"Physical" Stanford football

[kevpks]

All week, I've been hearing about how OU should be more like Stanford and play physical, hard-nosed football. This supposedly is the type of offense that is more dependable and less likely to get you beat. If tonight is an example of that, I'll pass. I prefer our current offense, which is capable of huge numbers even with our much maligned starting quarterback. The answer is not a new system but more discipline, poise, and better execution. Coaches and players have an equal responsibility to achieve that. To say they will is not sunshine pumping. There is historical precedent.

"The players will grow into the system, day to day, month to month, year to year." -Bob Stoops

[BigTip]

It was a fun game.

[picasso]

I'm pretty sure we got physical with them just a few seasons ago. We shall get the horses back.

[85sooners]

Phuck u

[Flagstaffsooner]

Phuck uIn stollwater that is 'phuck ewe'.

[kevpks]

Phuck u

Riveting commentary...

[goingoneight]

Wake me up when Stanford executes a balanced, physical, offensive gameplan.

[BoulderSooner79]

Stanford's strategy is sound (not saying it should be ours), they just are not that talented at the skill positions. They were ranked that high because they beat an over-rated USC team -- just like KSU is in the top 10 because they beat an over-rated.... oops.

[8timechamps]

I watched most of the game, and I still don't really know how Washington won. UW's QB, Keith Price, was chased out of the pocket on almost every snap (on throwing plays). But UWs defense showed up big time. Stanford is a solid team, but I think beating SC made a lot of folks think they were better than they really are. This is already shaping up to be an interesting year in the top 25.

[BoulderSooner79]

Stanford lost because they gambled trying to stuff a 4th and short and got burned for a TD. On offense, they got a weak performance from their QB and their one dangerous weapon at WR has poor hands. I watched the Stanford/USC game and their QB played poorly in that one too, but they won because their D made Barkley play poorly as well. Can't get very far with poor QB play.

[Fraggle145]

"The players will grow into the system, day to day, month to month, year to year." -Bob Stoops

Sometimes you'd rather have sophomores than 5th year seniors - (paraphrasing) the King.

[goingoneight]

Stanford's strategy is sound (not saying it should be ours), they just are not that talented at the skill positions. They were ranked that high because they beat an over-rated USC team -- just like KSU is in the top 10 because they beat an over-rated.... oops.

You can say it... Miami is definitely overrated.

[Sabanball]

All i thought after watching the game was congrats to the PAC 12 on becoming even more irrelevant. UW loses to LSU 41-3 and then turns around and beats the conference's top contender. Laughter abounds in SEC country...

[XingTheRubicon]

All i thought after watching the game was congrats to the PAC 12 on becoming even more irrelevant. UW loses to LSU 41-3 and then turns around and beats the conference's top contender. Laughter abounds in SEC country...

The Pac 10 conference's top contender is Oregon. Also, any laughter in the SEC should be directed toward Arkansas, and Auburn...and Kentucky, and Vanderbilt, and Tennessee, and Mississippi, and Missouri.

[OU_Sooners75]

All week, I've been hearing about how OU should be more like Stanford and play physical, hard-nosed football. This supposedly is the type of offense that is more dependable and less likely to get you beat. If tonight is an example of that, I'll pass. I prefer our current offense, which is capable of huge numbers even with our much maligned starting quarterback. The answer is not a new system but more discipline, poise, and better execution. Coaches and players have an equal responsibility to achieve that. To say they will is not sunshine pumping. There is historical precedent.

"The players will grow into the system, day to day, month to month, year to year." -Bob Stoops

The problem isn't the system, you're correct. The problem is the coaches in the system, not the players.

Any system must be flexible. And the coaches in that system must be able to understand that some players don't do everything in the system as good as the last person. So the coaches need to be able to bend the system to fit that player.

And that is what's wrong.

Landry Jones isn't a bad QB. However he isn't a Sam Bradford either. Te kid has limits. LJs limits are running with the ball, trusting his pocket, and throwing on the run. Among a couple of others.

[kevpks]

Stanford lost because they gambled trying to stuff a 4th and short and got burned for a TD. On offense, they got a weak performance from their QB and their one dangerous weapon at WR has poor hands. I watched the Stanford/USC game and their QB played poorly in that one too, but they won because their D made Barkley play poorly as well. Can't get very far with poor QB play.

Very true; no scheme can hide poor QB play forever. It eventually will catch up with you. A more extreme example happened to LSU in the title game last year.

[Sabanball]

The Pac 10 conference's top contender is Oregon. Also, any laughter in the SEC should be directed toward Arkansas, and Auburn...and Kentucky, and Vanderbilt, and Tennessee, and Mississippi, and Missouri.

I misspoke. Meant to say contender and not TOP contender.

Yes, we have our share of scrub teams this yr, but we've also got 4 teams in the top 6 in the country in the latest rankings--first time in history that a conference has been able to do that. But hey who's counting?

For fans that supposedly care nothing about conference affiliation or regional pride, you sure do like to talk about and mention the sec, sec, sec a lot.....

[BoulderSooner79]

All i thought after watching the game was congrats to the PAC 12 on becoming even more irrelevant. UW loses to LSU 41-3 and then turns around and beats the conference's top contender. Laughter abounds in SEC country...


I misspoke. Meant to say contender and not TOP contender.

Yes, we have our share of scrub teams this yr, but we've also got 4 teams in the top 6 in the country in the latest rankings--first time in history that a conference has been able to do that. But hey who's counting?

For fans that supposedly care nothing about conference affiliation or regional pride, you sure do like to talk about and mention the sec, sec, sec a lot.....

You're the one that brought it up. And since you're a 'Bama fan, why in the world do you feel the need to boast about the conference? You're sitting in the catbird seat.

[OU_Sooners75]

I misspoke. Meant to say contender and not TOP contender.

Yes, we have our share of scrub teams this yr, but we've also got 4 teams in the top 6 in the country in the latest rankings--first time in history that a conference has been able to do that. But hey who's counting?

For fans that supposedly care nothing about conference affiliation or regional pride, you sure do like to talk about and mention the sec, sec, sec a lot.....

Honestly in the grand scheme of things, conference alignment means very little.

And as far as 4 top 10 teams. By seasons end the SEC will likely have two, maybe 3.

This is the problem with preseason polls. From what I have seen from south carolina and Georgia, they are in no way top 10 teams. And LSU hasn't really looked all that well either.

Bama is what's carrying the SEC right now, and frankly when you get past Bama, the rest of the conference looks like any other.

Now back to picking on LJ and the OU offense!

[mainline13]

I misspoke. Meant to say contender and not TOP contender.

For fans that supposedly care nothing about conference affiliation or regional pride, you sure do like to talk about and mention the sec, sec, sec a lot.....

Dude, you have 1600 posts on our board - and you are far from the only SEC fan who is apparently enamored of our program and who hangs out here. How can we avoid talking about your SEC?

[Sabanball]

Dude, you have 1600 posts on our board - and you are far from the only SEC fan who is apparently enamored of our program and who hangs out here. How can we avoid talking about your SEC?

Great question!:)