true that. -M

1) Numbers don't lie, and as discussed, in this case, they are highly reliable. Reid's first year as the real QB was far and away better than Wood's.

2) The OSU coaches know better than the OSU fans.

3) The backup is usually the most popular player on the team. Woods isn't even a backup. He's a Safety. There is at least one, probably, there are 3 better QBs on the team than Mr. Woods.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Bobby Reid: - First year:

PASSING....Att..Cmp..Int..Yds..TD..Lg..Pct
2005..........108..52......4....602....2...49..48. 1
RUSHING....Att..Yds..TD..Lg
2005...........61...139...0....28

Donovan Woods: - First year:

PASSING....Att..Cmp..Int..Yds..TD..Lg..Pct
2004..........187....97....5...1628..13..68..51.9
RUSHING....Att..Yds..TD..Lg
2004..........123..436...10..35

You can't really compare a season in which he didn't play a full schedule. That '05 campaign, however, did include an unlikely win over a very good Tech team.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

That shouldn't effect passing efficiency. Besides, if you compare his 2006 season, he is only marginally better than Woods in 2004.

And I guess the coaches don't know what they're doing at OSU then?

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

I don't know what that has to do with anything. I'm just setting the facts straight.

I'm not saying, nor have I ever said that in this thread, that the OSU coaches are incompetent. I am saying when Reid took over as QB, there was no improvement at the position. At that time many fans WERE critical of the coachs' decision. It wasn't until last year that Reid's stats made some improvments and validated the coachs' actions.

Well the argument is that the stats bear out that Reid was good for OSU at QB. Woods' talents were clearly (and are clearly) needed in the secondary. In hindsight, they made some good moves.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Yes. Agreed.

Oh I love it , a good old fashioned in state rivalry. Hopefully the Pokes can be good enough to keep up their part of it. It can only be good for the state.

78-16-7 is hardly a rivalry.

Now.. OSU-Baylor.. that's a rivalry. I think OSU only leads Baylor by one game there.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

It never ceases to amaze me the degree to which OSU faithful will go to manufacture a rivalry with OU in reality that matches the one in their collective heads.

Boone Pickens, in an effort to buy the tradition the Pokes could never earn on the field, is subsidizing a rebuild of the entire OSU athletic program, including the bowling of a stadium that's never been consistently more than half full at its *current* capacity, yet all they can talk about is "beat OU, OU sux, OU isn't that good..." Good grief, get a grip, get a life, something. I hear Ags gripe endlessly about how they don't get the props OU gets, yet they're seemingly clueless that the way to earn those props is to stop trying to emulate OU and win something on your own. But, as I've heard too many OSU fans over the years say, "I'd rather go 1-10 and beat OU than anything else." Boy, how about that for grand aspirations. Fortunately, from a generic "football fan" perspective, OSU has a coach who is probably better suited to take OSU to the next level than any coach in their previous 20 years.

For me, as a lifelong Sooner fan, and OU graduate, OSU is just another team we play that's an obstacle to our greater perpetual ambitions of conference and national championships, all of which is part of the tradition and legacy OSU can only dream about. Yes, there's a degree of in-state novelty to playing and beating OSU, but that's all there is. While OSU seeks to better a team a couple of hours south, OU seeks to win nationwide.

Oh, and by the way, I'm delighted the names are back on the jerseys

-sd

Minor issue: Over the last 5 years attendance has been at or near capacity.

Over 100 years of disappointment prove that.

**Full Disclosure: I'm an OU fan**

Boomer Sooner Baby!!!!!

Make that 17. Woo hoo!!

BOOMER SOONER!