Trevor Lawrence has 'Rona

smokey_wasp said:
10 days from positive test (or onset of symptoms if those came first). You can’t beat the 10 days with negative tests, unlike the SEC. Will be cutting it very close for ND.
Click to expand...

Diseqc said:
lol
ACC rules about to change
Click to expand...
He's had symptoms. No rule change will work for him. That rule exists only if there are no symptoms and it is in place to prove a false positive test which is apparently what Saban's was. Trevor's is not a false positive.
 
GoGATech said:
He's had symptoms. No rule change will work for him. That rule exists only if there are no symptoms and it is in place to prove a false positive test which is apparently what Saban's was. Trevor's is not a false positive.
Click to expand...
If they’re a day or two away from having him eligible for ND, couldn’t they just say his symptoms started a day or two before the test? Voila he’s available for ND.
 
GoGATech said:
He's had symptoms. No rule change will work for him. That rule exists only if there are no symptoms and it is in place to prove a false positive test which is apparently what Saban's was. Trevor's is not a false positive.
Click to expand...
I’ll believe it when I see someone else run out for the first snap against ND
 
ramblin_wreck08 said:
If they’re a day or two away from having him eligible for ND, couldn’t they just say his symptoms started a day or two before the test? Voila he’s available for ND.
Click to expand...
Yes and this is what I expect will happen.
Diseqc said:
I’ll believe it when I see someone else run out for the first snap against ND
Click to expand...
See above. No rule change needed. He tested positive (got a positive result) on Thursday. If they say his symptoms started on Tuesday, probably got tested Wednesday, and is symptom free by next Thursday, he'll be able to play on Saturday against ND without any rule fudging.
 
Last thing I want is us bailing out those north bend bitches this season only for them to win the conference and turn their backs on us next year. That being said they’re gonna have to beat Clemson twice. And I’m not sure Lawrence being out is enough to beat them once.
 
If we beat ND then he'll 100% play. ACC has to protect their investment.

I believe Clem beats ND without him honestly..... ND is a paper tiger. Clemson is 2 Legit 2 Quit.
 
JoeCakeEater said:
If we beat ND then he'll 100% play. ACC has to protect their investment.

I believe Clem beats ND without him honestly..... ND is a paper tiger. Clemson is 2 Legit 2 Quit.
Click to expand...
The issue is that the backup (a true freshman) has been dealing with shoulder tightness in his throwing arm. That's why he didn't play against us. His backup (Phomachanh) broke his hand against us. Non-throwing hand, but still... not ideal.

I also think that Clemson's run blocking has been suspect this year. Even we were able to contain Etienne, albeit at the expense of our pass defense. The Tigers haven't been able to streamroll people up front this year, instead relying on the dominant passing game to create space for the running game.

I could actually see a low-scoring game. As long as Clemson doesn't give BC free points, they should definitely win handily, but it's not gonna be 56-10 like it could have been otherwise.
 
Swinney announced that Lawrence is out for ND. Wonder if he is experiencing symptoms.
 
From what I have seen of both teams, I still think Clemson will win, even with Ukelele at QB.
 
Had Clemson lost today, they might be in trouble. As it stands, they can afford to lose to ND without Trevor. They just need him for the rematch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top