ADVERTISEMENT

Bowl game history for Bob...

Sort of. It's the age and health thing.

Hope your days are productive, healthy, and beneficial to you, your family, and those whom you have the opportunity to influence and enrich.

fitty has my back and I have no doubt that he is sincere. I have yours as well as many others here.

If you can tolerate me, even in mild disagreement, that would be just another blessing to me.

Boomer Sooner
Psalm 51:10. Read it last night actually. Relationship > reaction when it comes to posts I read here...most of the time. :) Definitely applies to you my friend. No "toleration" required.
 
I have no burdens here so I do consider a leave a stupid suggestion. I've taken a break from here before because I let some of the crap get to me. Such is not the case now. I'm just no longer being courteous when courtesy is not deserved. I like discussing things here but if what I say going forward gets me booted I'll be just fine. I try to be positive in all things and we've got a lot to be positive about as Sooner fans, yet so many can only hang on the very few negatives. It must be sad to live that way but I have no empathy. If someone wants to wallow in negativity that's their prerogative but I view it and them as acting pathetic.

You can shake in your boots over Baylor and TCU if it makes you feel better but I'm not going to. The Bears are the "sexy" team right now. It will change eventually. It always does. And soon a better program will take Briles away. The Frogs were lucky we handed them a win in 2014 and were a healthy Baker away from a blowout loss in November.

When the dust settles we'll still be Oklahoma but we need Baylor, Okie State and TCU to step up with the losses of Nebraska, A&M, Colorado and Mizz.
The only time I quiver in my boots is when Obama executes another executive order as a last resort (actually his only resort as he has no intention of negotiating with Congress) to him not getting his way.

People usually reap what they sow. Adversarial confrontation must be your newly acquired style. Hope it takes you far.

You say the problem here is that so many on the Scoop "hang on a very few negatives". Yet, you seem to have no problems matching another's perceived negativity with your own. That would have you "wallowing" in your own negativity that you seem to abhor in others. They are "pathetic" when they are what you would call "negative" but it doesn't apply to you when you are? I must admit to being confused. But then, I'm not the brightest bulb on the tree.

Ignoring what is happening down south with the conference is not reality to me. Briles and Patterson seem to have that "killer" approach (some might prefer to call it "hungry") to them that I don't see in Bob. Maybe it's just not as overt with Bob as it is with others. Perhaps, with Bob, I'm just not looking for it hard enough.

Of course when the dust settles we'll still be Oklahoma. Even I'm smart enough to know that. It would shock me one day to wake up to discover we are now Boren University. Sorry, I know what you mean and the point is taken.

I'm sorry that you can't tolerate - with a modicum of positivity - the perspectives of others here. You are obviously a very bright person but your intolerance will most likely do irreparable harm to your poster versatility which likely damages the integrity of the Scoop. You seem to view opposition of thought as an unwarranted thing and an inherent evil here.

I'm sure, though, you will find a Scoop clique that will warmly embrace you and your negativity.

Boomer Sooner
 
Last edited:
The only time I quiver in my boots is when Obama executes another executive order as a last resort (actually his only resort as he has no intention of negotiating with Congress) to him not getting his way.

People usually reap what they sow. Adversarial confrontation must be your newly acquired style. Hope it takes you far.

You say the problem here is that so many on the Scoop "hang on a very few negatives". Yet, you seem to have no problems matching another's perceived negativity with your own. That would have you "wallowing" in your own negativity that you seem to abhor in others. They are "pathetic" when they are what you would call "negative" but it doesn't apply to you when you are? I must admit to being confused. But then, I'm not the brightest bulb on the tree.

Ignoring what is happening down south with the conference is not reality to me. Briles and Patterson seem to have that "killer" approach (some might prefer to call it "hungry") to them that I don't see in Bob. Maybe it's just not as overt with Bob as it is with others. Perhaps, with Bob, I'm just not looking for it hard enough.

Of course when the dust settles we'll still be Oklahoma. Even I'm smart enough to know that. It would shock me one day to wake up to discover we are now Boren University. Sorry, I know what you mean and the point is taken.

I'm sorry that you can't tolerate - with a modicum of positivity - the perspectives of others here. You are obviously a very bright person but your intolerance will most likely do irreparable harm to your poster versatility which likely damages the integrity of the Scoop. You seem to view opposition of thought as an unwarranted thing and an inherent evil here.

I'm sure, though, you will find a Scoop clique that will warmly embrace you and your negativity.

Boomer Sooner


Again, you're gonna see it how you wanna and that's cool with me. I don't see it as being confrontational, just calling something what it is. No passive aggressive tip toeing needed. I just can't wrap my mind around how some Sooner fans just can't be happy and proud of what's going on in Norman right. It reminds me of a quote from the great George Carlin:

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."
 
That's assuming the people you are talking about are the parties that are stupid, and not yourself. It's easy for people to simply take a mindset that everyone who doesn't think like him/her must be stupid. When in fact that mentality can also be used by others whom don't agree with you to label or view yourself. In the end, that literally makes everyone stupid at some time or another, and we are simply left with different people having differing opinions or mentalities on how they choose to view OU football.
 
That's assuming the people you are talking about are the parties that are stupid, and not yourself. It's easy for people to simply take a mindset that everyone who doesn't think like him/her must be stupid. When in fact that mentality can also be used by others whom don't agree with you to label or view yourself. In the end, that literally makes everyone stupid at some time or another, and we are simply left with different people having differing opinions or mentalities on how they choose to view OU football.


Calling one's self a Sooner fan and not enjoying the great accomplishments is stupid.

Everyone gets to have an opinion, but not all opinions are equal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OUgradJeff
I should have noted, Billy, that my reply doesn't really apply to you (for what that's worth).

Everything was great and Stoops was back to being flawless...until we lost. One game can apparently change some people's opinions on Stoops' coaching ability. We went right back to "can't win the big one", making victories over Tennessee, Baylor, TCU and Oklahoma State (on the road with the conference title on the line) what exactly? Brother Mike had it turned around and was back to being one of the better DCs in the nation, and now he's a liability that Bob doesn't have the courage to dismiss and is going to sink the entire ship...because the #1 team got the best of him.
 
Calling one's self a Sooner fan and not enjoying the great accomplishments is stupid.

Everyone gets to have an opinion, but not all opinions are equal.
Well I'm not going to claim to understand how a Sooner fan can look at the season as a whole and take away something negative. I'm right there with you on that BC. But I'm not going to automatically call them stupid. That also can be construed as a stupid way of thinking to some.

Look at it through the lens of some fans simply steer their thoughts to the side of caution. Take 2 years ago after the so Sugar Bowl. The thought of being negative or guarded about OUs future would have looked foolish. But 2014 went completely opposite of what everyone thought. After many disappointing seasons in recent years it's natural for some fans I think to still have a sense of not allowing themselves to be fooled again. At least that's how I look at it.

I'm elated about this season. The bowl sucked but hell this season was pure greatness!!! But I'm not going to label others stupid who think otherwise.
 
That's assuming the people you are talking about are the parties that are stupid, and not yourself. It's easy for people to simply take a mindset that everyone who doesn't think like him/her must be stupid. When in fact that mentality can also be used by others whom don't agree with you to label or view yourself. In the end, that literally makes everyone stupid at some time or another, and we are simply left with different people having differing opinions or mentalities on how they choose to view OU football.
Someone I have on ignore has resorted to name calling again? I'm shocked.
 
I should have noted, Billy, that my reply doesn't really apply to you (for what that's worth).

Everything was great and Stoops was back to being flawless...until we lost. One game can apparently change some people's opinions on Stoops' coaching ability. We went right back to "can't win the big one", making victories over Tennessee, Baylor, TCU and Oklahoma State (on the road with the conference title on the line) what exactly? Brother Mike had it turned around and was back to being one of the better DCs in the nation, and now he's a liability that Bob doesn't have the courage to dismiss and is going to sink the entire ship...because the #1 team got the best of him.
And for what it's worth I don't think you are stupid or anything but usually a solid poster. The rest of your post I wholeheartedly agree. Fans are a fickle bunch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huntin Hard
I should have noted, Billy, that my reply doesn't really apply to you (for what that's worth).

Everything was great and Stoops was back to being flawless...until we lost. One game can apparently change some people's opinions on Stoops' coaching ability. We went right back to "can't win the big one", making victories over Tennessee, Baylor, TCU and Oklahoma State (on the road with the conference title on the line) what exactly? Brother Mike had it turned around and was back to being one of the better DCs in the nation, and now he's a liability that Bob doesn't have the courage to dismiss and is going to sink the entire ship...because the #1 team got the best of him.
You assume wwwwaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy too much, imo, in your generalizations above. Omg! No wonder you think the way you do.

Who the heck felt Bob was "flawless"? You must be reading from the Gospel of Bob! Is that in the New Testament? Newsflash: Bob is not perfect. He is human!

Bob's been heavily criticized by us nonprofessionals on the Scoop (the premium and free boards) as well as the media "experts" (print and sports outlets) for ages and, in most cases, rightfully so, imho. Critical critiques on Bob just didn't begin the moment we lost to Clemson. Thus, one game didn't "change" public opinion of Bob's coaching abilities. Nor that of Mike.

I believe they now both lack that hot intensity--that fire in the belly - that they once had when we won the Natty in 2000. Having already won a Natty and a Five mil+/a year long term contract can sometimes do that to a person. Not saying this is the case with either.

With the strong emergence of Briles and Patterson's teams, I believe Bob is motivated more from the anxiety of a potential loss than the exhilaration from a pounding victory. Just speculation, of course, on my part. Heavy are the burdens on the head of an OU football coach. Until they win it all, Briles and Patterson don't share in those types of burdens, imho. Bob's already established his Hall of Fame legacy while Art and Gary are still working on theirs and are hungry to reach Bob's stature.

A little Passive-Aggressive behavior on your part would not signal the end of the world. You just might be a little happier.

Don't be so quick to dismiss the opinions of others or to denigrate them as being stupid. Don't pigeon-hole posters. That's usually the work of the shallow-minded.

Boomer Sooner
 
Last edited:
You assume wwwwaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy too much, imo, in your generalizations above. Omg! No wonder you think the way you do.

Who the heck felt Bob was "flawless"? You must be reading from the Gospel of Bob! Is that in the New Testament? Newsflash: Bob is not perfect. He is human!

Bob's been heavily criticized by us nonprofessionals on the Scoop (the premium and free boards) as well as the media "experts" (print and sports outlets) for ages and, in most cases, rightfully so, imho. Critical critiques on Bob just didn't begin the moment we lost to Clemson. Thus, one game didn't "change" public opinion of Bob's coaching abilities. Nor that of Mike.

I believe they now both lack that hot intensity--that fire in the belly - that they once had when we won the Natty in 2000. Having already won a Natty and a Five mil+/a year long term contract can sometimes do that to a person. Not saying this is the case with either.

With the strong emergence of Briles and Patterson's teams, I believe Bob is motivated more from the anxiety of a potential loss than the exhilaration from a pounding victory. Just speculation, of course, on my part. Heavy are the burdens on the head of an OU football coach. Until they win it all, Briles and Patterson don't share in those types of burdens, imho. Bob's already established his Hall of Fame legacy while Art and Gary are still working on theirs and are hungry to reach Bob's stature.

A little Passive-Aggressive behavior on your part would not signal the end of the world. You just might be a little happier.

Don't be so quick to dismiss the opinions of others or to denigrate them as being stupid. Don't pigeon-hole posters. That's usually the work of the shallow-minded.

Boomer Sooner


Ah, but as you are aware I'm far from shallow minded.

I'm sure you've seen me post here multiple times that supporting ones opinion along with how its presented is all that should be required to civil discussion. A select refuse to do it and post in a manner that I view as disrespectful so I have only chosen to respond in kind.

I chuckle when I think about some of those that have said "post like you're in the same room with the other person". You'll have to excuse me if I feel like that should apply with players and staff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soonersincefitty
Ah, but as you are aware I'm far from shallow minded.

I'm sure you've seen me post here multiple times that supporting ones opinion along with how its presented is all that should be required to civil discussion. A select refuse to do it and post in a manner that I view as disrespectful so I have only chosen to respond in kind.

I chuckle when I think about some of those that have said "post like you're in the same room with the other person". You'll have to excuse me if I feel like that should apply with players and staff.
Is it the opinion you disrespect or the perceived general conduct of the poster?

Live and let live without condemnation. I see it as you stoking the flames (along with the posters in question) to make sport of them. And, they follow your lead by launching their counter-attack. It would most likely stop with the IGNORE feature.

Never said, btw, that you are shallow-minded.

As I've always thought, you are a very intelligent poster. When my son was in Kindergarten and I inquired of the teacher as to his well-being in class, she responded, "he's having a little too much fun in school". Would this be applicable to you? It seems that way with those whom you disfavor.

Boomer Sooner
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillyRay
Is it the opinion you disrespect or the perceived general conduct of the poster?

Live and let live without condemnation. I see it as you stoking the flames (along with the posters in question) to make sport of them. And, they follow your lead by launching their counter-attack. It would most likely stop with the IGNORE feature.

Never said, btw, that you are shallow-minded.

As I've always thought, you are a very intelligent poster. When my son was in Kindergarten and I inquired of the teacher as to his well-being in class, she responded, "he's having a little too much fun in school". Would this be applicable to you? It seems that way with those whom you disfavor.

Boomer Sooner


To your first question: both.

As to your last statement: Now you're catching on. :)
 
We seem to be arguing over whether Oklahoma's 2015 season was a "great" (or "flawless") season or a "good" season.
I'll say it was a "very good" season.....even at the risk of being labelled a spoiled or stupid fan.

I'm a STOOPid fan. If that makes me stupid or spoiled by some other type of fan, so be it.
 
I believe there exist a certain loathsome element of posters here that have honed a skill at purposely provoking this board to respond to their drivel.
Why, I have no idea.

I suspect that their existence is so devoid of any measurable success' they've come to get feedback here, even if, and especially if that feedback is disparaging and castigating.

I'm quite sure there is a clinical name for it...because it's out of my pay grade I freely admit I wouldn't know what that is.
 
OMG! You don't seem to be just a homer. You seem to be a homer with a boner.

Questioning anytime the status quo or anything for that matter does not appear to be your forte. Nor does "trending" and common sense, imho. I will, however, commend you for being loyal to a fault with the caveat being "fault". I hope you don't maintain the "ostrich with his head buried in the sand" type poster as time continues to pass. Questioning is human nature and healthy as I've been told and taught.

When Bob took over OU, he was not dealing with the dregs of college football. True, his predecessor was a bum of a coach (but a decent recruiter) and produced losing records. But, he inherited a great deal of talent from Blake and added to it. Not an overly difficult situation in comparison to others (Briles for one) as he was an incoming coach at a traditional power, historically rich, and high profile university. To his credit, he didn't muck things up, got OU back on the winning track, and was a true blessing. Over the past couple of years prior to 2015, his performance has been "trending" down. 2015 was a fortunate and perhaps unprecedented run of good luck for him, imho. Bob's overall record is 179-46.

Bob won a Natty back in 2000. Baylor, at that time, was in the midst of a 29 game conference losing streak - a conference record that still stands. They were worse than the present day Kansas program.

Since Bob's arrival, he owns a 8-9 bowl record. Not too glowing, imho, for a coach who won the national title in his second year as a HC. In fact, it's rather pedestrian, imho, for an accomplished OU coach.

Art Briles has been the epitome of "trending" up since he became a HC. He inherited a losing program at a low profile school (Houston) and transformed it into virtually overnight a winning program. He won outright 1 Conference-USA title and won 2 Conference-USA Western Division titles at Houston in his short tenure.

Briles then literally took over the dregs of college football when he was hired to coach Baylor in 2008. The Bears were so bad before his arrival that they won a measly 11 conference games in the 12 years prior (average of less than 1 win/yr). Also, BU had a 12 year consecutive losing conference record prior to Briles' arrival. By his 5th year at BU, Briles had already won 17 conference games. A dramatic turnaround and a definite "trend" upward.

By Briles' 4th year on the job, OU had a 20 game winning streak against the Bears. Then he changed things starting with Robert Griffin III at QB and he has been "trending" up against OU since then. In 2013 and 2014, Baylor had consecutive blowout wins against OU despite OU being in the top 15 annually in the recruiting rankings with BU averaging in the 40's. In other words, Briles was accomplishing more with considerably less against OU. The turnaround for BU was "trending" faster than should've been expected.

BU won consecutive conference titles in 2013 and 2014 (shared 2014 with TCU) and opened the 2015 season as the conference favorite with a real chance for historical success after they had won 3 of the last 4 meetings with Bob. Only Bob had been able to win 3 consecutive conference titles. If BU could win in 2015 and defeat OU, they would match Bob's conference title record and Briles would be the ONLY conference coach to have beaten Bob 3 consecutive years. This is Baylor for Heaven's sake!

BU was undefeated at 9-0 going into the 2015 game with OU and in line for their 3rd consecutive title. Misfortune struck the Bears as they lost their starting QB (and would soon lose their #2 QB before the season's end) and their fate would rest on an inexperienced Freshman QB. We won a very hard fought game with the outcome in doubt mere minutes before the game's end. With the close defeat, BU would lose their historical conference opportunity. Had Russell QB'd (a dangerous passer and runner ala Watson), I believe we lose and BU would go on to tie that conference record. Briles' better days are obviously still ahead of him based on his "trending". He is one "hungry" coach and very much on the rise, imho. He has a 65-37 record at Baylor. Unbelievable for such a previously lousy program!

Briles is currently 3-3 in his bowl games with Baylor and has won 3 of his last 5 including this year's miraculous win when he reinvented his offense on the fly. What would Bob have done in a similar situation (losing his #1 and #2 QB's)? I don't believe Bob's results would've been pretty.

Patterson took over TCU in 2000 (Bob's Natty year) and has a 143-47 record. He has 1 Conference-USA title, 4 MWC titles, and 1 Big XII title (shared with BU in 2014). He has 10 seasons of at least 10 wins, 9 seasons of at least 11 wins, and one perfect season (13-0 in 2010) in which his team defeated Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. Hence, my previous reference that he has won every where he has been (conference) that you dismissed. He is 9-5 in bowl games!

Traditionally, both Baylor and TCU have been mid-range in the annual recruiting rankings but their conference successes in recent years is changing those "trends" for the better, especially in the case with Baylor. Baylor presently has (8) 4* recruits compared to our 7. And, this is potentially a banner recruiting year for OU versus last year's class. BU is currently ranked nationally at #9 and TCU is ahead of OU at the moment as well. Since they have recently been whipping our tails with lesser talent, I can only imagine what those butt whippings will be when their talent becomes superior to ours. TCU worries me too as their talent improves.

"Trending" my friend does not appear to be with us in the near future, imho. Keep looking at yesterday's successes with ignorance, imho, towards the very near future.

Boomer Sooner


Of course, the infalible Briles & Patterson. Here are some facts on them:

1. This day & age, it's a lot easier for the former "dregs" to be competitive and harder for the tradition rich schools to remain elite. Scholarship limits have worked and talent is all over the place.

2. On to the specifics of Briles & Patterson:

2013 Fiesta Bowl: #15 Central Florida over #6 Baylor 52-42
2014 Cotton Bowl: #8 Michigan State over # 5 Baylor 42-41 (a game in which Baylor led by 20 in the 4th Quarter).

But great coaches don't get out-coached or upset, do they?

As for Patterson, he took over a solid perennial bowl team from Franchione and took them to the next step, building up TCU into a Top 10 program by the time they moved into the Big XII, going 47-5, going to 2 BCS Bowls, and 3 Top 7 finishes in the 4 years before coming to the Big XII. Yet, 4 years into being in the Big XII, he has all of 1/2 of a conference championship. Bob Stoops has triple that over the last 4 years (1/2 of a title in 2012 and a full title this year), a time when generally everyone agrees OU has been very down.

Patterson and Briles are fine coaches. Stoops is better and has proven it. Repeatedly. For 17 years.

And here's the kicker, I don't actually like Bob Stoops. I've known too many people that have interacted with him, and he is generally a not nice guy to people he feels are below him. But, he is a great coach.
 
I believe there exist a certain loathsome element of posters here that have honed a skill at purposely provoking this board to respond to their drivel.
Why, I have no idea.

I suspect that their existence is so devoid of any measurable success' they've come to get feedback here, even if, and especially if that feedback is disparaging and castigating.

I'm quite sure there is a clinical name for it...because it's out of my pay grade I freely admit I wouldn't know what that is.

I consider the board as a community of many Sooner fans that are alike & all different at the same time. As such, the board will contain many different types of posters, each bringing their own unique personality & content for their own reasoning. It kind of makes the world go round so to speak. Unfortunately, egos can get bruised, lines get drawn, and some feel the need of survival is via a group or an alliance. It's really not much different than the real world either. Birds of a feather kinda thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fortworth4ou2
I believe there exist a certain loathsome element of posters here that have honed a skill at purposely provoking this board to respond to their drivel.
Why, I have no idea.

I suspect that their existence is so devoid of any measurable success' they've come to get feedback here, even if, and especially if that feedback is disparaging and castigating.

I'm quite sure there is a clinical name for it...because it's out of my pay grade I freely admit I wouldn't know what that is.


With due respect to you decrepit old geezers, this board is comprised of a majority of older posters (or so it seems), but (and this only my opinion) I see a trend in entitlement behavior, and im not referring to sports fandom. People think they are entitled to say what they want without reproach, everybody owes them, they are special and should be treated as such regardless how much another out works them.

Anonymity amplifies this behavior.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: K2C Sooner
Jeff,

Just my 2 cents but I see Bob's often cold or indifferent demeanor as a sort of social discomfort. The only time he seems loose is when something great just happened and he's flying high on emotion.
 
I don't buy #1.

Here's the breakdown of Natty Champs since the 85 scholarship limit ruling of 1992. The only 2 surprises in there are Texas and Auburn.

Alabama = 4
Florida State, Nebraska, Florida = 3
Ohio State, LSU, USC = 2
Oklahoma, Auburn, Michigan, Tennessee, Miami, Texas = 1

Aside from Auburn and Texas, the football powerhouses are still taking the National Championship regardless of the scholarship ruling.
 
When Bob was hired on, he promised championships. I don't believe he exclusively meant just conference championships.

I would not disagree with your notion that OU is trending up at the moment. To me, OU is trending up as it applies situationally to OU.

Long term, things will only trend even better for BU and TCU, imho. That's a scary proposition, I would think, for any OU fan to swallow considering BU and TCU's recent performances against OU. Bob is getting out-recruited in his own conference by teams much scarier than Texas in its recruiting heyday.

To me, second guessing Bob - whether here or in the media - is a healthy thing and can only make him better, imho. Keeps him from getting complacent.

Boomer Sooner

1. 9 Conference Championships, and 1 MNC is delivering on his promise. As much as I would like? Of course not. But we got close again this year and are on an upward trend from the last few. Perspective: Stoops has had a better run at OU than Spurrier did at Florida. If in 1998, you'd said we'd hire a guy to pull off what Spurrier was doing at Florida, I'd have taken it in a heartbeat.

2. At least we agree on the "OU is tending up" thing :). Just not sure how that leads to the doom & gloom you espouse for our future.

3. I believe TCU and Baylor have reached their heights already. They had multiple Top 10 /Top 15 seasons, they've been at their jobs for 8 and 15 years, I think they've taken their programs as high as they can go. Which is very high and very commendable. But they've both blown opportunities for more when talented enough for better.

Examples:
- the 2 biggest bowls Briles has taken Baylor to. They were upset and severely out-coached in both.
- TCU blowing a huge lead against Baylor in 2014 that cost them a spot in the CF playoff.

For all their success and Top 10 teams, Patterson has 1/2 a Big XII Title and Briles has 1.5. Remember, TCU was a perennial Top 10 program BEFORE they entered the Big XII. He hasn't gotten them further 4 years later.

4. I do think you misunderstand me. I do have my concerns for the future. I'm not sure Mike Stoops can maintain a great defense and our sheer talent (i.e. recruiting) MUST improve. We've basically had 15th-ish ranked classes for too long. I'd like to see that back in the Top 10 regularly, but we were NEVER a consistent Top 5 class under Stoops. I think maybe we had 1 Top 5 class in Stoops tenure? We were more like 6-8 ranked class in our best years.

The biggest difference between you and I seems to be that I see us trending upward and see it as a positive thing, and you see us trending upward and see doom on the horizon.

That and the whole where Bob Stoops ranks in the echelon of current coaches, obviously. But, just because I think he's a great coach, doesn't mean that I think he's perfect or don't have my concerns for the future.
 
1. 9 Conference Championships, and 1 MNC is delivering on his promise. As much as I would like? Of course not. But we got close again this year and are on an upward trend from the last few. Perspective: Stoops has had a better run at OU than Spurrier did at Florida. If in 1998, you'd said we'd hire a guy to pull off what Spurrier was doing at Florida, I'd have taken it in a heartbeat.

2. At least we agree on the "OU is tending up" thing :). Just not sure how that leads to the doom & gloom you espouse for our future.

3. I believe TCU and Baylor have reached their heights already. They had multiple Top 10 /Top 15 seasons, they've been at their jobs for 8 and 15 years, I think they've taken their programs as high as they can go. Which is very high and very commendable. But they've both blown opportunities for more when talented enough for better.

Examples:
- the 2 biggest bowls Briles has taken Baylor to. They were upset and severely out-coached in both.
- TCU blowing a huge lead against Baylor in 2014 that cost them a spot in the CF playoff.

For all their success and Top 10 teams, Patterson has 1/2 a Big XII Title and Briles has 1.5. Remember, TCU was a perennial Top 10 program BEFORE they entered the Big XII. He hasn't gotten them further 4 years later.

4. I do think you misunderstand me. I do have my concerns for the future. I'm not sure Mike Stoops can maintain a great defense and our sheer talent (i.e. recruiting) MUST improve. We've basically had 15th-ish ranked classes for too long. I'd like to see that back in the Top 10 regularly, but we were NEVER a consistent Top 5 class under Stoops. I think maybe we had 1 Top 5 class in Stoops tenure? We were more like 6-8 ranked class in our best years.

The biggest difference between you and I seems to be that I see us trending upward and see it as a positive thing, and you see us trending upward and see doom on the horizon.

That and the whole where Bob Stoops ranks in the echelon of current coaches, obviously. But, just because I think he's a great coach, doesn't mean that I think he's perfect or don't have my concerns for the future.


Damn near brought a tear to my eye.

I'd gladly shake your hand and buy you a beer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OUgradJeff
With due respect to you decrepit old geezers, this board is comprised of a majority of older posters (or so it seems), but (and this only my opinion) I see a trend in entitlement behavior, and im not referring to sports fandom. People think they are entitled to say what they want without reproach, everybody owes them, they are special and should be treated as such regardless how much another out works them.

Anonymity amplifies this behavior.

Oh, definitely a schism of values.
I run into that beotch every day.

You're raised a certain way and that becomes your baseline ballast.
As you advance in years some young upstart will challenge that ballast.
It's quite the vexing conundrum that you have to be really strong, and flexible in navigating.
 
I don't buy #1.

Here's the breakdown of Natty Champs since the 85 scholarship limit ruling of 1992. The only 2 surprises in there are Texas and Auburn.

Alabama = 4
Florida State, Nebraska, Florida = 3
Ohio State, LSU, USC = 2
Oklahoma, Auburn, Michigan, Tennessee, Miami, Texas = 1

Aside from Auburn and Texas, the football powerhouses are still taking the National Championship regardless of the scholarship ruling.

Your point has some validity, but isn't as strong as you may think:
- Michigan never won an MNC under Schembechlor (i.e. Michigan's perceived heyday).
- Tennessee hadn't won an MNC since 1951 and that's their only AP/Coaches MNC before Fulmer's in 1998.
- LSU won an MNC in 1958, but had a LOT of bad years before the 1990s.
- Florida State never won an MNC before 1993.
- Florida never won an MNC before 1996

And it took time for the 85 limit to really take affect:
- Nebraska hasn't won an MNC since 1997 (scholarship limits really hurt them, as did the NCAA ruling on their "walk-on" program)
- Penn State has a 10-win season about once every 5 years over the last 15-20.
- Pitt hasn't been relevant in a long time.
- Other former national powers have faded away & replaced by former nobody programs.

And think of how bad nearly all of those programs have been at various times since 1992 before or after their MNCs? It's been harder for them to maintain greatness.

On the flip side, I see the competitiveness in Top 10 finishes with no-name programs continually crashing the rankings party.

Remember the uprisings of the Baylors, Kansas States, Boise States, TCUs, Utahs, Northwesterns, Oregons, etc...
 
Last edited:
Your point has some validity, butisn't as strong as you may think:
- Michigan never won an MNC under Schembechlor (i.e. Michigan's perceived heyday).
- Tennessee hand't won an MNC since 1951 and that's their only AP/Coaches MNC before Fulmer's in 1998.
- LSU won an MNC in 1958, but had a LOT of bad years before the 1990s.
- Florida State never won an MNC before 1993.
- Florida never won an MNC before 1996

And it took time for the 85 limit to really take affect:
- Nebraska hasn't won an MNC since 1997 (scholarship limits really hurt them, as did the NCAA ruling on their "walk-on" program)
- Penn State has a 10-win season about once every 5 years over the last 15-20.
- Pitt hasn't been relevant in a long time.
- Other former national powers have faded away & replaced by former nobody programs.

And think of how bad nearly all of those programs have been at various times since 1992 before or after their MNCs? It's been harder for them to maintain greatness.

On the flip side, I see the competitiveness in Top 10 finishes with no-name programs continually crashing the rankings party.

Remember the uprisings of the Baylors, Kansas States, Boise States, TCUs, Utahs, Norwesterns, Oregons, etc...


Yep, I remember when Nebraskas walk on program was legendary.
Since there wasn't a Neb. State, the Huskers had the whole berg to themselves.

Put it this way, you really had to be a stud to play there as a freshman.
Plus, there were very few guys that opted to go to the NFL early, must have been nice while it lasted.
 
And think of how bad nearly all of those programs have been at various times since 1992 before or after their MNCs? It's been harder for them to maintain greatness.
...

I'll give you that, but there are enough "big name programs" that a couple can be down while the others take the crown these days and vice versa.

Penn State was shackled by their enamor for a legend and inability to do what was best for their program.
Since their self-destruction, they've been stacking up the big name recruits and will be right back slugging it out with Ohio State soon.

I'm praying we haven't married ourselves into a slow death just the same.
 
Yep, I remember when Nebraskas walk on program was legendary.
Since there wasn't a Neb. State, the Huskers had the whole berg to themselves.

Put it this way, you really had to be a stud to play there as a freshman.
Plus, there were very few guys that opted to go to the NFL early, must have been nice while it lasted.

Yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "walk-on" program basically guys that weren't given scholarship directly by NU, but were funded by boosters or their hometowns or something? It amazes me that it took so long for the NCAA to ban it.

But that's why their walk-ons were so good. They actually were scholarship quality players who would turn down normal scholarship offers even at other major programs to "walk-on" at Nebraska.
 
I'm praying we haven't married ourselves into a slow death just the same.


I get your point. But I also remember that many all-time greats had lulls in the middle of their tenure and came back to take MNCs. In today's world, these guys would have been fired before their last or last few MNCs:

- Barry Switzer
- Darrell Royal
- Bear Bryant
- Vince Dooley
- There are more if I felt like doing any research :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillyRay
Yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "walk-on" program basically guys that weren't given scholarship directly by NU, but were funded by boosters or their hometowns or something? It amazes me that it took so long for the NCAA to ban it.

But that's why their walk-ons were so good. They actually were scholarship quality players who would turn down normal scholarship offers even at other major programs to "walk-on" at Nebraska.

Well, that's the way I understand it.
Impoverished freshman that were clandestinely 'underwritten' by 'the friends of Nebraska football', or something along those lines.

I have very little knowledge of this to be too pretentious about it, but that was the consensus opinion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OUgradJeff
And here's the kicker, I don't actually like Bob Stoops. I've known too many people that have interacted with him, and he is generally a not nice guy to people he feels are below him. But, he is a great coach.
I've never met Stoops, nor do I know people who have interacted with him. But judging how he reacts during press conferences over the past 16 years, I wouldn't disagree with this above statement. But of course whether your coach is a nice guy or not is a completely separate question as to whether he is a great coach or not. Stoops is a great coach, and if he chooses to be a nice guy or not doesn't matter....as long as he wins. Winning is what matters in the end. It's not a popularity contest. Lol :D
 
Exactly Billy Ray. I'm not well liked but I'm still the man and a winner. I guess if you think about it.....Yankee=Bob Stoops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillyRay
- Other former national powers have faded away & replaced by former nobody programs. .

It is for this reason and this reason only that a natural process of constant pressure be mixed w/ constant love & appreciation & it be applied to anyone who coaches OU. Bob Stoops is the current individual that receives this adulation. He's done extremely well and he must continue to do extremely. OU is a National power and TCU & Baylor are the nobody programs and it must stay this way.

While not discounting his 2000 National Title, I often wonder how he would be perceived without it.
 
I've never met Stoops, nor do I know people who have interacted with him. But judging how he reacts during press conferences over the past 16 years, I wouldn't disagree with this above statement. But of course whether your coach is a nice guy or not is a completely separate question as to whether he is a great coach or not. Stoops is a great coach, and if he chooses to be a nice guy or not doesn't matter....as long as he wins. Winning is what matters in the end. It's not a popularity contest. Lol :D

The daughter met him & Gundy last year about this time as they were on the recruiting trail. She told me that Gundy was much friendlier and more oblidging. But she also said his was a good guy and treated her and the staff well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillyRay
It's called going to hell in a handbasket... I'll go in my cedar coffin if that's my destination. Hopefully I get to the promised land with all the other repenting hypocrites...

Cedar?
Good call dude...that will keep those pesky moths at bay that would ravage your woolen 'eternity suit' your peeps outfitted you in on your demise.

Man, I hate talking death and eternity...I'm so hauntingly close...:eek:
 
  • Like
Reactions: PtLavacaSooner
Cedar?
Good call dude...that will keep those pesky moths at bay that would ravage your woolen 'eternity suit' your peeps outfitted you in on your demise.

Man, I hate talking death and eternity...I'm so hauntingly close...:eek:

My eternity suit will be my Sooners road jersey and my cross hanging from my neck... Although I probably won't get to dress myself for that day...
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT