PDA

View Full Version : How would you rather face--Young or McCoy?


footballfanatic
10/13/2008, 08:23 PM
Young: Number one recruit out of high school. Won national championship, blah, blah. Unoffically 1-2 against OU, offically 1-1.

McCoy: Overlooked recruit from 2A school. 2-1 against OU. Not as talented or loved, no ring, but solid performances against OU.
CK Sooner
10/13/2008, 08:24 PM
McCoy
Lott's Bandana
10/13/2008, 08:25 PM
We lost to McCoy twice. VY once. Still more McCoy to come.
sooner59
10/13/2008, 08:26 PM
McCoy
footballfanatic
10/13/2008, 08:32 PM
Who would you rather have QBing for you? White or Bradford?
lloyd45
10/13/2008, 08:35 PM
Anyone who says VY here is dumb.
lloyd45
10/13/2008, 08:35 PM
Bradford for me. He's going to be a great pro.
PalmBeachSooner1
10/13/2008, 08:38 PM
I can't understand the question. how would I face?
JLEW1818
10/13/2008, 08:39 PM
lol

VET??? LETS GET DRUNK TONIGHT
Edmond Sooner
10/13/2008, 08:53 PM
Depends on who was offering the reach-around.
sooner59
10/13/2008, 09:03 PM
Who would you rather have QBing for you? White or Bradford?

I guess I would have to say White since he never lost to Texas, but I could just as easily take Bradford. The kid is good.
footballfanatic
10/13/2008, 09:07 PM
Sorry about the thread typo lol.
I just had another idea for an entirely better thread.
rainiersooner
10/13/2008, 09:19 PM
Very. Strange. Post.
GottaHavePride
10/13/2008, 10:06 PM
It wouldn't matter.

With proper execution our defense can handle either of them.

With sloppy execution and bad tackling, we're ****ed either way.
Jacie
10/14/2008, 06:18 AM
For a moment there in the first half I thought we had Colt's number and were going to roll em up. Colt was running for his life and committed intentional grounding to avoid a sack. I figured he was rattled and OUr D had taken him out of the game. But he came back . . .
Partial Qualifier
10/14/2008, 10:08 AM
Anyone who says VY here is dumb.

That was my first reaction too but after giving it some thought, imma go with Vince. Why? Vince was a freak of a run threat but his passing skills were limited. Yes, he gouged many a defense with his arm in 05 but mostly with simple flys and outs. Teams were terrified of his running ability and he made them pay for it.

We however had the right idea defending him: force him to make quick decisions and (try to) keep his scrambles between the tackles.

I'd rather face that again than a run threat QB sporting an 80% completion percentage in a sophisticated passing attack. As someone else said, we bottled up VY two years out of three (and our offense couldn't sustain a drive in 05). Colt was money all day and he's alot smarter than Vince.

In the end, GHP's right -- with proper adjustment and execution, we woulda handled Colt & company :mad:
OUmillenium
10/14/2008, 10:14 AM
Depends on who was offering the reach-around.

Sorry, I don't have the common courtesy to offer one.
OUmillenium
10/14/2008, 10:14 AM
That was my first reaction too but after giving it some thought, imma go with Vince. Why? Vince was a freak of a run threat but his passing skills were limited. Yes, he gouged many a defense with his arm in 05 but mostly with simple flys and outs. Teams were terrified of his running ability and he made them pay for it.

We however had the right idea defending him: force him to make quick decisions and (try to) keep his scrambles between the tackles.

I'd rather face that again than a run threat QB sporting an 80% completion percentage in a sophisticated passing attack. As someone else said, we bottled up VY two years out of three (and our offense couldn't sustain a drive in 05). Colt was money all day and he's alot smarter than Vince.

In the end, GHP's right -- with proper adjustment and execution, we woulda handled Colt & company :mad:


yep