Morning Coffee

by Peter Bean on Jul 5, 2006 7:20 AM CDT in Quick Hits

Hope everyone had a safe and fun 4th of July. Don't look now, but we're less than two months from football season. On to the notes:

*There's a new poll in the right column of the main page, asking who you want to see emerge as Texas' starting quarterback. Please vote when you get a chance.

*Sean's got an interesting 'what if' piece started, inspired by last night's events. Just a few adendums, Sean. I'm pretty sure Bob Stoops forces women home at gun point, Jim Tressel bribes 'em with gifts, and you were correct to leave off Dennis Franchione - he's still in the shed with a sheep.

*Speaking of interesting 'what if' scenarios, CFR has one going on potential CFB trading. Curiously, in his example, he suggests Ohio State go for a wide receiver. It's not so much that I disagree that they need someone opposite Ginn, but rather that they'd be better served by trading for a fierce middle linebacker to replace Hawk immediately and anchor the new unit. 9 of their 11 defensive starters from last year are gone.

*Nico has an interesting thread breaking down the best games to watch. Today's entry tackles Part 3 of Week 1.

*The Wiz notes that some opening lines have been posted for early CFB games. Some lines of note: USC is favored by 10 over Arkansas. Auburn -11 over Washington State. Cal -2.5 at Tennessee. UCLA -5.5 over Utah. And Texas -40 over North Texas.

*Coming up later today: a look at the 2003 season, as well as an introduction to 12 freshman conference players you'll need to know in 2006.

*Lastly, if you have not signed the damned petition yet, go do it now. We're at 252 signatures - within spitting distance of the required 300 to initiate action. Get it done so I can quit bringing this up.

--PB--

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

QBs

Shouldn't there be an option in the poll for the quarterback who performs the best? Why add to or attempt to create a controversy when there isn't one there? Why is it important to pick a "favorite"? Ridiculous.

And enough with the petition already. He'll get to Texas when he gets to it. What's the rush?

by Jason Mayer on Jul 5, 2006 8:15 AM CDT reply actions

And a poo poo to you, too

This is hardly an attempt to start a controversy, Jason. What's wrong with getting a pulse on who people think they want to win the job right now? It'll be irrelevant once play starts - we all know that. No need to get in a huff.

As for the petition, he may not get to Texas at all - it's a draw from the hat - he's not going to preview every team. What's the harm in prodding him? None, I say. It's all in good fun. Why the dour mood today?

by Peter Bean on Jul 5, 2006 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions

seattle

Call it the post-Seattle depression. Just got back in town from a vacation and I wish I was still there.

I figured he was going to preview everyone, especially the national champions.

by Jason Mayer on Jul 5, 2006 9:48 AM CDT reply actions

Ahh

That'll do it.

Speaking of Seattle, I watched Harrison Ford's "Firewall" last night, which takes place in Seattle. I knew it was going to be a bad movie and all - low expectations - but it was just terrible. Even low expectations weren't met.

by Peter Bean on Jul 5, 2006 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions

Re: quarterbacks

Looking back, I did come across as a bit surly in that first post. But I don't know how anyone could even have an opinion on which quarterback they would like to see emerge as the starter.

by Jason Mayer on Jul 5, 2006 10:04 AM CDT reply actions

Which one I want to play

That's good question. And typically, I wouldn't have an opinion. But this year I do. Either QB is a good fit. Both have a good upside, but Snead has a higher ceiling. However, McCoy is just a great kid. Did you hear the story of how this kid helped save a kids life during Memorial Day weekend? Great kid to root for.

It's a tough call. Do you go for the kid that has the most talent (although not by much), or do you go for the kid that just deserves it?

I think either QB will be just fine, though.

Although your comments did come across surly, I agree with you. It's hard to pick a fav at this point.

by GoHorns on Jul 5, 2006 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions

Just getting a sense of the mood

I couldn't endorse a QB at this point, either, but I was genuinely curious if Horns fans had an early favorite yet. I'm happy to see that the results are pretty much 50-50 at this point.

by Peter Bean on Jul 5, 2006 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions

Also

You're right Jason - it would have been helpful to add a "No Favorite Yet" choice to the poll. At this point, we're mostly flipping a coin.

by Peter Bean on Jul 5, 2006 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions

Typo

He didn't save a kids life. It was an older man. Dude had a heart attack on the lake and he (McCoy) and his father swam across the lake (with shoes still on) to help while the medics were in route.

by GoHorns on Jul 5, 2006 12:18 PM CDT up reply actions

sounds identical to 'SC

Sanchez has the higher ceiling, Booty has been in the system and deserves it...I'd have faith in Mack and Carroll for these ones...heaven's knows that they've done well enough over the psat 5 years at picking out QB's to start.

Fight On! Beat the Razorbacks!

by USCLink on Jul 5, 2006 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions

Ark vs. USC

is a must see game.

I like the line too.

Arkansas can play ball control and make this a close game. USC lost their best defensive players in a defense that was less than stellar to begin with.

I stand by my prediction that USC loses to either Ark or Neb. Not becuase USC goes in the toilet, but because those other teams will improve, just enough, to sneak up on them.

Walker, Texas Ranger -- C.D. Parker: And how are you doing, little partner? Lucas Simms: Walker told me I have AIDS.

by EYESofBEVO on Jul 5, 2006 10:14 AM CDT reply actions

Arkansas will be motivated

After the whupping that they took last year at the Colisseum -- this has "revenge game" written all over it.

And that is the singular majesty of college football.

(Practicing my pundit-like detachment in advance of next season's three losses, just to be on the safe side.)

by DC Trojan on Jul 5, 2006 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't think they're up there yet

and Nebraska underwhelms me for reasons I can't explain. I just don't get worried looking at Zach Taylor, I guess.

Cal tho...Cal looks like it could be scary.

Arkansas will be much closer, but because of their new QB, new Offensive coordinator, and 'SC's breadth of talent, I think we squeak that one out by a touchdown after getting behind early...similar to ASU of last year.

Fight On! Beat the Razorbacks!

by USCLink on Jul 5, 2006 5:17 PM CDT up reply actions

Cal at Tennessee

The line says Cal (-2.5) ... that may change with Cal's QB getting into a bar brawl and getting suspended for the opener in Knoxville.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2505771

"Excuse me while I whip this out."

by FreedomDip on Jul 5, 2006 12:05 PM CDT reply actions

It's definitely not good news...

...but it's not terrible either. Frankly, the line would move a lot more if Levy WAS the starter. He's an instant Cal legend for the two games he started and won, but we're all hoping Longshore is fully recovered from his broken leg or Reed is more ready than expected. (A few of us are also cautiously hoping Ayoob put last season behind him and is able to perform, but we're still scared sh*tless about handing the reins back to him).

Levy starting any game this season wouldn't be terrible in itself - he's capable enough - but it would signal that Longshore, Ayoob, and Reed all failed pretty badly. They all have more upside than Levy, and Longshore / Reed are Cal's QB hopes for the next 3-4 years.

As a last point contradicting what I just said, Levy will probably be most valueable at the beginning of the season (like the opener at Neyland) when the pressure is on and experience is at a premium. But even at that point, for the backup QB to come in to the game means something else already went pretty wrong.

by Calfan on Jul 5, 2006 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions