Link00707

I will happily admit that I want a LOOK at what different can be.

Different can be a variety of things. Harris at QB, a more spread look, running out 3 wide sets, etc.

As of right now, Harris is mostly an unknown. We have seen flashes of really good play along with flashes of really bad play. But what we have now is consistently bad play. So give different a chance. If it fails, so be it. But at least you can say you tried.

Would be far worse if we lose to Arkansas and/or A&M and don't even TRY to give Harris a shot if we need more offense.

ETA: I also do not buy into the whole "judge Harris on his performance at Auburn" argument. It has been a long time since that game, so to say he is the same QB when he hasn't even seen the field since is an unsupported statement.

Technically speaking, I suppose it COULD get worse. However, it is hard to see that happening. Both QBs are efficient at handing the ball off. Jennings is giving up turnovers (3 INTs in the last 3 games), so the argument that he won't cost us games is null.

Harris may not have known the playbook well at Auburn, however, it is unreasonable to assume he has made NO progress since then. And we have no evidence to support that claim since he has not been given a chance. My biggest concern is the experience argument, but that has been beaten to death.

If you need experience to play but are never given any because you don't have enough experience to perform (per the coaches), how will you ever have a fair shot at playing?

I really don't think they need to be ranked ahead of Bama. I honestly think that the computers would be enough to push OSU above Bama as long as they're just 3/4 in the human polls, even with Bama at a solid 2.

quote:

---

well, ok. but replace concussion with unconscious in my post

---

If Lowery has a concussion his testimony is ruled invalid because he has no idea WTF is going on around him and could suffer from memory loss, etc.[quote]well, ok. but replace concussion with unconscious in my post

I may be stretching...but maybe this is his way of saying, "Crap, the shoes didn't match. Now what..."

One thing is pretty clear...Lowery lied in the police report.
IF he changed his story when he interviewed with the police at the station, one would think they'd have tossed the case right there because he was clearly lying at some point.
If they failed to do so...then this was gross oversight on the part of their investigative staff. Since they kept pursuing the case...and we assume they are at least somewhat competent, it becomes easy to infer that Lowery's interview at the police statement matches what he said in the report.

This is what will happen. If "Andrew" was as innocent as some believe, charges would have been pressed and people would have dragged downtown already. This filing is too late and the truth is blurred.

25

Vacated if after the season, forfeited if during.
I think this was mentioned some time back in another post...