I don't know........I think our record against the SEC has been pretty good. Since Stoops we have beaten Bama 3 times, Tennessee twice, Auburn, and lost in overtime to Georgia. Its really not like the SEC is on a totally different level than OU.
Is OU done winning national titles?
- Thread starter BawlzDeep
- Start date
I don't know........I think our record against the SEC has been pretty good. Since Stoops we have beaten Bama 3 times, Tennessee twice, Auburn, and lost in overtime to Georgia. Its really not like the SEC is on a totally different level than OU.
I hear what you’re saying, bomber, but name two “high quality” schools the B12 has any chance of joining our conference. Okay.....name just one. The Domers is the only program available and that ain’t ever going to happen. We would most likely have to go to non-Power Five programs to get to 12 members. That won’t help the B12 one bit. In fact, OU would probably lose money on that kind of change.
We don't currently know who it could be. Nobody ever thought Tamu and mizzou would join the sec and we don't know what other schools could be drawn into the big 12. Maybe an Arizona school or Arkansas would be very interesting.
We'd also spend way more money in traveling fees for ever sport in which we participate. OUr student athletes would miss way more classtime, and seldom be able to attend class the day after conference road games in basketball, softball, soccer, wrestling and everything else across the board.
There is a reason why conferences are grouped primarily by regions. College athletics are not for the benefit of fans. It is for the students. It would be worse for OUr student athletes in virtually every sport.
Football isn't all that matters.
I've often wondered how these kids even go to class with all the travel they have to do
What amount of money is enough ?......
What is a conference?.....
Why are we in the Big 12?....
The sec is in bed with Espin which I don’t like, the Big 10 is snooty I think they voted to kick Nebraska out of the shared research academic bonus of being in the Big 10....
What is a conference?.....
Why are we in the Big 12?....
The sec is in bed with Espin which I don’t like, the Big 10 is snooty I think they voted to kick Nebraska out of the shared research academic bonus of being in the Big 10....
Bingo.
Missing Perkins was big. Losing DTY was back breaking. We didn't attack Burrow because I guess Grinch thought we couldn't and it was a massive mistake. Joe Brady going to the NFL is a collective sigh of relief for college football. And what Burrow did to everybody, including all those elite SEC and Clemson defenses, was a product of Brady, Burrow and that offense. Sometimes the stars line up. LSU is about to receive a hard fall back to reality.
We do need to upgrade the caliber of recruits on defense, especially up front, but attitude and effort can carry lesser talent a long way. Motely, Gallimore, Perkins, Redmond, Bookie , Murray, Brown, Fields and DTY all played better under Grinch. It is going the right direction.
Perkins (barring suspension)
Bookie
Fields
DTY
Stokes
Redmond
Davis
Norwood
White
The freshman OLB names escape me.
Lots of guys returning with lots of experience. Add in Winfrey and Ellison and it will be another step forward.
Joining the SEC is not a miracle cure for recruiting.
I honestly believe that OU and WVA going to the SEC would work pretty well for OU. It could open up recruiting into the southeast and those recruits would be guaranteed to be playing close to home all year..I made a typical schedule (7 games in division, 2 from the other (rotate), UT in the Cotton Bowl, and 2 other OOC games (maybe start a beginning of year tradition with OSU).
1 osu H
2 tulsa H
3 msu A
4 ole miss H
5 texas N
6 arkansas A
7 auburn A
8 atm H
9 vandy A
10 florida H
11 lsu A
12 alabama H
I think that's a challenging but not impossible schedule.Maybe better than winning the Big12 every year and then getting killed in the post-season.
1 osu H
2 tulsa H
3 msu A
4 ole miss H
5 texas N
6 arkansas A
7 auburn A
8 atm H
9 vandy A
10 florida H
11 lsu A
12 alabama H
I think that's a challenging but not impossible schedule.Maybe better than winning the Big12 every year and then getting killed in the post-season.
The travel issues would be minimised by being in a western central time zone DIV or pod. It's not a big deal to spend a few more hours a year on a jet plane where students could study.
As you say football isn't all that matters but neither are sports. What the university would gain by joining the Big 10 over time in terms of money and prestige far offsets any down sides.
OU is in the middle of making major changes in the direction of the university that sound a lot like a Big 10 school
No matter what happens neither OU or UT can financially afford to stop playing each other. Odd's are IMHO that we both move together, maybe with others.
lol ole Miss was in his very first year. We lost to LSU twice but both of those LSU teams won the NC so no shame there.
This says the Big 10 will make 60 M per team from TV media by 2025 and near 70 M in 2029.
Due to the much lower TV viewership the Big 12 cannot possibly keep up.
For OU, the Big 12 is on its deathbed.
https://www.btpowerhouse.com/2019/8...ms-reach-60-million-annually-in-media-revenue
Due to the much lower TV viewership the Big 12 cannot possibly keep up.
For OU, the Big 12 is on its deathbed.
https://www.btpowerhouse.com/2019/8...ms-reach-60-million-annually-in-media-revenue
An SEC loss is an SEC loss using your Stoops Era criteria. An SEC win, such as Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl, is an SEC win during the Stoops Era. Regardless, playing one SEC team a year does not compare to an entire conference slate plus a potential championship game in the ATL.
I agree. That goes back to my original point of why anyone would want OU to play an SEC schedule. We have made the playoffs the last four years in a row and done well against the SEC without being in that league. We shouldn't make it harder on ourselves.
Oklahoma has only been to the playoffs three years in a row, four of the last five...
My bad. Doesn't change my point though. We have had no problem making the playoffs despite being in the big 12. We don't need to change conferences especially not the sec
So we are afraid to "make it harder on ourselves." The last time I looked we are still rated the #1 program in the modern Era. We are not afraid to make it harder on ourselves. We relish the challenge.
There are OU fans that can’t handle losing two or three games a year even if defeated by the best two or three teams in college football. Yet when OU loses to a number 25-11 ranked conference foe but still ends up as conference champ and make the playoffs only to lose to one of the top three teams still see it as a successful season. I totally don’t feel that way but certainly understand and support those great OU fans. It’s all how one rates success. There’s no wrong way, IMO, but there is a big difference in the two.
edit: A prime example. Colorado 1971 team lost two games. One to #1 Nebraska and one to #2 Oklahoma. The Buffalos ended up # 3. I call that a very successful season and better than a team winning a conference while losing only 2 games and ending the season ranked 5 or below. But that’s just me.
Last edited:
I've had OU lose as many as 8 games in a season in my lifetime, plus losing to Texas 12 out of 13 years, and while I don't like it, I've handled it...because what other alternative is there ?
What I don't like now are too many bad postseason performances, the long 20 year wait for a national championship (and no, I don't expect one every year), the overall decline of what was once a strong Big 12 conference and the inability to recruit on the same level of Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia and Clemson.
Here's hoping Riley can get this program to a higher level. He has everything he needs to do it as far as I'm concerned.
Been there too, but one of the low points for me as a preteen were the 1959 and 60 seasons after all the prior success. But we bounced back with a successful three loss season losing to ranked opponents in two close games. Notre Dame by 3 and Texas by 6. The only negative was the Alabama loss because the score (17-0) made it sound closer than it was, Imo.
Actually it was a 13-7 loss to ND and a 9-6 loss to Texas. Namath and Jordan (31 tackles) dominated OU in the 1963 Orange Bowl after that 8-2 season in 1962.
OU lost a game in 1961 vs Iowa State 21-15 that Wilkinson said was one of his toughest defeats ever. Iowa State led 21-0 after the first quarter before OU woke up and dominated the rest of the way, but fell short.
OU's 1963 team was probably the most disappointing Sooner team for me, losing to Texas 28-7 and Nebraska 29-20 and Looney's fight with an assistant coach. So much talent was on that 1963 team.
Last edited:
You’re right. My memory’s not all that good now days. Lol. I got the games mixed up.
Last edited:
Well if we are the #1 rated program then why are we wanting to move to the SEC?
Bama.........hopefully you arent referring to me. I'm never satisfied with only winning the big 12. I want to win a NC as bad as anyone. However, playing a difficult schedule and losing 2 or 3 games can knock you out of contention even if you are a very good team. Heck we can't even go a full season without losing to a Kansas State or Iowa State. As I said earlier, I think the Big 12 will be much stronger next year and I can see us adding a couple of teams in the future.
I wasn’t referring to you, my friend. But I do have good friends that are also great Sooner fans who absolutely feel that way. They have admitted it. I just don’t feel the same way. I’m not comparing OU to Boise State but I’ve made the case to my buds that Boise State wins a lot of conference championships and doesn’t lose much but I don’t consider them a great program. However, it wouldn’t surprise me that Boise State could play in the B12 and do better or just as well a few current B12 members. If so, that doesn’t speak well for the B12, imo.
It's a body of work spread out over 8 decades during which time we have earned our ranking through consistency. Today, the body of work is suspect because of how weak the conference is. Winning occasional matchups with top tier opponents doesn't add to our luster just because we keep winning this weak conference.
I don't disagree that the conference could use some improving. I just dont think we should jump ship and go elsewhere. Is this the longest we have gone without a NC since the 70's? I think it is
I think we could do whatever with or without Texsa who ruined the SWC and whose inclusion has been detrimental to the XII. We should strive to keep the RRR for the next 25 years perhaps, as a separate contract deal
Since Oklahoma won its last national championship the B12 has only won one other (Texas). The PAC has won two; the B10 two; the ACC 4; and the SEC 10. There’s no question which is the conference of champions!
In my mind we have 3 choices: stay in the Big 12, go to the Big 10, go to the SEC.If we go to the Big 10 west I think it will be with Texas. If we go to the SEC west I think it will be with OSU.
That’s my point. Big Fish in a small pond now and for the last 8 years or so. Initially the B12 was a major player. Unfortunately Oklahoma was going through really tough times. OU came back and enjoyed great success winning/playing solid teams. Then Nebraska began to drop. Texas won a natty in 2005 that I thought they couldn’t. OU lost three that I thought they should....but I admit I may have been over confident. Then Texas began to suck and Nebraska bolted to the B10, Missouri and A&M went to the SEC and Colorado joined the PAC. The B12 reverted back to the B8 before picking up two programs hoping for a way to become relevant again. Maybe both were better partners than Colorado but not as good for the conference as those that left the B12. Regardless now the BIG TWELVE only has TEN members. And the likelihood of convincing quality programs to come help us out is almost impossible. So what’s to like about the future stuck here in the B12 where recruiting is so much more difficult that when we lose a top player to injury we don’t have anyone as capable to plug in as say an Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson to name a few. That, in my mind, has had a very negative impact for OU football for the last several years. I know there’s nothing that can happen for a few more years but when the time comes I will be ready to move on even it means we have to take our lumps until we get the Jimmy and Joes who can win another national championship. I believe that’s my best chance of seeing another natty in my lifetime.
Agree 100%. I think Oklabama has conveyed OU's situation the best it's ever been said.
While OU may be in position to remain the "bully on the block" in the Big 12, it's become a "Pee Wee Herman" in the postseason.
But the point of being in a conference is about sports. I believe you overestimate the prestige of the Big Ten.
It would wreck on if our two most consistent sports. Softball. And send every winter sport conference road game into the kind of weather that killed OSU athletes. More practically, would get the athletes stuck in airports instead of going to class way too often.
And anybody who thinks OU is going to any other conference without OSU, is in a pipe dream.
Consider the negative that the switch meant for the Huskers. And they are much closer geographically to the BIG. Kansas and Iowa State and Tech might benefit financially by moving. But OU is making more money than 3/4 of the Big Ten.
Moving just makes it rarer to see OU non revenue sports on tv.
Similar threads
