Huskers vs. Indiana - May 11-13

When/where was the 1st incident that Bland is referring to?

The “protection” reasoning is bunk or he would’ve been out there in the top half playing SS before pinch-hitting him next time his spot comes up. That was an immediate benching. Just own that. 

Twice I’ve been thrown at and twice I knew it was coming, both times my coach prepped me for it, he didn’t pull me for my “protection” or to avoid a fight. 

I’d rather he just say it was benching rather than this excuse making. 

 
Savage Husker said:
When/where was the 1st incident that Bland is referring to?

The “protection” reasoning is bunk or he would’ve been out there in the top half playing SS before pinch-hitting him next time his spot comes up. That was an immediate benching. Just own that. 

Twice I’ve been thrown at and twice I knew it was coming, both times my coach prepped me for it, he didn’t pull me for my “protection” or to avoid a fight. 

I’d rather he just say it was benching rather than this excuse making. 
Click to expand...
Also judging by what he said and how he reacted to Gelo coming back to the dugout, it wasn't a protection thing. This was for sure a backtrack after looking silly on multiple outlets for not allowing a college kid to have fun. Also for anyone watching those games, that was the last bit of energy we really showed all weekend, the effort was butt after that homer (sans Hohensee). 

 
FrantzHardySwag said:
Also judging by what he said and how he reacted to Gelo coming back to the dugout, it wasn't a protection thing. This was for sure a backtrack after looking silly on multiple outlets for not allowing a college kid to have fun. Also for anyone watching those games, that was the last bit of energy we really showed all weekend, the effort was butt after that homer (sans Hohensee). 
Click to expand...


Yup. I’m not a fan of staring down homers and I’m whatever about bat flips, unless they’re egregious like Joey Bats a couple postseasons ago. I think their should have been a conversation and if there was already a warning, then I understand the benching. Saying it’s for protection is a PR spin when he could have just reiterated his response from Friday (choosing not to comment and leaving it at “the conversation is between us”) or expanded on it being about prior conversations. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top