Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Comments
Burnerbot,
You have to assume a lot to get to the conclusion that this is a "bad look" for everyone who's arriving at the most readily available conclusion. I'll concede it's possible that 6 really did have some kind of issue that needed to be checked on. But it gets a little harder to believe that there was never any such intent in the game when 20 looks to the sideline and immediately goes to take a knee, like he thought he knew exactly what was expected of him, then quickly hops up and spins around like, "Nobody saw that." Maybe they really were telling 6 to go down for his own good, but 20's readiness does raise an eyebrow. I don't know where you could be getting this impression that he seemed baffled.
This brings us to the second one. If it was a simple eye/contact issue, he could have easily made it to the sideline. You see players with minor issues do it all the time. They don't just plop down in the middle of the field. Again, is it possible that, oh I don't know, both eyes happened to become injured on the same play beyond the point of usefulness in getting off the field? I suppose. But to get to where it's a "bad look," one has to assume not only the extent of an eye injury, with no evidence, but also that the basis for this assessment of the injury is clear enough that everyone who's calling the situation what it otherwise looks like should know better and just doesn't care.
Lastly, I have to disagree that losing the #3 tackler for one play in exchange for a free timeout at a point where one is clearly needed is "lousy strategy." Seems like a pretty good deal to me.
It's possible that this was all one big coincidence, at a point in the game when Notre Dame's defense was on its heels. I honestly can't say with absolute certainty that it wasn't. But Kelly's explanation (at least for the second one) has understandably added fuel to the impression that there were some shenanigans going on. I think if anything, it would be a reasonable misunderstanding. Questionable and conveniently timed injuries aren't exactly unprecedented in college football.
Did 6 reenter the game? If so, Kelly wasn't the least bit worried, for if there is even the possibility of a concussion any sane coach would keep the player out until conclusive proof a concussion didn't occur. As Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet, "The coach doth protest too much, methinks." What? Isn't that what he said?
Was the Irish sideline signaling for a player to go down? It is obvious number 20 was starting to make a flop move to the ground too.
I would have more respect for Kelly if he admitted he did it. If he said, I did it, and it worked. It would make it look better.
But, if he admits to it, he may not be able to keep the lowly tactic in his playbook. This is not a good look for Notre Dame.
Nixon denied any connection to the Watergate break-in a lot too.
For me it is the context of these injuries that is problematic. Due to previous incidents, ND was down to ONE REMAINING time out and there was still LOTS of game to be played. GA was freight training down the field, seemingly unstoppable. Without using their LAST timeout, the ONLY way for ND to stop play was an injury. Check the film. The (injured) ND defender completed the play and popped up for the next play only to be pulled down by another ND defender, compelling him to stay down. What we can't see on tape was if this was signaled in from the ND bench? The second one was just laughable. I've worn contact lens most of my life and don't ever recall brushing up against another person creating an issue. Again, it is the context which makes this one suspicious as in, "Hey, it worked earlier, let's do it again".
What's done is done. It's in the best interest of these young men to when in doubt never hesitate to evaluate an injury. I do believe that it is in the best interest of CF for these incidents to be evaluated by NCAA football and the Referee Association for inconsistencies and whether or not these incidents were encouraged from the bench. IF revealed it's a "pattern", perhaps another opportunity for a 10 second run-off?
I think people keep pushing this story that ND was faking injuries. The second one remains questionable in particular. I have no comment on that one, but the first one folks should watch the game to know what is going on. Two plays before the "fake" injury, #6 took a hard shot to the head making a diving tackle. On the next play, #6 barely moves at all and looks to be out of sorts. What appears to have happened is the ND sideline saw #6 looking woozy, and one of his teammates caught on and pulled him down for evaluation. #20, who was closer to the sideline in front of #6 probably saw the coaches motioning for a player to go down. #20 was probably confused thinking the coaches were asking him to get down so he started to until realizing that they were pointing towards #6. Maybe I'm wrong, but I watched closely and think this is the actual explanation.
Can we please talk about something besides FAKE INJURIES? This topic has been discussed way too long. IT happened, it will happen again, nothing new.