Originally Posted by Big Studly
you are right, the Heisman is a season to season award, so lets make sure he didn't have what I am going to call a Tony Romo type year (because I think Romo is set up to fail this year), before we anoint him the next great college QB. You know no underclassman is going to win the heisman unless they have some crazy year where they just blow everyone away....if the stats are close, an underclassman (FR., SO.) will NEVER win a heisman. That being said, he has 2 more years, then if the stats are close, I will buy that he might have a shot.
Underclassman or not, you still cannot deny what he did on the field. Nothing has significantly changed for either Colt or Romo so I don't know how you can base your opinion that either one might fail.
I am glad Bomar was kicked off the team, he was over rated. When Thompson was a backup, and he came in and played awesome against A&M, I had high hopes for him, but after seeing him in action over the course of a year, he was quite dissapointing. I will defend OU to the death, but I know when they have sub par talent. Don't forget that 11-3 should be 12-2, and the only people that still believe OU "lost" that game are Oregon fans.
Hey, Texas should have been 11-1 and headed for the Big XII Championship until a freak play. It happens. There is no * for Texas or OU last season. Whats done is done.
True about A&M, but if they can ever be consistant, I think they have a chance.
With Francakes at the helm, they have 0
Tech is a joke, but they are fun to watch. You never know when they might score 35 points in the first quarter, then blow it by the end of the game! Tell me that wasn't a fun game to watch! I hated that Texas won, but it was still a fun game. Then the A&M game where Tech scored to win it on the last play, then the OSU game where they almost lost on the last play. You never know what you are going to get with them, that is what makes them fun to watch.
They are fun to watch when they play teams that are similar to their talent level, but when they play someone like Texas, OU, etc. they generally get pounded pretty good. Its okay to see every now and then, but to watch it on a constant basis would be boring because you know that none of what they are doing translates into them being a success in the NFL.
Originally Posted by BlueThunder99TA
Bomar had all the right tools to be a stud, too bad he thought too much of himself.
As far as Thompson, although mediocre, he was a SAVIOR last year for the team.
The only thing Bomar had going for him was that 5* ranking from Rivals. OU did a great job of "hiding, not highlighting" Paul Thompson last year. Sorry, but I had to throw that Hoge quote out there.
In the big games, he didn't play well at all (Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, or Boise St.) If you look at those games, combined he went was: 60.7 QB Rating, 56/105, 53.3%, 746 yards, 4 TD/6 INT. OU was 2-2 for those 4 games. Thats not a savior, thats being more lucky than good.
Originally Posted by BlueThunder99TA
since 2000, OU has played for 3 National Championships(00', 03', 04') & 5 Big 12 Titles(00', 02', 03', 04', 06') and with the exception of Jason White, each time it was with an unknown/untested QB running the show. I think it's safe to say, OU doesn't "need" a veteran to get them headed in the right direction.
sidenote: however, it would be nice to get a guy that plays a couple solid seasons, the revolving QB thing gets kinda old.
Congrats. Too bad that really doesn't translate to this coming season as those teams were stacked when Stoops inherited players and was initially winning the recruiting battle in Texas against Mack Brown. That is not the case now. If OU fans think that the QB position for their team is not an issue, you are putting your head in the sand.
Originally Posted by JasonB
We did ok last year without Peterson (I believe 6-0). And the two guys that filled in for him (and averaged more yards per game) are back as well as DeMarco Murray. Running back will be the least of our worries on offense, and it will help whoever is named QB settle in just like it did with Thompson last year. Whoever they name won't be the star of the team, but they will be more than capable of winning games. With OU's offensive line and two solid tight ends this will be the best chance a new QB has had for OU in three years (including the one about to start). I'm not sure why that is so laughable? But then again I don't have your superior football knowledge.
Yes, and in those 6 games you played: Colorado (2-10), Missouri (8-5), A&M (9-4), Texas Tech (8-5), Baylor (4-8), and Oklahoma State (7-6). Not exactly a "Murderer's Row" schedule there especially for the "high and mighty" Sooners.
I'd say that part of the success the backups had is the fact they had fresh legs. Peterson was seeing 30+ carries every game and they weren't taking hardly any snaps, that given the fact they played some pretty weak run defense teams explains a pretty big portion of why they did what they did when Peterson wasn't in there.
OU's offensive line this year may be better than last year's, but that doesn't say a whole lot and since when did OU start featuring their TE?
Sorry, but Joe Jon Finley isn't anything special. Hell, Jermichael Finley almost equaled his career output in one season and he was a Red-Shirt Freshman. Other than Finley, OU has nothing but Freshman behind him so I'm not quite sure how that could be seen as a strength of any significance.
Unless Texas falters, OU will be behind Texas again this year. If anything, it looks like this:
3. Texas Tech/A&M
5. Oklahoma State