DeSean Bishop Injury

#31
#31
He won’t be 100%. That’s for sure. Looked like a nasty ankle roll to me.
From my view of the mechanism of injury it appeared to be a medial collateral strain, hoping that is all it is because a meniscus could also be affected. They'll know today but we're likely not to be informed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LittleVol
#32
#32
From my view of the mechanism of injury it appeared to be a medial collateral strain, hoping that is all it is because a meniscus could also be affected. They'll know today but we're likely not to be informed.
 
#33
#33
I thought Bishop was grabbing his hamstring. Pretty sure it wasn’t a knee which is the scariest injury for me to see.

I think you may be on to something, but I think he'll be fine. The reason the tackle was the way it was could be Bishop wasn't at full explosiveness during the run like he was tightening up.
 
#34
#34
I'm all for protecting players but its a double-edged sword because the last thing we want is to give the subpar officiating another "discretion" penalty. It's way too influential on a game.
I am perfectly good with giving out suspensions after the film reviews instead of flags real time for DANGEROUS tactics. That word gets out and solves the problem WHEN video evidence is CLEAR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rocketskates
#37
#37
I remember watching a state playoff game in which Bishop put on a pretty good show,and I came on here and raved about him and wanted UT to go after him.I don't think he is the best back we have ever had but he is earning his place.I hope he is well very soon.Coach said last night it didn't seem to be a long term injury!
 
#38
#38
It isn’t arguable. He may miss a couple cuts; he may not have breakaway sped, but our offense goes so much better with Bishop I. The backfield.

Why?

Serviceable+ running back, (especially when our line plays well), but very good when in the backfield because he makes the passing game a threat with his pass protection.

Early in the season, Thomas lit it up. After a few games of film, teams start stacking the line against him and Lewis because they k ow the (deep) passing game suffrs when Bishop is not in, so they stack the line.

I mostly agree and early in the season I thought that Bishop was playing like he should be third string but the last two games have shown that his vision is significantly better than PLew's and he is more physical than Star. Combine that with his pass blocking and he is RB1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HalfullVol
#42
#42
Star was the first few games but Bishop has been lately. PLew is the best in short yardage.
Bishop has been consistent all season.
He’s only a sophomore and is 43 yards away from having 1,000 career yards.
He’s averaging 7.6 yards per carry for his career so far.

If we bring in DGG that will only make us better.
He could learn A LOT from Bishop so I hope they get to play together
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol in Buckeye Land
#43
#43
It isn’t arguable. He may miss a couple cuts; he may not have breakaway sped, but our offense goes so much better with Bishop I. The backfield.

Why?

Serviceable+ running back, (especially when our line plays well), but very good when in the backfield because he makes the passing game a threat with his pass protection.

Early in the season, Thomas lit it up. After a few games of film, teams start stacking the line against him and Lewis because they k ow the (deep) passing game suffrs when Bishop is not in, so they stack the line.
I think that low balls him a little. He has good vision and short area quickness. His power is above average for his size. He lacks top end speed but that's about it.

And as you suggest, he does everything else very well that you want out of a RB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLINVONORE
Advertisement



Back
Top