For everyone except the ten people who watched the OU women Tuesday night

[Plainosooner]

The OU women closed out the regular season winning in Lubbock 70-60 over the Red Raiders. The Sooners thus ended up tied for fourth with OSU. Since the Sooner women lost both Bedlam games, they'll be the lower seed, but it doesn't matter except in what color jerseys get worn, but there will be a third Bedlam game in the first round of the tournament, with OU as the visitors. The winner will be most likely to play Baylor in the second round.

The OU women were 8-0 against the bottom four teams in the conference standings and 3-7 against the other five teams in the top six. Interestingly, OSU was the only team in the conference or otherwise to beat Baylor this season. OU was the only team besides Baylor to beat Texas. OU was swept by Baylor and OSU and split with Texas, West Virginia and KState.

West Virginia is third, but was 0-4 against the top two teams. The women play Saturday morning in the first game of the quarterfinals at 11:00 a.m. The game is in Oklahoma City.

 

[PryorFan]

I miss out on attending OU men's and women's basketball being an official "snowbird". Back to Oklahoma on Monday, hopefully the Lady Sooners will still be playing in OKC afterwards so I can get to one of their Big XII Tournament games.

 

[Schoonerman]

Plaino,
As always, thanks for the update on the women's sports!

 

[Plainosooner]

I miss out on attending OU men's and women's basketball being an official "snowbird". Back to Oklahoma on Monday, hopefully the Lady Sooners will still be playing in OKC afterwards so I can get to one of their Big XII Tournament games.

The only way that happens is if they make the finals by beating Baylor.

===========

Schoonerman, you're welcome. I am the ultimate contradiction. I love watching Sooner women, scream at officials and turnovers,and love when we win. But I hate Title IX.

 

[sybarite43]

The only way that happens is if they make the finals by beating Baylor.

===========

Schoonerman, you're welcome. I am the ultimate contradiction. I love watching Sooner women, scream at officials and turnovers,and love when we win. But I hate Title IX.

If there were no murders, there would be no need to establish a law making murders illegal.

Let's see. When I went to OU prior to Title IX, exactly how many women's scholarships did we have for sports?

 

[Plainosooner]

If there were no murders, there would be no need to establish a law making murders illegal.

Let's see. When I went to OU prior to Title IX, exactly how many women's scholarships did we have for sports?

There were zero when I was there,, and I'm not advocating that. I'd take one of about three views. Let each sport have an allotment of income from the university. Then whatever they earn besides that can be used for their sport. Football could have as many ships as their income would afford.

I just believe it's plain ole wrong to go find "athletes" who never rowed in their lives and give them a ship to meet title ix requirements when men's sports are being cut to fit some rules.

Take football out of the equation. At OU, it doesn't just pay for itself. It pays for everything. Basketball might break even this year on the men's side. We've eliminated men's sports. We've cut ships in all the relst. Less talented athletes are getting supported at the expense of more talented athletes' exclusion. You as a socialist thinker, think that's right. But you only want such equality when it suits your purposes.

If you seek real equality, have only one team open to either gender, and let the best get the ships. I'm sure you'd protest such meritocracy. What did you think about the female kicker at Colorado a decade ago? See if she can do that, then why can't male volleyball players play at OU on a ship, when we don't have men's volleyball? Or rowing? Or swimming? The answer is that men are inherently better. If that's true, then they should have more ships.

That doesn't mean I think there should be no women's athletics. But it is unfair for there to be even numbers of ships. Women not as talented, or big or fast or strong. They don't earn as much money to support their programs. Harsh to say? Maybe. But the young men deprived of college education scholarships, when they are more talented and better, just because they have Y chromosomes is just as harsh and a lot less fair. And gender equality cuts both ways. Or should.

Men who wrestle for a decade or more through the end of high school, are much more deserving of a college scholarship than a talented for a girl athlete who gets a full ride for rowing, when she never did it before. It is upside down thinking to favor the less talented or merited, at the artificial choosing of a political philosophy.

 

[sybarite43]

There were zero when I was there,, and I'm not advocating that. I'd take one of about three views. Let each sport have an allotment of income from the university. Then whatever they earn besides that can be used for their sport. Football could have as many ships as their income would afford.

I just believe it's plain ole wrong to go find "athletes" who never rowed in their lives and give them a ship to meet title ix requirements when men's sports are being cut to fit some rules.

Take football out of the equation. At OU, it doesn't just pay for itself. It pays for everything. Basketball might break even this year on the men's side. We've eliminated men's sports. We've cut ships in all the relst. Less talented athletes are getting supported at the expense of more talented athletes' exclusion. You as a socialist thinker, think that's right. But you only want such equality when it suits your purposes.

If you seek real equality, have only one team open to either gender, and let the best get the ships. I'm sure you'd protest such meritocracy. What did you think about the female kicker at Colorado a decade ago? See if she can do that, then why can't male volleyball players play at OU on a ship, when we don't have men's volleyball? Or rowing? Or swimming? The answer is that men are inherently better. If that's true, then they should have more ships.

That doesn't mean I think there should be no women's athletics. But it is unfair for there to be even numbers of ships. Women not as talented, or big or fast or strong. They don't earn as much money to support their programs. Harsh to say? Maybe. But the young men deprived of college education scholarships, when they are more talented and better, just because they have Y chromosomes is just as harsh and a lot less fair. And gender equality cuts both ways. Or should.

Men who wrestle for a decade or more through the end of high school, are much more deserving of a college scholarship than a talented for a girl athlete who gets a full ride for rowing, when she never did it before. It is upside down thinking to favor the less talented or merited, at the artificial choosing of a political philosophy.

I can only assume from your post that no man should ever be a father since he can't have children on his own? Since man is biologically inferior (?) and can't have children, he should be given a part of some money so he can do what---buy a dog?

Football isn't the goal. It was a means to an end. It was nothing more htan a way to get the public more interested in the university as a whole. The university doesn't belong to the football team, or to those who like football. It belongs to the people of the state (being a land grant college, of the nation). It is there to educate the public within a state so that they won't be dumb enough to think that sports is the goal of a university.

The last time that I checked, women were over half of the population of the average state. But, since they can't run as fast or jump as high as men, they shouldn't receive an equal chance at a scholarship at their state university? Really? You do realize that they are a part of the ownership of this state? Of all states, I'd think that one that had The Pioneer Woman as one of its landmarks might recognize that. A bit of a history of Oklahoma might discover the importance of women to this state. But, they are not to be given the same opportunity to participate in sports at their local school or university because they are not able to jump as high?

Good luck with those attitudes.

 

[CTOkie]

Is it a general feeling among OU fans that the women's basketball and softball teams are disposable if it means adding ten more football scholarships each year ?
No one has to point out that there is more athleticism in men's sports than women's sports. That's obvious. But since becoming an avid UConn women's basketball fan since the 1994-95 season, I see a sport that has become better each year and has gained more popularity during that time...and with true student athletes who are focused much more on getting a degree and staying out of bars at 2 am. That's a breath of fresh air to me.
I am not sure if the volleyball and rowing teams are financially shackling OU much given the stadium expansion, the addition of Headington Hall and the newer buildings on campus....and a multimillionaire football coach.

 

[Plainosooner]

Syb, it is that attitude that allows the less competent to be your boss. Do you think that we should have more white running backs? The government should require it? You just want liberal govt to make the decision for all. The are many more males than females that play sports. So by proportion, your way is still unfair.

 

[sybarite43]

I am assuming that your children were not provided food and shelter since they didn't earn it. The football program is a part of a family, a part that would not have existed if we hadn't used other resources to build it. Perhaps we should have used those resources for other purposes, like giving more scholarships for what college is there for---academics. I supposed that we let the football program pay for the stadium?

Someday, maybe you will realize that a family, university, and a state are a community who has taken an oath to work together towards a common goal. The resources don't belong to an individual, but to the community according to a distribution plan deemed acceptable.

 

[Oklabama]

Plaino, is your degree in Journalism? Or was it a minor? Just curious since you have mentioned that you covered high school sports once upon a time.

 

[Plainosooner]

Still do. Did 11 games for the Star-Telegram in the fall of 2015.

I've never taken a journalism course. I know the basics for many reasons. My degree taught me how to write and I've been able to type since my senior year. And no brag, just fact, you've met very few people who understand the traditional team sports the way I do.

I was also really lucky. John Clark was my mentor and he was still the head coach at Plano, when I first started covering the Wildcats for a little paper trying to compete with the longtime one in Plano in 1974. It's part of why I have a little different view on the task. Coach Clark taught me to consider the impact on kids when I wrote about high school football. I was full time for two plus years, worked as a stringer for two or three more years for that paper and the one that succeeded it when it couldn't pay its bills any more. And then I'd met some of the high school beat writers guys for then two Dallas major newspapers and started working as a stringer in 1978 for the DMN. For four years, I mostly covered Plano games for them, except when they had one of the top games in the area and they had staff guys cover the game.

I knew enough to do a good job and in those days, I got to write eight to ten paragraphs and had a byline on the games. But when they changed their MO in the 90s, that all changed. It became mostly a glorified stat job, with two to four graphs, but they had a lot more stringers and less room for any game story.

At the last game I did for them at the end of the 2011 season, I worked with some kid from the Star-Telegram who made almost double what I did and got to write a real story, so I called their high school editor and he told me he knew about my work and would love for me to swap sides. So I've worked for them the last four year. It's a lot more fun, though the drives are more than occasionally a lot longer.

The only thing better about Dallas, is that generally in the DFW area, there are a lot more good teams in the Dallas side than the FW side. And the best teams in Tarrant County (FW) get covered by their staff guys.

It's a harder job than covering a college game, because you have to do everything. At a college game, you are provided all the stats you need and the task is to keep up and then get quotes and meld them into a story. At the high school level, you have to keep your own stats, with sometimes unreadable jerseys, and at some games, I'm the only writer in the press box. When both teams are going no huddle, it's hard.

But I'm good at stats, have my own little way of keeping up, and make deadline more often than I don't, though when the game doesn't end until 10:35 and the deadline is 10:45, hardly anybody is going to make that deadline on that system. But I like the challenge. Mostly.

 

[Oklabama]

Still do. Did 11 games for the Star-Telegram in the fall of 2015.

I've never taken a journalism course. I know the basics for many reasons. My degree taught me how to write and I've been able to type since my senior year. And no brag, just fact, you've met very few people who understand the traditional team sports the way I do.

I was also really lucky. John Clark was my mentor and he was still the head coach at Plano, when I first started covering the Wildcats for a little paper trying to compete with the longtime one in Plano in 1974. It's part of why I have a little different view on the task. Coach Clark taught me to consider the impact on kids when I wrote about high school football. I was full time for two plus years, worked as a stringer for two or three more years for that paper and the one that succeeded it when it couldn't pay its bills any more. And then I'd met some of the high school beat writers guys for then two Dallas major newspapers and started working as a stringer in 1978 for the DMN. For four years, I mostly covered Plano games for them, except when they had one of the top games in the area and they had staff guys cover the game.

I knew enough to do a good job and in those days, I got to write eight to ten paragraphs and had a byline on the games. But when they changed their MO in the 90s, that all changed. It became mostly a glorified stat job, with two to four graphs, but they had a lot more stringers and less room for any game story.

At the last game I did for them at the end of the 2011 season, I worked with some kid from the Star-Telegram who made almost double what I did and got to write a real story, so I called their high school editor and he told me he knew about my work and would love for me to swap sides. So I've worked for them the last four year. It's a lot more fun, though the drives are more than occasionally a lot longer.

The only thing better about Dallas, is that generally in the DFW area, there are a lot more good teams in the Dallas side than the FW side. And the best teams in Tarrant County (FW) get covered by their staff guys.

It's a harder job than covering a college game, because you have to do everything. At a college game, you are provided all the stats you need and the task is to keep up and then get quotes and meld them into a story. At the high school level, you have to keep your own stats, with sometimes unreadable jerseys, and at some games, I'm the only writer in the press box. When both teams are going no huddle, it's hard.

But I'm good at stats, have my own little way of keeping up, and make deadline more often than I don't, though when the game doesn't end until 10:35 and the deadline is 10:45, hardly anybody is going to make that deadline on that system. But I like the challenge. Mostly.

You're very good and I'm glad that you are still involved. It's obvious you find covering sports enjoyable.