Page 1 of 1

That is IT!

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:17 pm
by the_ouskull
Two things, 1) I'm sick and tired of Bob Stoops making a sh*tty gameplan, bringing it in and getting kicked in the teeth using it... yet continuing to use it for the course of an entire game, or at least an entire half. 'cause why, exactly? Is he THAT stubborn? Is he THAT pompous? To think that maybe it'll START working? (I realize that the ISU game is featuring a lot of bad breaks that are, in no way, gameplan-related. This is a much deeper-seeded issue...)

2) I'm breaking up with Sam Bradford. No more civil union for us. I'm sticking with the fiancee from here on out. Period.

the_ouskull

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:49 pm
by RadioFan
Not if we keep turning the ball over. Sheesh.

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:05 pm
by Moby Dick
first half i was like...where's John Blake???

luckily for us..ISU sucks ass. game is nowhere near over (just ended 3rd quarter) but i'm pretty sure we'll win this damned game.

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:07 pm
by King Crimson
i wouldn't put this on the staff or gameplan. this is on the field.

this looks like a team that took care of business against 2 ranked teams the last two weeks, read about it the fishwrap and getting caught looking ahead to a bye week off.

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:54 pm
by the_ouskull
This is on the staff, the QB, and the gameplan. The staff's gameplan is to dummy-down the offense for Bradford when we're on the road, allowing opposing defenses to tee off on us. The QB, Bradford, responds in kind, today in particular, by over and under throwing receivers all day long, mainly 'cause he's throwing off of his back foot 'cause our offensive line is having trouble handling the blitzing and stunting of smaller, faster, d-linemen. It's a mess. We should have beaten this team by 30, not 10. Either way, I'll take it, but I'm still dumping Sam. I need to date other, better quarterbacks, like whoever's at Notre Dame this year.

Sin,
Beano Powlus.

Errr...

But, we're still in the running for the BCS title game, so I'll take it. I guess when you're good, you can afford to be nitpicky. :D

the_ouskull

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 7:54 pm
by the_ouskull
This is on the staff, the QB, and the gameplan. The staff's gameplan is to dummy-down the offense for Bradford when we're on the road, allowing opposing defenses to tee off on us. The QB, Bradford, responds in kind, today in particular, by over and under throwing receivers all day long, mainly 'cause he's throwing off of his back foot 'cause our offensive line is having trouble handling the blitzing and stunting of smaller, faster, d-linemen. It's a mess. We should have beaten this team by 30, not 10. Either way, I'll take it, but I'm still dumping Sam. I need to date other, better quarterbacks, like whoever's at Notre Dame this year.

Sin,
Beano Powlus.

Errr...

But, we're still in the running for the BCS title game, so I'll take it. I guess when you're good, you can afford to be nitpicky. :D

the_ouskull

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 8:07 pm
by Dinsdale
My boner for an Oklahoma/Oregon BSC Bowl is going a little flaccid at the moment.

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:48 am
by RevLimiter
Where the FUCK was this OU team LAST WEEK??? :x :x :x

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:01 am
by WolverineSteve
So....you're engaged?

Congrats kid.

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:14 am
by RadioFan
WolverineSteve wrote:So....you're engaged?

Congrats kid.
Yeah, but he just broke up, so it's a push.

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:38 am
by King Crimson
i will say this game did feature two of the dumbest looking plays i've ever seen. the fumble no one from OU saw.....until Bradford comes back from going to the sidelines to make a big tackle. and the goofball run after INT after the ball hit Gresham in the numbers and bounces up in the air for the INT. looked like a peewee game. thankfully, OU made a stop on D so that one stayed off the "highlights".

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 12:57 pm
by KatMode
OU needs a year's supply of

Image

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:19 pm
by the_ouskull
Yeah, engaged. We're still working on the rock, but that's because she's finishing school (pre-med, not high school, a-holes) and I'm still a teacher who has just started coaching. I hate you, money. :D

I hate OU's schemes more right now though. But, so does she, so she's a keeper.

the_ouskull

Re: That is IT!

Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:09 pm
by Cornhusker
the_ouskull wrote:Two things, 1) I'm sick and tired of Bob Stoops making a sh*tty gameplan, bringing it in and getting kicked in the teeth using it... yet continuing to use it for the course of an entire game, or at least an entire half. 'cause why, exactly? Is he THAT stubborn? Is he THAT pompous? To think that maybe it'll START working?
OMG, you could insert Bill Callahan and take this statement to the 10th power if your a Neb. fan.

Listen, I don't wanna hear bitchin' about WINNING by 10 against a team that was amped by a hell'va good coach at home. Hey a one point win against Ball St. looks better every week from where Corn fan stands. Yeah I'm bitter and you're spoiled. I'd trade places with ya in a heartbeat.
You have issues with Stoops...? we sure as hell will take him off your hands.

I had OU in the pick 'em so yeah I was pissed, but if you could see the trainwreak in Lincoln you'd count your blessings. Man we suck sooo bad. OU looks damn good to anyone here, then again most everyone does.

Rack the engagement...marriage IS the toughest thing you'll ever do outside of raising your kids. Just a little fatherly advice D. No charge.

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:34 am
by the_ouskull
I attended school during the Gibbs / Schnellenburger / Blake eras, so to call me "spoiled" is only partially accurate.

My issues with Stoops are just those, and, frankly, for the kind of program he runs, they're more than worth it in the long run. I just get frustrated on Gameday from time to time. At least it's not Natural Light-fueled.

the_ouskull