Started By
Message
re: SI: Why Alabama, Not Oklahoma, Should be #1
Posted on 5/25/11 at 11:59 am to X
Posted on 5/25/11 at 11:59 am to X
quote:
You're probably right. I mean, if you think about it, the last time we started a new quarterback that was half as talented as these two it was disastrous.
Yes because history is always the best indicator of the future. It's a preseason poll, so right away it's horrible IMO. But if they're going to exist I'm going to pick the team with the superior quarterback, which is OU.
1
Posted on 5/25/11 at 4:28 pm to Tiger Authority
quote:
Yes because history is always the best indicator of the future. It's a preseason poll, so right away it's horrible IMO. But if they're going to exist I'm going to pick the team with the superior quarterback, which is OU
To be fair Bama's QBs are new, so nobody can really judge if OU's is better. To say so one way or another is speculation at best...and there's not a whole lot to base that off of right now.
This post was edited on 5/25/11 at 4:29 pm
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News