What happened to our comeback confidence?

[RoaminSooner]

The thing that is missing for me with this team (as good as we may be) is my confidence in the team to come from behind or make clutch plays when its needed. I recall in Stoops first 3 or 4 seasons when there was a 4th down play that had to be made. I think most of us had the confidence to know the play would work or we would clamp down and overcome any defecit. Or if we were trailing you "knew" we would come back. 2000 and 2002 are the teams that carried the most confidence. I would say 2003 but we weren't behind until K-State and the NCG. :O

Summing it up- I would like to know what you guys feel is missing if anything? and should the time come to play an LSU or an underhyped but dangerous(?) OSU if we get down do you feel the same way I do?

[kevpks]

I don't know. That comeback against Mizzou and the way we kept answering Texas was pretty impressive to me. I also like the team that came out after halftime in the ISU game. It is good to see the big plays on defense again after we couldn't seem to buy an interception a few years ago.

The only thing that is missing right now is ball security. Yeah, Bradford was off but even so, it was the turnovers that killed us. We would have rolled our last two opponents if we held onto the ball.

[RoaminSooner]

you know you make a great point about the turnovers. Its good to see a balance atleast, but if you think of it for a very long time we could alway's count on our D to get int's '00 '01 '02.

I also think the team showed some character in those comebacks, but maybe its the fact we are struggling at times that concerns me. Texas was Texas we alway's show up, but Colorado and ISU are going to leave a sour taste for a while.

[OUHOMER]

I hear what your saying, In the colorado game , i was like no problem, we will get that magic play somewhere here in the forth quarter and pull this out. but they did not make that play.

[Leroy Lizard]

We're 7-1, right?

How many comebacks this year have we failed to make? One? Isn't that as few as any since 2000?

[kevpks]

you know you make a great point about the turnovers. Its good to see a balance atleast, but if you think of it for a very long time we could alway's count on our D to get int's '00 '01 '02.


I loved those defenses in '00, '01 and '02. I guess I was thinking of the year when Moe Dampeer had one of the first interceptions of the season against Kansas.

[Jewstin]

Well, I've always said that close games benefit teams a lot better than big blowouts. We learned our lesson at Colorado, and since then, the team has been rock solid when it counts. Sure, we have some bone head plays every now and then, or silly turnovers, but we're still winning our games despite that.

I was really happy with the ISU game, to be honest. People here were incredibly upset, but I saw a defense that essentially locked down ISU when they needed to be (4-15 on third down conversions, which has usually been our Achilles heel) ... and an offense that went right to a ball-control, run it down your throat kind of scheme that got the victory (a big point).

Our offense has shown me that they can pass all day and score at will if need be ... but I've also seen us lock it down and dominate a team mentally/physically with a clock-eating run attack (with the occasionally third down/fourth down conversion).

We are DEEP at running back, and that will never change, and our receivers have made some BIG time catches when we really needed a play.

I was not worried at all in the second half of the ISU game after I saw our team fight it out against Texas and Missouri. I remember having a conversation with a friend about "who will step up and make a big play to turn this game around." I'm really confident that we have the kind of playmakers on both side of the ball that can seize the moment ... and we haven't had that in several years. We took our licks and came back swinging in each contest, and to me that builds a much better championship caliber team than anything else.

[SoonerStormchaser]

I'll just say what everyone's probably thinking.

Leroy Lizard= NickZepp

[the_edge]

I think senior leadership is what OU lacks, and that might not be restored to 2000-2004 levels until next season.

[FirstandGoal]

I am confused as to whether this thread is referring to the team or to the fans.

I think the team has full confidence that they can win every game that they go out to play. You can tell from the second half that they were men on a mission.
The CU game was one of those weird days where our mojo took a siesta at a critical time, but I don't recall seeing one definitive moment where it looked like the team gave up. Actually I think what beat them in the end is that they started trying too hard and further compounded the mistakes.

If this thread is referring to the fandom in general, I would have to say that there were many more of us in the game thread that knew we would pull out an ugly win than there were the sky-is-falling-ZOMG-I-am-embarassed-to-be-a-fan posters.

[TexasEx4OU]

I've alluded to this in a couple of threads since the CU game, but I think it all comes down to maturity and leadership. I got to thinking about this as we continued to lose the momentum in Boulder, and I reminded myself that prior to this season, many were talking about NEXT year...that this team is young, talented, but not likely to challenge for an MNC until next year.

Sitting in Folsom Field, listening to the CU student section get into the game late in the third quarter and into the fourth, I was reminded of the 2000 game at Kyle Field. Of course, this should seem to many a complete disconnect, as the student section at CU is predominantly left-wing, Birkenstock-wearing, granola-eating, dope-smoking, trust-fund sucking, non-football-knowing wackos, and the student section in Collie Station is made up of right-wing, neo-nazi, evangelical, goose-stepping, book-burning, crotch-grabbing wackos. At least they've got the wacko thing in common...but I digress. ;)

Anyway, that 2000 game at Kyle Field had monumental shifts in momentum, capped by Torrance Marshall's INT for a TD to retake the lead. That 2000 team had a group of senior leaders that absolutely refused to lose. When the momentum shifted in a given game (think being down two TDs to Nebbish), or the on-field sphincter started to pucker in a tight game (think Stillwater, with Derrick Strait batting down an endzone pass to preserve an ugly 12-7 W), that team would always draw a line in the sand and say, "Not today".

This team is young. Hugely talented, but young. And it showed in Boulder. When the momentum started to swing, no one stood up and drew that line in the sand. It simply snowballed. A major positive that I took out of the ISU game was that we were in a position for that same snowball, and the D stood up and refused to let it happen. JMHO.

[Ash]

Has swagger or Mike Stoops been mentioned, yet?

[Leroy Lizard]

The problem is that OU has lost that swagger. We need a coach that can come into the program and put that swagger back into the team.

Does anyone have any coaches they would like to see on the staff? Make sure that the coach can instill some swagger into the team.

[SoonerTerry]

I'll just say what everyone's probably thinking.

Leroy Lizard= NickZepp


leroy lizard= Summers Eve

BTW Leroy, its Cheetos.. http://www.cheetos.com/

[RoaminSooner]

I think you hit the nail on the head TexasEx...and I was referring to thoughts of the fans. I have no doubt the team believes they can win every game. So do I, but I think there hasn't been that definitive leader that captures the publics attention. Like a Calmus Alexander Heupel Lehman or T. Smith...

[Sooner02]

I think most of the leaders that have been there in the past years have been on defense. Even back to 2000 our stand out players were on defense (not diminishing Heupel in any way, he should have won the Heisman for his effort). Since then most all the big leaders, with the exception of Jason White were on defense. It's starting to show again with Lofton and English. And with a QB like Bradford, and talented RB's and WR's with a strong OL, there's really no reason to believe we shouldn't be national title contenders this year and next.

[adoniijahsooner]

I think most of the leaders that have been there in the past years have been on defense. Even back to 2000 our stand out players were on defense (not diminishing Heupel in any way, he should have won the Heisman for his effort). Since then most all the big leaders, with the exception of Jason White were on defense. It's starting to show again with Lofton and English. And with a QB like Bradford, and talented RB's and WR's with a strong OL, there's really no reason to believe we shouldn't be national title contenders this year and next.

Even though our defense have so many returning players on it, its about a year away from being really dominant, especially if Lofton, English, Harris, and Smith return next year. That is alot of leaders on one team, and all of them will be all-americans. The offense is struggling with identity issues, and i believe that is because of coach wilson. He started the season throwing 5 straight swing passes for our first touchdown of the season, and we have been throwing more than passing, but everyone complains that this cant' run the ball. Last year we developed an attitude to line up and maul down teams with the run, we just havent done that this year on O. If he ever decides to do it, I believe that Patrick will be the leader of this offense to finish the year.