Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="ZooCougar, post: 5109001, member: 296"] Surprisingly, I don't agree that Warner wouldn't have had a major impact in the game if he had played. He's not a Heisman caliber but he has shown tons of promise. But I am going to a do an exercise here, and instead of making an irrational cheerleader argument like you did, I am going to make a better argument for you. College football is a sport where you play 12 games and try to win as many as possible, based on your record and a bunch of subjective beauty pageant criteria you get assigned to a bowl to play in. Your record is the sum of your results and is mostly dictated by your performance and that is driven by decisions the team makes. In this case Rice, in previous games for whatever reason, couldn't keep Warner healthy enough. Other defenses have been hammering him. So they gave him the night off because he was so banged up. Performance and Decisions. You see, it simply doesn't matter that he didn't play. They weren't a good enough to keep him healthy, and the coaches didn't have a QB or a plan to make up for it. It doesn't matte that they lost to us and beat Navy. Navy might not be that good, but really Rice is only good if all of the pieces fall into place, and in this sport you have to be able to win when the pieces don't fall into place. [/QUOTE]