KG03bruins7 Posted October 7, 2007 Report Posted October 7, 2007 Man ive been dredding this type of situation all season i know WB has atheletes by committie I hate to see a player that so dedicated to his team get hurt i hope its not that serious. I watched him grow up i always new he would be a beast on the field. His uncle and i go the same church ill try to get more info.
Mr. Buddy Garrity Posted October 7, 2007 Report Posted October 7, 2007 WB will be fine. I would personally keep him out until the playoffs start if in fact he can return. And i heard a few weeks ago about some soph RB i think that WB has from someone back home, who is he????
BearWolf Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 yes, i heard today that they will bring him up. He was to be Alberts replacement next year. Look like it's going to happen a half year early. The only thing I know about him is that he's faster than Albert.
Yeoj Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 yes he is a small scat back type. very shifty and can cut on a dime.
dat_hook_em_fan Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 THATS WHAT I WAS THINKING......STATS ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT......THAT BIG OF A LEAD U BRING IN BACK UPS TO GET SOME EXPERIENCE......
Guest WBFan09 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 he can now run with the big dogscorrection...big BRUINS ;D i dont think we have official backup RB on varsity otherwise they wouldve been in the game
BearWolf Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 that's correct, the only other RB on varsity is a starting LB and I doubt that they will move him.
Guest WBFan09 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 so now everyone should stop with the "they shouldve taken them out" they didnt have anyone to put in...and when you want to run out the clock you have to run the ball...meaning Christine and Albert in there...he wasnt even hurt on a play where he ran the ball
BearWolf Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 from what i heard he was not involved in any contact on the play.
BMTSoulja1 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 I heard he lost his footing on the turf.
dat_hook_em_fan Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 blowout take ya starters out....
Guest WBFan09 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 I heard he lost his footing on the turf.yea me too...no contact is what i heard as well i hope that means it wont be AS bad as it could have beenthey were being very cautious with him at the gameim not sure what the pop might indicate...knee cap?
Yeoj Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 A couple of the players go to church with me and they said he was walking around the locker room on it. So lets just hope its a sprain and not any ligament damage.
Guest FPHS 78 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 blowout take ya starters out....that's a no brainer!
82 5A State Champs Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 dat-hook-em and FPHS78, didn't you two guy's read what was posted by WBFan09.....WB did NOT have a backup RB on varsity, or he would have been in there. So stop it with the "should have been taken out" thing. I'm sure if Stump could change things now, he would. Since he can't, it's all water under the bridge and Williams will be back. So let's just concentrate on this weeks game against Lee, OK. Thanks
24 over par Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 west brook has no back up. thats hard to believe, i bet any of the kids wearing a 60 or a 70 on thier back would have gladly carried the ball
westend1 Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 I gotta agree with 24 over. surely we could find someone to carry the ball with a 40 point lead. What's the worst that could happen? Gotta get the starters out of there in those situations. I bet lots of those kids have been running backs at some point in their life.
Guest BigHam Posted October 8, 2007 Report Posted October 8, 2007 I've heard from a couple of folks that Williams might be OK. Maybe out for a week or 2. Hopefully get him back before Humble and PAM. Main thing is to get him healthy.
Guest whoabroncos09 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 sounds like dayton.except our quarterback got hurt.
Guest WBFan09 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 west brook has no back up. thats hard to believe, i bet any of the kids wearing a 60 or a 70 on thier back would have gladly carried the ballI gotta agree with 24 over. surely we could find someone to carry the ball with a 40 point lead. What's the worst that could happen? Gotta get the starters out of there in those situations. I bet lots of those kids have been running backs at some point in their life.Stump is not stupid...im sure if he thought those guys could hold on to the ball or have had experience running the ball he would have...the facts are they still needed first downs in order for them to keep the clock running thus keeping Williams and Michael in the game...Stump places the guys who could be backups for them on JV...why?...so they can get experience in case of situations like this, now the kid will get his chance and wont be coming off the bench having not played at all this season...he will be used to the game atmosphere im sure we can all agree that putting in a kid whom has not been in a game half way through the year isnt smart?secondly, ive talked to many guys on the team and they have told me EVERYONE got to play in the game which means had Stump had the backup RB he would have played him...i mean everyone, even the worst of the senior class
Mr. Buddy Garrity Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 yes, i heard today that they will bring him up. He was to be Alberts replacement next year. Look like it's going to happen a half year early. The only thing I know about him is that he's faster than Albert.
KG03bruins7 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 This is Bruin football hate it or love it. This how the bruins get down. Dont blame Stump for anything that happened It's a no brainer a coach that has a back up would be in. It was the turf. lol
westend1 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 Stump is not stupid...im sure if he thought those guys could hold on to the ball or have had experience running the ball he would have...the facts are they still needed first downs in order for them to keep the clock running thus keeping Williams and Michael in the game...Stump places the guys who could be backups for them on JV...why?...so they can get experience in case of situations like this, now the kid will get his chance and wont be coming off the bench having not played at all this season...he will be used to the game atmosphere im sure we can all agree that putting in a kid whom has not been in a game half way through the year isnt smart?secondly, ive talked to many guys on the team and they have told me EVERYONE got to play in the game which means had Stump had the backup RB he would have played him...i mean everyone, even the worst of the senior classI agree with most of what you said. However, we didn't NEED any first downs. Practice punting, whatever, just get the starters out of there. JMO
Recommended Posts