Adrian Martinez Injury

[skers83]

Correct. I have actually figured out the perfect punishment.

A-Magic needs to go full Adam Sandler from the Longest yard. One perfectly placed football in #44's nuts a few times should teach him the lesson. 

That is the best I've heard yet. + 10.  :thumbs

 

[Caliborn72]

Correct. I have actually figured out the perfect punishment.

A-Magic needs to go full Adam Sandler from the Longest yard. One perfectly placed football in #44's nuts a few times should teach him the lesson. 

I’ll settle for this a few times:

 

[knapplc]

And my argument is that is the wrong mentality when you are talking about affecting someones career.

This is the only post I've seen openly advocating affecting someone's career.

Now, if one of our O-lineman were to chop block the hell out of #55 and #53's knees.. I am ok with that.

 

[JJ Husker]

OK, so we've seen the Husker equivalent of the Zapruder film (the "secret angle") so now what?

Is this still a thing, or is the Pac-12's non-answer pretty much the end of it?

Talk of this will probably slow considerably after we play another game, especially if AM plays. I suspect the issue will completely die when AM plays again and shows no lingering effects from the injury. Of course it will be brought back up again leading up to our game against sCUm next year.

A message should be sent, regardless of the severity of the outcome, particularly because there was no on-field penalty (late hit or unnecessary roughness). If your daughter was raped, you wouldn’t want prosecution of the perpetrator to depend upon whether it resulted in pregnancy or not. (Analogy). How soon Martinez plays is irrelevant to this being actionable.

I didn’t say it shouldn’t be actionable now. It was a dirty play that has no place in CFB. I was responding to the original question of “is this still a thing?” and I assumed it was only intended for the message board crowd. Of course it should be a thing for the conferences and no, it doesn’t matter if or when AM plays again for them to do something about it.

And your rape analogy is a bit over the top. The Letterkenney response was perfect.

 

[Minnesota_husker]

This is the only post I've seen openly advocating affecting someone's career.

The player who twisted Martinez knee isnt getting a pass. I am saying the person who advocated we go after the Colorado QB who had nothing to do with it was wrong.

I dont really care what happens to the player who already proved he doesnt care about others by twisting their knee. If he wants to go after others knees, then he opens himself up to that. 

 

[knapplc]

I am saying the person who advocated we go after the Colorado QB who had nothing to do with it was wrong.

But you're imagining that. Nobody is saying "go after the Colorado quarterback."  This whole tangent is something you've fabricated because you misinterpreted someone's point.

 

[JJ Husker]

It’s pretty simple in my book. We go hard after Montez or any of their quarterbacks and hit him as hard and as much as is legal and clean. As an example, Peyton Manning in the 98 Orange Bowl. It was all clean but still took him out of the game. But #44 is a different story. I don’t have a problem if some guys go at his knees/legs with the intent to injure. F that guy. My only hesitancy is that I hate to stoop to their level but sometimes you gotta get dirty.

 

[Minnesota_husker]

This is the only post I've seen openly advocating affecting someone's career.

Sure about that?

I don’t know about Montez but #44 has proven he is willing to commit the act himself so I say a couple guys high-low him and end his career. 

 

[knapplc]

Then post at JJ if your problem is with JJ.

 

[Minnesota_husker]

But you're imagining that. Nobody is saying "go after the Colorado quarterback."  This whole tangent is something you've fabricated because you misinterpreted someone's point.

Not really. 

Someone mentioned it would be awful if something were to happen to Montez implying that something would come from us going after him. 

Then when I said Montez has nothing to do with this, you said you hoped it would mean that Montez would get hit harder than usual as payback. Clean/legal or not you wanted Montez to pay for the actions of two other players.

Doesnt take a rocket scientist to read between the lines.

 

[JJ Husker]

It would just be terrible if something were to happen to montez next year.

Sure about that?

Well I sure didn’t propose that we go after their qb in a dirty way but LumberJackSker did allude to that in the above post that I responded to. IIRC that has been the only mention that could be construed that way so I’m not sure why you’re going on with @knapplc about it.

 

[Minnesota_husker]

Then post at JJ if your problem is with JJ.

I have no problem with JJ. We had the exact same point. Get payback on the people who caused it.

My problem is you being all pissy and saying I am the only one advocating violence.

Just simply pointing out you were wrong.

 

[knapplc]

I’m not sure why you’re going on with @knapplc about it.

Everyone needs a hobby.

 

[JJ Husker]

Then post at JJ if your problem is with JJ.

I was actually saying that Montez was not the player that should be hit dirty  :dunno  If somebody read that otherwise, their comprehension skills should be questioned.

But shouldn’t our defense always go after opposing quarterbacks and hit them mercilessly and hard? Isn’t that football? Not sure why this is causing a problem.

 

[knapplc]

If somebody read that otherwise, their comprehension skills should be questioned.

That's a pretty good summation of someone's contributions to this thread.

But shouldn’t our defense always go after opposing quarterbacks and hit them mercilessly and hard? Isn’t that football? Not sure why this is causing a problem. 

Yes, this is what football is all about.  Some people just want to find a reason to argue.