So what's the deal with Kovacs?

Submitted by Dailysportseditor on
I'm very concerned about Jordan Kovacs' condition. He only recorded a single tackle against Purdue and the TV announcers observed he was injured without specifying the extent of his injury. Have there been any reports of his condition?

TheGhostofYost

October 7th, 2012 at 2:48 PM ^

Hopefully this week should give him a chance to get out of the game early.  Illinois looks downright terrible.

BlueGoM

October 7th, 2012 at 2:57 PM ^

Well he (Kovacs) was wearing a knee brace.  However he played the whole game, IIRC.

I'm a little more concerned about Denard's hand.  He clearly injured it towards the end of the game.

 

Pete99

October 7th, 2012 at 9:01 PM ^

Denard hurt his hand late in the 2nd quarter when he was tackled in the backfield on a failed zone-read play. After the play, he was shaking his hand as he was trotting off the field. I'm assuming that since he was back out there to start the 3rd quarter, there were no broken bones.

flysociety3

October 7th, 2012 at 3:17 PM ^

I do think Kovacs looked a little slow out there....

Obviously, the defense played really well as a whole, but there were a few plays that TerBush completed passes, and Kovacs was pretty far behind his guy...

Just saying...

corundum

October 7th, 2012 at 3:20 PM ^

Purdue was lacking a vertical passing game for the most part, but I was somewhat surprised to see that he wasn't used as a blitzer at all. Probably wasn't brought to the line as a blitzer due to Purdue's scheme in which the ball remains in the QB's hands for a maximum of 2.5 seconds. If he was seriously injured, he wouldn't have been in the game.

Perkis-Size Me

October 7th, 2012 at 3:29 PM ^

If Purdue actually put up a consistent offensive attack, this might be a legitimate question. Personally I'm pretty happy if a wideout or running back doesn't make it far enough downfield for the safeties to have to make a tackle. Means the front seven is doing its job.

LB

October 7th, 2012 at 3:31 PM ^

 

"...the TV announcers observed he was injured without specifying the extent of his injury."

I'm not convinced that Hoke tells Brandon the specifics of an injury. What are the chances of him letting a BTN announcer in on the details?

Don

October 7th, 2012 at 3:52 PM ^

but I'm curious about the nature and extent of the knee thing myself. He played hurt last year, so it might be nothing serious.

BigShotDave

October 7th, 2012 at 5:07 PM ^

If we're complaining about Kovacs making one tackle on Saturday, we've clearly forgotten what it was like to watch Obi Ezeh for three straight years at linebacker.  

wolverinenyc

October 7th, 2012 at 5:11 PM ^

If Kovacs getting only 1 tackle results in defensive performances where we give up less than 250 yds of offense and win the turnover battle, I will most certainly take it!

mvp

October 7th, 2012 at 5:51 PM ^

Frustrating that there is so much snark on a relatively innocent question.  It's not like the OP asked about Kovacs' favorite Care Bear or something irrelevant.

Agreed that it is great that not many plays got into the secondary.  But for as many people spend post after post complaining about stupid or pointless topics, there's just as many people that had stupid or pointless responses to the OP.  After about the 3rd comment detailing that the lack of safety tackles is a good thing, I think we have it covered.

There is a legitimate outstanding question about Kovacs' condition.  The board, with many posters that might have insight they can share seems like an appropriate place for the topic.

wolverinenyc

October 7th, 2012 at 8:14 PM ^

wasn't being snarky. I was just pointing out that with his apparent lack of production we had a pretty good defensive performance. I'd prefer to not have to rely on him to make a ton of tackles every game. that's all.