[needle]

Disagree. I thought it was egregiously wrong that Love played against Arizona State after missing the previous week. But there are always different ways of looking at things. Here's an ESPN write-up favorable to Shaw (whereas I remember being pretty critical of the decision to have Love suit up and play after seeing his first half performance):

Quote:
 Stanford running back Bryce Love returned after missing the Utah game with a left ankle injury. He was not fully healthy against the Sun Devils, but did show bursts of explosiveness before Shaw opted to take him out in the second half.

Love's stats: 21 yards on 11 carries

https://www.espn.com/college-football/re.../401012768

Anyway, most of us know that Love sustained a severe knee injury on what was close to the last play of Big Game. It is possible that without that injury--the sort of unfortunate thing that is a danger for every running back--he might have been healthy enough for the NFL.

As you acknowledge, any player on any play could suffer an ACL injury. Him playing through injuries earlier in the season didn't cause his ACL injury.

So is the malpractice that Shaw didn't sit his best player in the Big Game because it was a "meaningless" game and he could be a high draft pick and he could maybe be injured in it? What's even the point of CFB then?

My complaint was with the decision to play Love in the Arizona State game after he had missed the Utah game a week earlier. Looking back at that season, the Arizona State game was sort of a "must win" after losses (to Utah and ND) that really hurt a team with fairly high expectations (pre-season No. 13 in the AP poll). I question whether Love was rushed back more so because the team needed a win rather than because his leg injury had improved (he looked noticeably hobbled against Arizona State).

I don't have a strong memory of how Love looked specifically in Big Game, but his stats were somewhere between bad and mediocre:  22 carries for 74 yards. No strong opinion here as to whether he should have sat.

[needle]

Disagree. I thought it was egregiously wrong that Love played against Arizona State after missing the previous week. But there are always different ways of looking at things. Here's an ESPN write-up favorable to Shaw (whereas I remember being pretty critical of the decision to have Love suit up and play after seeing his first half performance):

Quote:
 Stanford running back Bryce Love returned after missing the Utah game with a left ankle injury. He was not fully healthy against the Sun Devils, but did show bursts of explosiveness before Shaw opted to take him out in the second half.

Love's stats: 21 yards on 11 carries

https://www.espn.com/college-football/re.../401012768

Anyway, most of us know that Love sustained a severe knee injury on what was close to the last play of Big Game. It is possible that without that injury--the sort of unfortunate thing that is a danger for every running back--he might have been healthy enough for the NFL.

As you acknowledge, any player on any play could suffer an ACL injury. Him playing through injuries earlier in the season didn't cause his ACL injury.

So is the malpractice that Shaw didn't sit his best player in the Big Game because it was a "meaningless" game and he could be a high draft pick and he could maybe be injured in it? What's even the point of CFB then?

My complaint was with the decision to play Love in the Arizona State game after he had missed the Utah game a week earlier. Looking back at that season, the Arizona State game was sort of a "must win" after losses (to Utah and ND) that really hurt a team with fairly high expectations (pre-season No. 13 in the AP poll). I question whether Love was rushed back more so because the team needed a win rather than because his leg injury had improved (he looked noticeably hobbled against Arizona State).

I don't have a strong memory of how Love looked specifically in Big Game, but his stats were somewhere between bad and mediocre:  22 carries for 74 yards. No strong opinion here as to whether he should have sat.