the corner before being hit consistently on a pitch out or any other off tackle run, and no one who can get big gains between the tackles, either. Seems like most of the Bears' best runs are when Garbers takes off after the play breaks down because four or five defenders are already in the backfield.

Did the staff have a much too optimistic assessment, in the offseason, of how good the offensive players are? So after five games, reality has set in, and the staff now realizes they have to adjust to a talent level that is lower than what they mistakenly thought they had?
The glaring issue is RT. Daltoso has no business out there - he lacks the quickness and strength to handle fast DEs. What is more glaring is that the staff has had at least two years to recruit and develop a capable RT. They saw this coming.

As to RBs, the speed issue has been another glaring issue for just as long. The 3-deep doesn't have it on this score. We were alerted to the arrival of Street and Stredick (a surprise, at least to us, late entry into his class). We saw Stredick for one series a few games ago and Street for only one carry in the WSU game. They both looked faster than any of the others.

Bear Bryant, I think it was, is quoted as saying, "It's not the ones you don't get, its the ones you get who can't play." Hate to say it, but...
Dang Rushin, you've been reading my posts. The OT issue and team speed, especially at RB are significant problems (Daltoso is a guard masquerading as an OT with predictable results). Yep, it always comes back to recruiting…..

By the way, Street had eight carries v. WSU. And I agree, he did look a step quicker than his counterparts in the backfield who have seen action this year. That takes us to play calling - Cal should stop running sweeps, they do not have the speed necessary to get around the corner. Thus they are bottled up at the LOS. Who is calling the plays? He should be sent back to play calling school for some remedial lessons. Oh yeah, that's right - the vagabond OC, a guy who has been unable to hold a steady job.

Lastly, it was Bill McCartney at Colorado not Bear Bryant who came up with that great line…..

Regarding the play calling, I thought it was pretty good in our middle three games. Against Nevada and WSU, a lot less so. Just a feeling on my part, but last Saturday, I felt like I always knew what we were going to run, prior to the snap. The WSU defense apparently shared that feeling. One of the few exceptions was two successful Street carries, followed by a fake to him and an intentional Garbers run.

Chris Street last Saturday got the carries that DeCarlos Brooks had been getting (before injury), when they wanted a change of pace with a little more zip. As others have stated, the RB position is far from our biggest weakness although, sure, it'd be nice to have someone who can take it to the house.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
3146gabby said:

Any thoughts on what happened since the Ilinois game, when the entire team looked quite good.

Yes some losses - Weaver et al - and change in coaches. But that cannot explain fully the free fall.


Actually those things, especially the coaching, explains a lot.
Stolibear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We should never have had great expectations after beating Illinois. They ended the year 6-7. they lost the last game of their regular season to a mediocre Northwestern team. They played in the weak half of the Big 1G. Go back and take a look at the 2019 season. Unimpressive wins against Davis and North Texas. Lost at home to OSU. Shellacked by USC and Utah. Beat Washington on the freak delayed game. Basing high expectations on that season were probably unwarranted.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Stolibear said:

We should never have had great expectations after beating Illinois. They ended the year 6-7. they lost the last game of their regular season to a mediocre Northwestern team. They played in the weak half of the Big 1G. Go back and take a look at the 2019 season. Unimpressive wins against Davis and North Texas. Lost at home to OSU. Shellacked by USC and Utah. Beat Washington on the freak delayed game. Basing high expectations on that season were probably unwarranted.


Exactly. We beat FCS teams and teams with losing records. The fact that those were mostly the games that Garbers played in lead some to say "we are undefeated when Garbers is healthy." Imagining we would be undefeated if he played in every game (and thus "next year." Correlation is not causation, QBs get too much credit/blame. It is the most important position but it is not the only position. We saw Modster light us up when he was at UCLA. He is a better passer than Garbers. Garbers is the better runner, which is a critical skill in an offense that can't get receivers open regularly. Musgrave needs to stop trying to make Garbers a pocket passer and give him the green light, especially on third down.

The defensive stars of 2019 have graduated. TDR and GA are not here to coach up the new guys.
prospeCt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
~ 'a word to the wise is enough', couldn't have happened to a nicer guy, local gentleman baller punter-PK holder horror story ( could reel off 83 yrd punts, at times )

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/sports/2003/08/14/punters-famous-feat-was-a-knee-to-nose/dd2a4312-4d05-4158-9b00-a90f3663b181/

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/734757-20-most-gruesome-injuries-in-nfl-history

"Aaron Schatz of statistics site Football Outsiders noted a punt Barker kicked "in 1999 that was just ridiculous, far past any baseline I had ever created. In Week 5, on the road against the Jets, [Barker] punted the ball from the Jaguars' own 5-yard line to the Jets' 12-yard line, an 83-yard punt"


Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

Rushinbear said:

BearSD said:

There are many problems on offense. The biggest is the one some of us identified in the first game: Pass protection is really poor. It looked even worse in the Wazzu game, with Garbers getting hit a few times right after he secured the snap. Either the playcalling is going to have to emphasize getting the ball out very very quickly for the rest of the season, or Garbers is going to absorb a truckload of hard hits. The run game is slightly better, but there's no RB quick enough to turn the corner before being hit consistently on a pitch out or any other off tackle run, and no one who can get big gains between the tackles, either. Seems like most of the Bears' best runs are when Garbers takes off after the play breaks down because four or five defenders are already in the backfield.

Did the staff have a much too optimistic assessment, in the offseason, of how good the offensive players are? So after five games, reality has set in, and the staff now realizes they have to adjust to a talent level that is lower than what they mistakenly thought they had?
The glaring issue is RT. Daltoso has no business out there - he lacks the quickness and strength to handle fast DEs. What is more glaring is that the staff has had at least two years to recruit and develop a capable RT. They saw this coming.

As to RBs, the speed issue has been another glaring issue for just as long. The 3-deep doesn't have it on this score. We were alerted to the arrival of Street and Stredick (a surprise, at least to us, late entry into his class). We saw Stredick for one series a few games ago and Street for only one carry in the WSU game. They both looked faster than any of the others.

Bear Bryant, I think it was, is quoted as saying, "It's not the ones you don't get, its the ones you get who can't play." Hate to say it, but...
Dang Rushin, you've been reading my posts. The OT issue and team speed, especially at RB are significant problems (Daltoso is a guard masquerading as an OT with predictable results). Yep, it always comes back to recruiting…..

By the way, Street had eight carries v. WSU. And I agree, he did look a step quicker than his counterparts in the backfield who have seen action this year. That takes us to play calling - Cal should stop running sweeps, they do not have the speed necessary to get around the corner. Thus they are bottled up at the LOS. Who is calling the plays? He should be sent back to play calling school for some remedial lessons. Oh yeah, that's right - the vagabond OC, a guy who has been unable to hold a steady job.

Lastly, it was Bill McCartney at Colorado not Bear Bryant who came up with that great line…..
If it has to be Daltoso, wouldn't you put a TE on the wing out there to cover the outside rush? You'd think we' d have a series of plays off of that.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rushinbear said:

71Bear said:

Rushinbear said:

BearSD said:

There are many problems on offense. The biggest is the one some of us identified in the first game: Pass protection is really poor. It looked even worse in the Wazzu game, with Garbers getting hit a few times right after he secured the snap. Either the playcalling is going to have to emphasize getting the ball out very very quickly for the rest of the season, or Garbers is going to absorb a truckload of hard hits. The run game is slightly better, but there's no RB quick enough to turn the corner before being hit consistently on a pitch out or any other off tackle run, and no one who can get big gains between the tackles, either. Seems like most of the Bears' best runs are when Garbers takes off after the play breaks down because four or five defenders are already in the backfield.

Did the staff have a much too optimistic assessment, in the offseason, of how good the offensive players are? So after five games, reality has set in, and the staff now realizes they have to adjust to a talent level that is lower than what they mistakenly thought they had?
The glaring issue is RT. Daltoso has no business out there - he lacks the quickness and strength to handle fast DEs. What is more glaring is that the staff has had at least two years to recruit and develop a capable RT. They saw this coming.

As to RBs, the speed issue has been another glaring issue for just as long. The 3-deep doesn't have it on this score. We were alerted to the arrival of Street and Stredick (a surprise, at least to us, late entry into his class). We saw Stredick for one series a few games ago and Street for only one carry in the WSU game. They both looked faster than any of the others.

Bear Bryant, I think it was, is quoted as saying, "It's not the ones you don't get, its the ones you get who can't play." Hate to say it, but...
Dang Rushin, you've been reading my posts. The OT issue and team speed, especially at RB are significant problems (Daltoso is a guard masquerading as an OT with predictable results). Yep, it always comes back to recruiting…..

By the way, Street had eight carries v. WSU. And I agree, he did look a step quicker than his counterparts in the backfield who have seen action this year. That takes us to play calling - Cal should stop running sweeps, they do not have the speed necessary to get around the corner. Thus they are bottled up at the LOS. Who is calling the plays? He should be sent back to play calling school for some remedial lessons. Oh yeah, that's right - the vagabond OC, a guy who has been unable to hold a steady job.

Lastly, it was Bill McCartney at Colorado not Bear Bryant who came up with that great line…..
If it has to be Daltoso, wouldn't you put a TE on the wing out there to cover the outside rush? You'd think we' d have a series of plays off of that.


My thought exactly. We have big TEs now. There are a lot of plays you can run off that that take advantage of an aggressive pass rush, but we also need to do more outside zone running and then play action off that so the DE has to think and cannot just head straight for the backfield on every play.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I know y'all are justifiably pissed.

But remember others can can read your comments go vent to you buddy or the bartender at the local pub or a therapist.

I'm hot too but I am not going throw the players under the bus because I want to selfishly vent.

Go Bears
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fat_slice said:

The fact that it takes 5 games to find a faster running back is outright weird. They must be horrible at talent assessment, let alone player development.

Given that Ragle is still not fired, I think we are resigned to no major changes this season. I would love to see a turnaround but
I have no confidence in this coach's ability to do anything different (definition of crazy) to improve outcomes.

How you can not identify weaknesses in the off-season is beyond me.


Chris Street started getting the carries that DeCarlos Brooks had been getting until he got injured (the faster change-of-pace back). They are similar, but Damien Moore is probably better all around.

I see our personnel weaknesses as being...

Veteran DBs came into the year overrated.

We need another pass rusher. Hard to overcome the loss of Deng and Brett Johnson, but dems da breaks.

RT

QB is inconsistent in accuracy and doesn't see the field real well.

Snap-spot-kick. That's insane.

And now the whole thing has morphed into a feeling of self-doubt and the OKGs are just too "nice".
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
going4roses said:

I know y'all are justifiably pissed.

But remember others can can read your comments go vent to you buddy or the bartender at the local pub or a therapist.

I'm hot too but I am not going throw the players under the bus because I want to selfishly vent.

Go Bears
Totally disagree. Once you have accepted a scholarship to a major program, you have put yourself into the public eye and are subject to being critiqued for your performance.

I believe the old saying is…

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

fat_slice said:

The fact that it takes 5 games to find a faster running back is outright weird. They must be horrible at talent assessment, let alone player development.

Given that Ragle is still not fired, I think we are resigned to no major changes this season. I would love to see a turnaround but
I have no confidence in this coach's ability to do anything different (definition of crazy) to improve outcomes.

How you can not identify weaknesses in the off-season is beyond me.


Chris Street started getting the carries that DeCarlos Brooks had been getting until he got injured (the faster change-of-pace back). They are similar, but Damien Moore is probably better all around.

I see our personnel weaknesses as being...

Veteran DBs came into the year overrated.

We need another pass rusher. Hard to overcome the loos of Deng and Brett Johnson, but dems da breaks.

RT

QB is inconsistent in accuracy and doesn't see the field real well.

Snap-spot-kick. That's insane.

And now the whole thing has morphed into a feeling of self-doubt and the OKGs are just too "nice".
Regarding the last sentence, the team reflects its leadership. The missing component is a kick-ass attitude.
flounder
How long do you want to ignore this user?
who gives a rats ass what this coach has to say at this point? it's just a bunch of bs coach speak
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
These "student athletes" are not professionals thus don't treat them as such …

From PR standpoint this situation needs remedies not whining

Your take is Eerily similar to a slave -slave master relationship.

Where is your compassion ? Have you no empathy ? It's the coaches responsibility to put players in the position to succeed NO ?
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
going4roses said:

These "student athletes" are not professionals thus don't treat them as such …

From PR standpoint this situation needs remedies not whining

Your take is Eerily similar to a slave -slave master relationship.

Where is your compassion ? Have you no empathy ? It's the coaches responsibility to put players in the position to succeed NO ?

I have zero empathy for any collegiate or pro athlete unless he is injured in the course of a game. There are highly trained individuals who possess varying levels of skill. They are prepared to deal with winning and losing and all that comes along with those outcomes. If they can't handle losing or the criticism that comes with that result, they should stay on the sidelines.

Yes, it is the responsibility of the coaches to put players in a position to succeed. However, if the player is not skilled enough to execute the coaches instructions, he shouldn't be playing or he should be ready to handle the adverse reactions that will inevitably follow.

In this era where college sports is now a multi-billion dollar industry, the quaint notion of "student-athlete" no longer exists. The are athletes who represent a particular school.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"The[y] are athletes who represent a particular school."

I don't think this is true any longer, if it ever was. This is business now, more than ever. These kids pick a program to play in for many different reasons, and I believe "representing" is lower on the list than it ever has.

Semantics? Maybe so.
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

going4roses said:

These "student athletes" are not professionals thus don't treat them as such …

From PR standpoint this situation needs remedies not whining

Your take is Eerily similar to a slave -slave master relationship.

Where is your compassion ? Have you no empathy ? It's the coaches responsibility to put players in the position to succeed NO ?

I have zero empathy for any collegiate or pro athlete unless he is injured in the course of a game.

What a psycho lol
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
going4roses said:

I know y'all are justifiably pissed.

But remember others can can read your comments go vent to you buddy or the bartender at the local pub or a therapist.

I'm hot too but I am not going throw the players under the bus because I want to selfishly vent.

Go Bears


What you're really saying is that we should be voicing our opinions in the form of an appropriate TikTok video, right?
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.