Griz - Dirtiest Team In FCS?

PapaG · Post by **PapaG** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:18 pm

Discuss...

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 10:32 pm

cat fans. Most moronic in the world.

Discuss.

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:17 am

Weber had two non-called illegal chop blocks in that game.

CPACAT · Post by **CPACAT** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:04 am

I'm sure Weber thinks so.

catatac · Post by **catatac** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:57 am

Re/Max Griz wrote:Weber had two non-called illegal chop blocks in that game.

Any proof to this? And if so were they done after Weber's best player had his football career ended by a UM lineman?

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:27 am

GrizinWashington wrote:cat fans. Most moronic in the world.

Discuss.

GinWa,

Start your own thread!!

AlphaGriz1 · Post by **AlphaGriz1** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:48 am

Re/Max Griz wrote:Weber had two non-called illegal chop blocks in that game.

Chop blocks happen in almost every game. I see GF10 gave you talking points and marched you out to defend an undefendable play.

So what if they had them, I would hope they did after what Balogh did to their best DL player. Just like a pitcher hitting a batter and the opposing pitcher hitting back in retaliation.

Fortunately IF there were 2 chop blocks our players walked off the field.

Grizlaw · Post by **Grizlaw** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 11:33 am

catatac wrote: Any proof to this? And if so were they done after Weber's best player had his football career ended by a UM lineman?

I don't know anything about this (aside from the accusations on eGriz)...but are you suggesting that if Weber had two chop blocks then it's OK as long as they were in retaliation for Balough's block? That's pretty messed up logic, IMO...

Also, I can't really agree with Alpha's analogy about a pitcher hitting an opposing batter in retaliation for one of his guys getting plunked. The fact is, unless we're talking about (a much younger) Roger Clemens throwing at a guy's head, a pitcher throwing at a batter doesn't usually result in career ending injuries. If Balough did what he did intentionally to hurt Weber's guy, then he probably shouldn't be playing football, period...but if Weber's guys intentionally responded in kind, then the same goes for them, IMO.

AlphaGriz1 · Post by **AlphaGriz1** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 7:28 pm

Grizlaw wrote:
catatac wrote: Any proof to this? And if so were they done after Weber's best player had his football career ended by a UM lineman?
I don't know anything about this (aside from the accusations on eGriz)...but are you suggesting that if Weber had two chop blocks then it's OK as long as they were in retaliation for Balough's block? That's pretty messed up logic, IMO...

Also, I can't really agree with Alpha's analogy about a pitcher hitting an opposing batter in retaliation for one of his guys getting plunked. The fact is, unless we're talking about (a much younger) Roger Clemens throwing at a guy's head, a pitcher throwing at a batter doesn't usually result in career ending injuries. If Balough did what he did intentionally to hurt Weber's guy, then he probably shouldn't be playing football, period...but if Weber's guys intentionally responded in kind, then the same goes for them, IMO.

Chop blocks don't usually result in career ending injuries either.

I will tell you this straight out. If that happened to a player on my team, I would grab my guys and say "We are a team and we protect our own, I am not telling you to directly take someone out but if the chance happens use your own judgement and I will not think any less of you."

STREETCAT · Post by **STREETCAT** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:22 pm

Grizlaw wrote:
catatac wrote: Any proof to this? And if so were they done after Weber's best player had his football career ended by a UM lineman?
I don't know anything about this (aside from the accusations on eGriz)...but are you suggesting that if Weber had two chop blocks then it's OK as long as they were in retaliation for Balough's block? That's pretty messed up logic, IMO...

Also, I can't really agree with Alpha's analogy about a pitcher hitting an opposing batter in retaliation for one of his guys getting plunked. The fact is, unless we're talking about (a much younger) Roger Clemens throwing at a guy's head, a pitcher throwing at a batter doesn't usually result in career ending injuries. If Balough did what he did intentionally to hurt Weber's guy, then he probably shouldn't be playing football, period...but if Weber's guys intentionally responded in kind, then the same goes for them, IMO.

Personally if they are in retaliation to Balough's block. GOOD FOR THEM!!! Dont dish it out if you dont want the same treatment!!!

PapaG · Post by **PapaG** » Sat Oct 06, 2007 9:39 pm

Apparently the Griz are a dirty team and they also struggle against mid-level BSC schools?

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 1:16 pm

This thread should have died days ago.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 10:52 pm

I could argue that SUU was pretty dirty from what I saw Saturday.

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Sun Oct 07, 2007 10:59 pm

Shoot, didn't see the responses to my post, I didn't get the two chop block stuff from GF10, it actually came from Bobby himself on this last friday. He discussed it with McBride, if I remember correctly it's play 46 & 54 in the game with the right guard and center.

Grizlaw · Post by **Grizlaw** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:13 am

longhorn_22 wrote:I could argue that SUU was pretty dirty from what I saw Saturday.

SUU was notorious for chop blocking a few years ago, back when they were running the flexbone offense -- I don't remember the specifics, but I think we lost a D-lineman or two to them. I didn't see our game with them this year, though...

STREETCAT · Post by **STREETCAT** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:31 am

Grizlaw wrote:
longhorn_22 wrote:I could argue that SUU was pretty dirty from what I saw Saturday.
SUU was notorious for chop blocking a few years ago, back when they were running the flexbone offense -- I don't remember the specifics, but I think we lost a D-lineman or two to them. I didn't see our game with them this year, though...

I think the comment was in reference to our field conditions

Grizlaw · Post by **Grizlaw** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:10 am

STREETCAT wrote:I think the comment was in reference to our field conditions

Ahh...gotcha. Sorry; I heard your game was played in a blizzard, but the double meaning went over my head.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:16 am

Actually, I was actually commenting on a few plays I saw. Now it's kind of funny that I didn't even think about the mud. Anyway, I saw one or two very questionable unnecessary roughness plays that weren't called and some extra curricular activity after many plays. Also, for a team that was 0-4 coming into that game, they talked a lot of shi* to our players and did plenty of head nodding. IMO, they were a pretty dirty team.

HelenaCat95 · Post by **HelenaCat95** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:22 am

longhorn_22 wrote:Actually, I was actually commenting on a few plays I saw. Now it's kind of funny that I didn't even think about the mud. Anyway, I saw one or two very questionable unnecessary roughness plays that weren't called and some extra curricular activity after many plays. Also, for a team that was 0-4 coming into that game, they talked a lot of shi* to our players and did plenty of head nodding. IMO, they were a pretty dirty team.

I agree.
There was one play where #40 hit Bostick literally 20 seconds after the play was over (or was it closer to 10 seconds ...I don't remember). The refs were already marking the ball when it happened, and they didn't see it. SUU's coach saw it, and yanked #40 from the game.
There was another play where Rolo was hit about a yard out of bounds. Granted, at this point the out of bounds line was more of a "judgment call" due to all the mud...but this was blatant.