Here's a fun little scenario to ponder. Word from a reliable source on the inside is that they are tinkering with the idea of moving Spurlock to WR/RB and Robert Lane will be the starting QB. I'm sure they will play with the idea in spring practice. Interesting theory indeed, and it makes sense. I just wonder who between Lane and Spur has the best and most accurate arm. I haven't seen Lane throw, but Spur is quite impressive. I have a feeling that this spring game is going to be one of the most fun to watch in years because of the guys trying to win the starting QB job. It hasn't been an issue for the past three or four years.
So, if Spurlock isn't the starting guy at QB afterall, here is my prediction for the QB situation. What do y'all think?
1. Robert Lane
2. Seth Smith
3. Ethan Flatt
WR
it will be spurlock, I am certain, but if he didn't start (like if he quit or something), I would agree with that pecking order, except I would move Flatt ahead of Seth, b/c he knows the system better.
What I'd like to see is a QB who can run the ball and throw accurately. I think that puts defenses on the lookout all over the durn field and gives them fits. Robt. Lane, from what I know (which ain't much), is more of a Manning-style drop-back passer because he's tall and lanky. I think Spur should be the man taking snaps as long as Tremaine continues to have days like he had against OSU (is Tremaine a sr? I think he's a jr.) then we'll have the RB spot, or at least one of them, filled.
As far as receivers go Taye, Flowers, Kerry Johnson and Espy should return and that has us set with others waiting in the wings.
That's just my two cents worth. I'd like to see the QB have the option of throwing or running and being good and both and for that I think Spur should be the man.
What about Pittman!?!? Anyone know?
Turner is a SR. Next year our backs should be Pearson,Jacobs and Pittman.
KlutzDio I Wrote:What I'd like to see is a QB who can run the ball and throw accurately. I think that puts defenses on the lookout all over the durn field and gives them fits. Robt. Lane, from what I know (which ain't much), is more of a Manning-style drop-back passer because he's tall and lanky. I think Spur should be the man taking snaps as long as Tremaine continues to have days like he had against OSU (is Tremaine a sr? I think he's a jr.) then we'll have the RB spot, or at least one of them, filled.
As far as receivers go Taye, Flowers, Kerry Johnson and Espy should return and that has us set with others waiting in the wings.
That's just my two cents worth. I'd like to see the QB have the option of throwing or running and being good and both and for that I think Spur should be the man.
What about Pittman!?!? Anyone know?
hey dio, just wanted to let you know that Robert Lane was the number 1 DUAL threat qb in the nation last year. He has good speed, real good speed. remember he is a baseball player, and did well on stolen bases. He also is an accurate passer. He will be a good un
It will certainly be interesting to see what happens. I'm looking forward to the spring game weekend so that we can get an idea of how things will look. Granted, I know the Cotton Bowl was only four days ago, but I'm so excited about the way things turned around this year, that I'm already looking forward to '04. Let's not forget, we get the Vols in Oxford next year.
First things first...I'm planning a little summer trip to Omaha hopefully.
WR
Thanks for the info Rebelknut and Marine!
Sorry you don't like Plato, USMC :D !
WizardRebel Wrote:It will certainly be interesting to see what happens. I'm looking forward to the spring game weekend so that we can get an idea of how things will look. Granted, I know the Cotton Bowl was only four days ago, but I'm so excited about the way things turned around this year, that I'm already looking forward to '04. Let's not forget, we get the Vols in Oxford next year.
I'm the same way Wiz. I'm already making inquiries about season tickets for football '04. I may even try to make it up to Laramie for the WY game.
Btw, when is Red and Blue weekend, I'd like to get up there for that.
The game coincides with Dixie Week, EBR!
You should know this you old fraternity boy!
Has anybody seen a schedule for '04 yet?
Wryword Wrote:Has anybody seen a schedule for '04 yet?
<a href='http://olemisssports.ocsn.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/04-future-schedule.html' target='_blank'>schedule '04</a>
Here it is Wry.
Does anyone know why everyone played 12 this year but next we are going back to 11?
Yeah, we played 12 last year as well, and I believe we played 12 in '99 or '00 if I'm not mistaken. Not sure as to the reasoning.
WR
Whoever the QB is will have a little time to get ready for the meat of the schedule. Of course none of our games ever seem to be gimme's but Tennessee is'nt until October 16th.
After looking at the schedule it makes me wonder why I buy season tics. Home games are Memphis, Vandy, Ar State, Tenn the 1st good one, then AU, and State on Thanksgiving Day.
12 games vs. 11?
One of the reasons a couple of years ago was that NCAA football was to begin (for 90% of the teams) at the end of August, specifically the last weekend of August. That way conferences could work out there conf. schedules and add a fourth (or fifth for some teams) non-conf. opponent. If the last weekend of August falls on a bad week, then it'll mess up the logistics on scheduling for the conf. Well at least acc. to an SI piece done two years ago. The reasoning might have changed.
One thing about the BCS vs. the AP poll and all that vis-a-vis 12 game schedules that has collegiate football afficionados worried is that the more teams on a school's schedule will result in at least one loss. Think about it. If a team goes through the regular season with 12 games, then makes it to a championship game that makes 13 games, then a bowl for a grand total of 14 (hey, I can add!). Playing so many games from August to January on the NCAA level would make it almost impossible for one team to end up undefeated and the all-around nasty champs.
To remedy this, I think we should go back to 10 games in the regular season, with conference championships in all conferences (and get fricken Notre Dame in a durn conference). Relegate all those pre-xmas bowls to decide a semifinal and use pre-New Year's bowl to decide who plays for the nasty championship. That would make the NCAA season about 15 games for the champ and runner up. About 12 to 13 for other teams that don't make it quite as far.
Of course this won't work because it makes too damn much sense. Anyway, I think NCAA football is too durn big and vast to have just one national champion. And split ones allow us to rag LSU fans--"...y'all didn't win it outright, ha ha!"
