I don’t think it would have mattered. They were looking for any excuse not to give it to Tua.So, we were correct about the procedure that he underwent. It is a shame that this information was not made public before the Heisman votes were cast.
I don't think the information would have changed the vote of theSo, we were correct about the procedure that he underwent. It is a shame that this information was not made public before the Heisman votes were cast.
After the game, there will be a debate about Heisman.....I don't think the information would have changed the vote of the
Anybody but Bama crowd. Their minds were made up much earlier.
Now it falls to us to show those close minded voters how wrong they were.
I was watching Scott Van Pelt on the late night SportsCenter the other night and they showed the play where Jonah Williams stepped on his ankle when talking about his surgery. I love SVP but I was really surprised that there's still that much misinformation out there about when the injury happened..Percentage wise, what is the over under that sports talking heads will still say Tua is recovering from the ankle injury he suffered in the 4th qtr? I predict if qtr is given in story, 80% will say 4th.
That is why you have to get the message out fast, before people set their minds on a specific story line. I am not saying that they are getting it wrong on purpose now - I am saying that they see conflicting information now and ignore it because they see it as conflicting, not as corrective.I was watching Scott Van Pelt on the late night SportsCenter the other night and they showed the play where Jonah Williams stepped on his ankle when talking about his surgery. I love SVP but I was really surprised that there's still that much misinformation out there about when the injury happened..
yeah i tend to agree with you. The voters had no idea tua was significantly injured that whole game, and he still garnered more points than any non winner ever. it was a lot closer than people around here are acting like. that info could have changed it.That is why you have to get the message out fast, before people set their minds on a specific story line. I am not saying that they are getting it wrong on purpose now - I am saying that they see conflicting information now and ignore it because they see it as conflicting, not as corrective.
No one has officially said, but I would bet that it was the same.Did Hurts have this same procedure earlier or was it something different?
Can't imagine why...he takes more unneeded hits - imo - to extend a play than any QB we've had in my memory.And to think we had some questioning Tua's toughness.
Insert eyeroll here.
Almost certain the same or very similar. It does appear that Hurts was probably a bit worse, with more ligament damage, and he's already almost back to full speed...Did Hurts have this same procedure earlier or was it something different?
I have absolutely no information on the medical prognosis. Even if I did, I wouldn't understand it. But based on his performance against UGA, I think Hurts will be 100% by 12/29.Almost certain the same or very similar. It does appear that Hurts was probably a bit worse, with more ligament damage, and he's already almost back to full speed...