ADVERTISEMENT

What would you rather have???

sooner_mike

Sooner starter
May 6, 2004
9,421
377
83
4 national Championships and lead the series over Texas, with several of those season not even bowl eligible.

Or Seven national Championships and an occasional loss to them and be Bowl eligible?
 
You forgot option 3, 7 titles, lead the series by 25, and beat the $h&t out of them by 40 at least 75% of the time........with the other 25% a win by less than 10 points. :D
 
I don't do what ifs............But since you asked...............I'll take her over any fitty avatar post I've ever seen him make...............


tumblr_n52giiJbEN1spkeyvo1_r1_1280.gif
 
4 national Championships and lead the series over Texas, with several of those season not even bowl eligible.

Or Seven national Championships and an occasional loss to them and be Bowl eligible?

I'll take 7 NC's and in the modern era a losing record to this point with 3 ties, but a 20-18 scoring advantage. Take into consideration that Texas is about 3-5 times the population of Oklahoma and I think we've done pretty freakin well.

Ah yes, those TX people who claim that we'd have no team if it weren't for players from TX. Well...as I tell 'em here...that may be true. You have a sizable advantage in population to draw athletes from, but the fact that you had to import me suggests you lack intellectual talent. Thusly, while conceding your point athletically, it should be more embarrassing to import smarts than athletic talent.

Here is a little blurb about the modern era stats: From 1945 to the present, the winning record still goes to UT, owning a 33-29-3 advantage. However, the average score is now at 20-18 in OU's favor. Using the following as a resource: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/436110-red-river-rivalry-dominance-is-a-matter-of-perspective

Yes, it's a few years out of date, so accounting for lost time OU is 4-2 against the nut sacks to the south which means the series is now 35-33-3.
 
4 national Championships and lead the series over Texas, with several of those season not even bowl eligible.

Or Seven national Championships and an occasional loss to them and be Bowl eligible?
It really doesn't matter. texas sucks regardless.
 
I'll take 7 NC's and in the modern era a losing record to this point with 3 ties, but a 20-18 scoring advantage. Take into consideration that Texas is about 3-5 times the population of Oklahoma and I think we've done pretty freakin well.

Ah yes, those TX people who claim that we'd have no team if it weren't for players from TX. Well...as I tell 'em here...that may be true. You have a sizable advantage in population to draw athletes from, but the fact that you had to import me suggests you lack intellectual talent. Thusly, while conceding your point athletically, it should be more embarrassing to import smarts than athletic talent.

Here is a little blurb about the modern era stats: From 1945 to the present, the winning record still goes to UT, owning a 33-29-3 advantage. However, the average score is now at 20-18 in OU's favor. Using the following as a resource: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/436110-red-river-rivalry-dominance-is-a-matter-of-perspective

Yes, it's a few years out of date, so accounting for lost time OU is 4-2 against the nut sacks to the south which means the series is now 35-33-3.



Not only that but their best coach in their history is not only an Oklahoman but an ex-sooner player as well!

So in my opinion we do not have to make that either / or choice.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT