Bring it on PAC-10...I'm Ready!!!

DON'T MAKE ME KICK YOUR NECK!!!!

:42:








How much longer until game time?

 

Hmmm.....apparently nobody is as fired up about the season as I am (while juggling an equivalent amount of hate for the PAC-10)

I'm just saying, we get a chance to take out 2 PAC-10 schools after we stomp on some Blazers from Bama.

 

I say "Take 'em out!"

 

While I'm looking forward to the upcoming season, it's still more than two months away. I'm pacing myself.

 

Don't peak too early or you will run out of energy. Long, sturdy, and resilient are the keys.

 

Well, considering we're 1-2 vs our last PAC-10 teams, I say it's time we fix that.

 

cut there f*c#ing head off

 

Washington should be easy since they've been the worst team in the Pac 10 for the last couple of years. Oregon will be really tough since they have a good football team and it will be in Outzen and that place is really loud. Since everyone hates the Pac 10 now I wonder if anyone wants to play the monster team of the Pac 10 (the USC Trojans).

 

I'm excited to watch every snap of every sooner game this year. PAC Ten games included. It's going to be so much fun.

 

You could if it wasn't for abc.

 

oregon will not be loud once AD rips off a couple 50+ yarders to start the game.

 

ahhhhhh yea!!!!!!!!!!

 

I've been looking forward to this Washington game for years.

 

Is there a conference weaker than the PAC-10?

and nominated the Big East does not count, they are not a conference in my opinion.

 

well, hypothetically, if they were a "conference" they would be better than the pac-1. at least they aren't a one-team conference

 

No the sky isn't falling, and yes I expect that we will win.

HOWEVER.... easy? I remember that being said about TCU last year.... then Tulsa. Many were saying that about Baylor as well later in the season when we knew what we had in the way of a team.

Need I remind everyone (yes, apparently) that we have essentially the exact same team we had last year with the exact same problem- little experience and questionable depth on the offensive line.

Fortunately, overall our defense should be improved with what now appears to be a good bit of experience and at least some depth in the secondary. So I expect we'll hold our first couple of opponents (incl. WU) down on the scoreboard.

But we had better, because I think it is silly to expect that we are going to do much offensively in the way of lighting up the scoreboard until that offensive line has had time to gel.

And I do expect that we will start putting up some big scores by mid-season (as long as Peterson stays healthy through the early going.) I just think it's gonna take some time... we're still awfully young offensively.

 

i think with last year's experiences, they can light up the scoreboard without a good offensive line. i don't think it could get much worse than last year's, and by midseason, our offense began to learn how to light up the scoreboard a little bit in spite of the offensive line. besides that, instead of having an inexperienced quarterback, we now have one with a tough year under his belt who could end up being the best quarterback in the conference this year if he loses some of his freshman mistakes. with another outlet for scoring, the running game should begin to open up for ad. provided ad stays healthy throughout the season, i think this year's situation is completely different than last years situation

 

I'm sorry, but no... no they can't. I am not cracking on you kid, but that statement shows a complete lack of understanding of the game. Can somebody please help me out with this one?

I'm not saying they can't be a good offensive line eventually... but they cannot light up the scoreboard without one.

I'll put it this way: I challenge you to name one single team ever at any level of competition that lit up the scoreboard on a game-in game-out basis that had a poor or even average offensive line.

A good offensive line is requisite for consistently moving the ball up and down the field and scoring. Period.

Let's use our own Sooners for an example. In 2000 we were a scoring machine with a very experieced and very solid to good offensive line. 2001... youth and inexperience took over. Remember what happened to our scoring? Virtually the same very experienced and talented offensive skill players returned, and we could not consistently rack up big scores. They (the o-line) got a little deeper and more experienced in 2002, and our scoring started coming up. Then in 2003 they were a talented, experienced veteran line... and voila the scoreboards exploded. Ditto 2004. Then 2005 youth and inexperience... do you detect a pattern here?

Last year it didn't help things at all that we had inexperience at the skill positions as well. But it all starts up front. Any coach at any level will tell you that.

I'll give you one more example. Let's take the Sugar Bowl game against LSU. Were LSU's skill players better or more talented than ours. No... they clearly were not. Now we had a very good offensive and defensive line in '03. But between us and LSU... whose offensive and defensive lines as units were clearly better?

It all starts up front... the game is won in the trenches... forever and ever, amen.

 

i'm not saying they could light it up on a game-in game-out basis, all i'm saying is that we were able to light up the scoreboard a couple of times last year, and most of the time it had nothing to do with the offensive line. i'm not saying that we could take all the lineman out of the game and still go score, the only thing i'm saying is that we can still have a successful offense with a less-than-spectacular line. they do need to play decent, but i don't think our entire offense is riding on the offensive line, they've learned better than to count on that. it wouldn't hurt though if our line could return to the elite status it was at in ad's freshman season

 

I'm screwed...I'll be in Officer Training School until September 29th in Alabama...thus no hanging out with my peeps at the tailgate party for awhile.


AAARGH!!! :stunned: