A third and then they still would have needed a fourth

Sign up, and you'll be able to vote in polls. Sign up

Report problem with this ad

Oct 27, 2024
7:35:28pm

cougarfann888 All-American

A third and then they still would have needed a fourth

Report problem with this ad

cougarfann888

Bio page: cougarfann888
Joined: Oct 10, 2010
Last login: Oct 27, 2024
Total posts: 29,363 (96 FO)

Report problem with this ad

Messages

Author

Time

May have been discussed but did sitake discuss postgame why LJ didn’t play more

BYU '80

Oct 27, 6:49pm

LJ himself said he’s fine

canuckchuck

Oct 27, 6:51pm

Out for 68-74 weeks

NYCougz

Oct 27, 6:51pm

I figured it was more precautionary than anything

SUAVO

Oct 27, 6:51pm

Why would he play more? Why risk injury?

cougarfann888

Oct 27, 6:51pm

When byu was starting to struggle to get first downs and the lead was 34-18

BYU '80

Oct 27, 6:58pm

Ropati was doing really well and LJ is still coming back. Had 102 yards. No need

WP17

Oct 27, 6:53pm

Game was over. Precautionary. No injury and making sure they keep it that way for Holy War

JohnnyComeLately

Oct 27, 6:58pm

At 34-18 with ten minutes left it wasn’t over

BYU '80

Oct 27, 6:59pm

It was.

Conan

Oct 27, 7:00pm

BYU had to execute multiple third downs. If they hadn’t the same guy who led

BYU '80

Oct 27, 7:24pm

A third and then they still would have needed a fourth

cougarfann888

Oct 27, 7:35pm

If byu had failed to get first downs and kicked a fg they would have had

BYU '80

Oct 27, 7:49pm

I will go with Kalani’s opinion over yours and the words of LJ himself.

JohnnyComeLately

Oct 27, 7:57pm

Unless you had Kalani on the phone during the time of the game it was 34-18

BYU '80

Oct 27, 8:06pm

Ok. So if the game had played out differently than it did, I suspect we would have seen LJ.

Spiff

Oct 27, 8:05pm

Considering LJ was about the only known starter not in the game at 34-18

BYU '80

Oct 27, 8:06pm

Fine. It's a valid question. You've been given several valid answers. It's on you if you don't like them.

Spiff

Oct 27, 8:08pm

Which answers were valid. We never got an answer. Every response here has been

BYU '80

Oct 27, 8:19pm

I guess you're right then. He was hurt and BYU almost lost.

Spiff

Oct 27, 8:24pm

I asked if he was hurt. At 34–18 the game wasn’t over

BYU '80

Oct 27, 8:28pm

Maybe read my post one more time. What does precautionary mean to you?

JohnnyComeLately

Oct 27, 8:31pm

I saw what you said. That was an opinion but never confirmed.

BYU '80

Oct 27, 8:39pm

And he told Wrubell he was healthy. So not sure what point you are trying to make.

JohnnyComeLately

Oct 27, 8:49pm

If the game was won, why only take him out? It’s a pretty clear point

BYU '80

Oct 27, 10:31pm

RE: At 34-18 with ten minutes left it wasn’t over

JohnnyComeLately

Oct 27, 7:05pm

For those laughing, Greg and Hans were asking the same question on the radio

BYU '80

Oct 27, 6:59pm

The question has been asked many times but you may not have seen

NYCougz

Oct 27, 7:29pm

I hadn’t seen which is the reason I asked as stated in the original post

BYU '80

Oct 27, 7:50pm

If he is hurt, sadly sitake won’t be clear about it

NYCougz

Oct 27, 8:39pm

LJ in post game said it was a charlie horse.

Lance71

Oct 27, 7:00pm

Report problem with this ad

Posting on CougarBoard

In order to post, you will need to either sign up or log in.

Report problem with this ad