Riley was 65%?!!!

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765606683/BYU-football-Nelsons-injury-may-put-Hill-in-starting-QB-role.html?pg=2



Riley will play even though he shouldn't. He admitted he was 65% against Boise State and admitted he will never sit out unless the coaches tell him to. Riley has a history of playing to the detriment of the team and he admitted that he will again because he is a Senior and there are very few opportunities left, so he will never throw in the towel.



Bronco states that he will play Riley if he is close to 100 percent (which is different than actually the 100 percent standard of just a few days ago). He also stated he would rely on Riley and the Doctors to make the call. Riley is already between 70-80%.



This means he will play against Hawaii. :sulk:



And I find it arrogant, not gutsy. You think your 65% effort is better than 100% back ups? Yeah, that's a great team player. And what's worse, you admit you can see the difference, but also have no intention of sitting unless the coaches tell you that you have to because you are a Senior.



Sorry, I'm not loving that attitude.



And as an indictment of BD, if you know your QB has a bad back, why do you keep running that option play? I'm not a big conspiracy theorist, so I don't accept that he was trying to get Riley injured more, but he should be limiting contact at all costs... Roll outs and hand offs, not options where the option QB either has to keep the ball and take additional punishment or pitch it.



As I said on Cougymonster's thread, where am I going and why am I in this handbasket?

I actually like the attitude - from the player. I want players who want to play, who never want to come out, who want to give it everything they have.



I don't like the attitude from coaches. The coaches determine who play. If you have a player only at 65%, you have a responsibility to the team and the player to sit them.



Playing with a serious injury is a receipe for a severe injury. You don't get healthy by continuing to do what is causing the injury. Rest is how you get healthy.



Coaches have a responsibility to look after a player's health.

SpiffCoug wrote:
I actually like the attitude - from the player. I want players who want to play, who never want to come out, who want to give it everything they have.



I don't like the attitude from coaches. The coaches determine who play. If you have a player only at 65%, you have a responsibility to the team and the player to sit them.



Playing with a serious injury is a receipe for a severe injury. You don't get healthy by continuing to do what is causing the injury. Rest is how you get healthy.



Coaches have a responsibility to look after a player's health.

I should clarify. I like the never quit attitude, but only if Riley is completely honest with what his health status is. I'm not saying he hasn't been, but it would be very tempting to understate it so that I could keep playing and then say it is up to the coaches to play or not play me. If he is 100 % honest about his health, then I have no problems with Riley's attitude or desire.



I have a huge problem with the boneheaded coaching decisions and play calling with an injured QB.

Right, but you also want your player to be smart enough to acknowledge that he is taking the team down with him. Nelson is not. He gave away the last two games, and stole them right from the defense.



When was the last time that BYU lost when the other team's offensive unit didn't score? Has that ever happened to BYU?

On a related side note, remind me to never, ever go to a doctor named Nelson in the next 15 years.



"I'm not to tired to do this open heart surgery. My arm doesn't hurt that much..."

SpiffCoug wrote:
I actually like the attitude - from the player. I want players who want to play, who never want to come out, who want to give it everything they have.



I don't like the attitude from coaches. The coaches determine who play. If you have a player only at 65%, you have a responsibility to the team and the player to sit them.



Playing with a serious injury is a receipe for a severe injury. You don't get healthy by continuing to do what is causing the injury. Rest is how you get healthy.



Coaches have a responsibility to look after a player's health.

This re the attitude. Coaches and doctors then decide. And if Riley came out and said, I am only 65% and I don't give a rip if the coaches think I give the team the best chance to win - I am not playing - he would get criticized for that too.





[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

It isn't the player's responsibility to determine if he is fit to play. It is the coaches responsibility to recognize that he is not fit to play and pull him out of the game before he hurts the team.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
Right, but you also want your player to be smart enough to acknowledge that he is taking the team down with him. Nelson is not. He gave away the last two games, and stole them right from the defense.



When was the last time that BYU lost when the other team's offensive unit didn't score? Has that ever happened to BYU?

2003? Utah 3 BYU 0. No points by either offense, just special teams?

I agree. I want a player who refuses to quit no matter what. But Doman should be watching pre game warm ups and if he can't see Riley's regular velocity on the ball (which he obviously didn't have in the BSU game), then he needs to come to Riley before the game and tell him that he isn't ready to go and give hill the ball.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

I actually like the attitude - from the player. I want players who want to play, who never want to come out, who want to give it everything they have.



I don't like the attitude from coaches. The coaches determine who play. If you have a player only at 65%, you have a responsibility to the team and the player to sit them.



Playing with a serious injury is a receipe for a severe injury. You don't get healthy by continuing to do what is causing the injury. Rest is how you get healthy.



Coaches have a responsibility to look after a player's health.

I should clarify. I like the never quit attitude, but only if Riley is completely honest with what his health status is. I'm not saying he hasn't been, but it would be very tempting to understate it so that I could keep playing and then say it is up to the coaches to play or not play me. If he is 100 % honest about his health, then I have no problems with Riley's attitude or desire.



I have a huge problem with the boneheaded coaching decisions and play calling with an injured QB.

Agreed.



Riley was apparently honest against Weber, and it appears, he was less so the last two weeks.

SpiffCoug wrote:

SpiffCoug wrote:
I actually like the attitude - from the player. I want players who want to play, who never want to come out, who want to give it everything they have.



I don't like the attitude from coaches. The coaches determine who play. If you have a player only at 65%, you have a responsibility to the team and the player to sit them.



Playing with a serious injury is a receipe for a severe injury. You don't get healthy by continuing to do what is causing the injury. Rest is how you get healthy.



Coaches have a responsibility to look after a player's health.

I should clarify. I like the never quit attitude, but only if Riley is completely honest with what his health status is. I'm not saying he hasn't been, but it would be very tempting to understate it so that I could keep playing and then say it is up to the coaches to play or not play me. If he is 100 % honest about his health, then I have no problems with Riley's attitude or desire.



I have a huge problem with the boneheaded coaching decisions and play calling with an injured QB.

Agreed.



Riley was apparently honest against Weber, and it appears, he was less so the last two weeks.

I'm sure he wanted to be a hero and take down 2 of the best teams on our schedule for purposes of glory. Ironic that it was his play that cost us both of them. Sigh.

I don't know if it was purposes of glory. Does wanting to win, count as being in it for the glory?



He doesn't know when his play isn't helping but hurting that effort. It's the coaches job to make the call - which they did in the Boise game and didn't in the Utah game.

SpiffCoug wrote:
I don't know if it was purposes of glory. Does wanting to win, count as being in it for the glory?



He doesn't know when his play isn't helping but hurting that effort. It's the coaches job to make the call - which they did in the Boise game and didn't in the Utah game.

Everyone knows what an undefeated or one loss team is capable of doing with this year's schedule. Riley's not dumb. He wants legendary status at BYU and has a few shots to get a signature win to secure that. Nobody wants to be thought of as Feterik 2.0, so he'll do what it takes to get on the field.

SpiffCoug wrote:

Right, but you also want your player to be smart enough to acknowledge that he is taking the team down with him. Nelson is not. He gave away the last two games, and stole them right from the defense.



When was the last time that BYU lost when the other team's offensive unit didn't score? Has that ever happened to BYU?

2003? Utah 3 BYU 0. No points by either offense, just special teams?

Perhaps. But I meant on defensive points alone. You do win the prize though.

mizzoucoug wrote:

I don't know if it was purposes of glory. Does wanting to win, count as being in it for the glory?



He doesn't know when his play isn't helping but hurting that effort. It's the coaches job to make the call - which they did in the Boise game and didn't in the Utah game.

Everyone knows what an undefeated or one loss team is capable of doing with this year's schedule. Riley's not dumb. He wants legendary status at BYU and has a few shots to get a signature win to secure that. Nobody wants to be thought of as Feterik 2.0, so he'll do what it takes to get on the field.

Since everyone agrees with that - what is your point. That is why teams have coaches and medical advisors. Coaches reacted too slowly - with the turnovers mounting. That tells me they did not think Hill was ready to go 4 qtrs and deal with adjustments BSU would thus have time to make. Factored into the decision to go for two too.



What do you want - Bronco to state that T Hill was not ready for prime time when he knows T Hill will likely be playing ready or not. The team is hanging together - yet everyone wants to jump all over the guys that have so far preserved team unity in the face of adversity.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

mizzoucoug wrote:

I don't know if it was purposes of glory. Does wanting to win, count as being in it for the glory?



He doesn't know when his play isn't helping but hurting that effort. It's the coaches job to make the call - which they did in the Boise game and didn't in the Utah game.

Everyone knows what an undefeated or one loss team is capable of doing with this year's schedule. Riley's not dumb. He wants legendary status at BYU and has a few shots to get a signature win to secure that. Nobody wants to be thought of as Feterik 2.0, so he'll do what it takes to get on the field.

I hope every player we ever have wants legendary status.

Ya. Hear that noise? Its the foundation of unity cracking. If Riley pulls out the same performance this week, it'll start with the fans and creep into the team. They haven't been faced with the home crowd during these defeats. They have had to stick together. But you don't think the D has their doubts? Even if they are beneficent doubts about Riley--they are doubts. And why the double standard? Because DAD says so?

How about looking at the bigger picture? We will win this game no matter who plays. What about getting healthy for the USU and OSU games where he could make a difference.

Cougarbib wrote:

I actually like the attitude - from the player. I want players who want to play, who never want to come out, who want to give it everything they have.



I don't like the attitude from coaches. The coaches determine who play. If you have a player only at 65%, you have a responsibility to the team and the player to sit them.



Playing with a serious injury is a receipe for a severe injury. You don't get healthy by continuing to do what is causing the injury. Rest is how you get healthy.



Coaches have a responsibility to look after a player's health.

This re the attitude. Coaches and doctors then decide. And if Riley came out and said, I am only 65% and I don't give a rip if the coaches think I give the team the best chance to win - I am not playing - he would get criticized for that too.





[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Waah. Riley wants the glory, he better withstand the criticism. But he doesnt give a whoop about the criticism. He doesnt care about his injuries and how that effects the outcome. It's his MO. He did this two years ago to try and win QB2. It cost games and the a starting job by years end. This year it's even worse. Riley is about Riley.

SpiffCoug wrote:

Right, but you also want your player to be smart enough to acknowledge that he is taking the team down with him. Nelson is not. He gave away the last two games, and stole them right from the defense.



When was the last time that BYU lost when the other team's offensive unit didn't score? Has that ever happened to BYU?

2003? Utah 3 BYU 0. No points by either offense, just special teams?

Yes, and this was the beginning of the end for Crowton. I really really hope it Bronco isn't hanging his rep on a wounded warrior whose best skill, that of running is greatly hindered. And his average arm when healthy is worse than average. What do defense have to be afraid of? He can't run full strength. He can't throw even his full strength. What play options does BD has left? Either run Riley into the ground and replace him or scale back THE LARGEST THREAT and keystone of this offense: Rileys run game.