Hornfans meltdown continues

[soonernija]

http://forums.hornfans.com/php/wwwthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=football&Number=5342187&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=

rickysrun
1000+ posts
12/04/07 08:30 AM

Re: Stoops [re: caryhorn]
Edit post Reply to this post

I said it a week ago, Bob and OU own the Big 12, they just let us and others rent it out every once in a while. Since Bob showed up in Norman, we've been to 2 conf. championship games, and one of those we backed into thanks to an OU collapse. He does it with any qb, he loses AP, doesn't matter, plug in the next guy and keep the same playbook and gameplan. He loses his starting qb in the offseason, and plugs in Paul Thompson, are you kidding me, and wins the Big 12, if we lost Colt tomorrow for next season, it would take till next November to get our feet back underneath us. I love his approach to the game, might come across as an a-hole, but he keeps adding to his trophy collection, so who really gives a [censored].

__________________________________________________ _________
Re: Stoops [re: caryhorn]
Edit post Reply to this post

All you need to know about Stoops was on display in his pre-game comments for the Big 12 title game. Mizzou players were yapping about how they gave away the game in Norman, were the better team, yada yada yada. Stoops' response?

"I guess it's convenient to look at your miscues and not look at the other team's miscues," Stoops said. "If they call their miscues, 'They gave it to us' ... you can spin it however you want. I know this, when we're kicking off with 2:20 to go in the game, we're up three possessions, and I'll take that every week. If that's 'Giving it to us,' we'll take it every time."

"Some people are wondering if we won that last game," Stoops said. "Spin it however you want."

You know what Mack's response would have been: "Well, it was a hard fought game and we caught a few breaks. It could have gone either way. Missouri is a great football team and we'll need to play better than last time if we want to win."

I can actually hear Mack say that.

That's the difference between us and them. They reflect the attiitude of their take no prisoners, cut the [censored] coach. We reflect the attitude of a Mr. Politically Correct nice guy.

And here was Stoops on the role of playing spoiler against Mizzou:

"I don't get that," Stoops said. "We're going after a Big 12 championship. There isn't anything spoiler about that. Spoiler roles are for those teams 5-6. That's not what we've been about."

The guy is so [censored] smug, and he backs it up. He makes his players back it up. Damn, we need some of that attitude. VY is the only guy we've had here who brought that to the team. None of the coaches do. They just want us to try hard, and they'll have some orange slices for everybody at halftime.

__________________________________________________
caryhornSponsor
1000+ posts
12/01/07 10:57 PM

Stoops
Edit post Reply to this post

Stoops has won 5 Big 12 titles in 8 yrs. With 5 different quarterbacks.

He is the best coach with the best staff in the Big 12.

Ou sucks.

But ou is the toughest, most highly motivated team in this league this year.

With a freshman QB.

And the entire offensive line and wide receivers and their best running back all returning.

The team reflects the attitude and swagger of the coach.

This ****es me off.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

Just gems. All of them, gems.

[Blues1]

The Sooners Just Keep Rockin'...... :)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I think I want Mack to win at the Holiday Bowl, just to ensure he keeps his job.

[virginiasooner]

What a bunch of whiners. If they had message boards back in the 1970s and 1980s, all you'd have to do is substitute "Barry" for "Bob", and "Darrell" or "Freddie" or "John" for Mack, and there's no difference. If the Horns want to go to the Big 12 championship, THEN WIN THE RED RIVER SHOOTOUT. Easy as that.

[Flagstaffsooner]

Did you read this Captain of Horse$hit's post?


Puddle- it starts with a lot of things. Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12? Why do we not even try to bend rules? Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs? We miss on judging some of these too, but that is the goal. This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game. That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.

Silly, silly, whorns.

[Lott's Bandana]

I love the "orange slices" comment...so "Austin".

[Desert Sapper]

What a bunch of whiners. If they had message boards back in the 1970s and 1980s, all you'd have to do is substitute "Barry" for "Bob", and "Darrell" or "Freddie" or "John" for Mack, and there's no difference. If the Horns want to go to the Big 12 championship, THEN WIN THE RED RIVER SHOOTOUT. Easy as that.

Not really. They did last year, and we still won the Big 12. Mostly thanks to the whorns unravelling at the end of the season.

They have a point about adjusting to loss. Bob had his best coaching performance of his career last year when the chips were down. And ENA, for all his faults, was a great leader.

As far as all the high and mighty BS the one poster was spewing, it was just the whorns playing their role. It's why aTm calls them tea-sips. They think they are better than everybody. And DKR was far from a saint.

[fadada1]

Puddle- it starts with a lot of things. Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12? Why do we not even try to bend rules? Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs? We miss on judging some of these too, but that is the goal. This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game. That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.

that, my friends, is pure gold. you think texas didn't waive vince young's academics when he enrolled at UT. the man score a 6 on the wonderlick. A 6!!!!! you could NOT read the questions and get a 6. 6!!!!! i could check, but if i'm not mistaken, OU has the highest graduation rate in the big12 for athletes (even above baylor). don't let thse "academic standards" claims fool you. EVERY school has a certain number of "we'll let you in, even if you're stupid."

[Stoop Dawg]

Did you read this Captain of Horse$hit's post?

Silly, silly, whorns.

Yeah, you'd be hard pressed to find any "bending" or "breaking" rules since Bob got here. There has been one "incident" and the result was immediate dismissal from the team for all involved. Bob is such a softie. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, the criminal allegations in Austin just keep rolling in......

[Vaevictis]

Yeah, I love the "more difficult academics" refrain.

VY majored in kinesiology. AKA, physical education. It's a degree program where you take courses in basketball, tennis, baseball, etc. It's a teaching program that doesn't even yield a teaching certificate.

Tougher academics my ***.

[JPNSKER]

Puddle- it starts with a lot of things. Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12? Why do we not even try to bend rules? Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs? We miss on judging some of these too, but that is the goal. This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game. That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.

LOL! I can't tell you how many times we hear the same excuses from colorado. At least they have the Noble prize winners to back it up.:rolleyes:

If your coach is mediocre, your team will be mediocre.... simple as that...

[oupride]

thanks for the post!

[OUsooner1]

i could check, but if i'm not mistaken, OU has the highest graduation rate in the big12 for athletes (even above baylor)."

Our graduation rate for football has fallen from previous years. Currently we're second to last on graduating football players with texas being last and if i'm not mistaken we're dead last when it comes to student athletes graduating overall in the Big 12.

http://homepages.baylor.edu/baylorproud/2007/10/04/baylor-leads-big-12-in-football-graduation-rate-again/

[Stoop Dawg]

Evidently Mack is watching the pay stubs of all of his players and making sure their hours match their pay. Bob lets the compliance office do that. Maybe that's why Bob's teams look so much better prepared every October.

[Curly Bill]

I love the "orange slices" comment...so "Austin".

I would like to second how funny this was. :D

[TexasLidig8r]

As for academic standards, wouldn't it be logical that the more difficult the academic standards, the lower the graduation rate?.. Similarly, the more lenient academic standards would result in higher graduation rates?

Further, many of the posters on that thread are praising Stoops and your program.. perhaps in your "I will hate everything about UT and argue no matter what" mantra... that subtle point was missed... :rolleyes:

[silverwheels]

They have some sad, pathetic, delusional morons over there. But for the most part they've all accepted their role as 2nd place in the South.

[Stoop Dawg]

As for academic standards, wouldn't it be logical that the more difficult the academic standards, the lower the graduation rate?.. Similarly, the more lenient academic standards would result in higher graduation rates?

Depends. Is it the entrance requirements that are high or the graduation requirements? If you're only letting the "smart" people in in the first place, you should graduate more of them.


Further, many of the posters on that thread are praising Stoops and your program.. perhaps in your "I will hate everything about UT and argue no matter what" mantra... that subtle point was missed... :rolleyes:

That thread started out praising Stoops, then turned into a "Stoops is a cheater, cheater, pumpkin-eater!!!" thread. This thread started out as a "look, they're jealous of Stoops" thread then turned into a "my god, they are grasping at straws down there" thread.

[Vaevictis]

As for academic standards, wouldn't it be logical that the more difficult the academic standards, the lower the graduation rate?.. Similarly, the more lenient academic standards would result in higher graduation rates?

Buddy, you've got players majoring in PE. The academic standards argument just doesn't hold water.

[The Maestro]

Where is the "Graduation Rate Board"?

TIA.

[r5TPsooner]

http://forums.hornfans.com/php/wwwthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=football&Number=5342187&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=0&fpart=

rickysrun
1000+ posts
12/04/07 08:30 AM

Re: Stoops [re: caryhorn]
Edit post Reply to this post

I said it a week ago, Bob and OU own the Big 12, they just let us and others rent it out every once in a while. Since Bob showed up in Norman, we've been to 2 conf. championship games, and one of those we backed into thanks to an OU collapse. He does it with any qb, he loses AP, doesn't matter, plug in the next guy and keep the same playbook and gameplan. He loses his starting qb in the offseason, and plugs in Paul Thompson, are you kidding me, and wins the Big 12, if we lost Colt tomorrow for next season, it would take till next November to get our feet back underneath us. I love his approach to the game, might come across as an a-hole, but he keeps adding to his trophy collection, so who really gives a [censored].

__________________________________________________ _________
Re: Stoops [re: caryhorn]
Edit post Reply to this post

All you need to know about Stoops was on display in his pre-game comments for the Big 12 title game. Mizzou players were yapping about how they gave away the game in Norman, were the better team, yada yada yada. Stoops' response?

"I guess it's convenient to look at your miscues and not look at the other team's miscues," Stoops said. "If they call their miscues, 'They gave it to us' ... you can spin it however you want. I know this, when we're kicking off with 2:20 to go in the game, we're up three possessions, and I'll take that every week. If that's 'Giving it to us,' we'll take it every time."

"Some people are wondering if we won that last game," Stoops said. "Spin it however you want."

You know what Mack's response would have been: "Well, it was a hard fought game and we caught a few breaks. It could have gone either way. Missouri is a great football team and we'll need to play better than last time if we want to win."

I can actually hear Mack say that.

That's the difference between us and them. They reflect the attiitude of their take no prisoners, cut the [censored] coach. We reflect the attitude of a Mr. Politically Correct nice guy.

And here was Stoops on the role of playing spoiler against Mizzou:

"I don't get that," Stoops said. "We're going after a Big 12 championship. There isn't anything spoiler about that. Spoiler roles are for those teams 5-6. That's not what we've been about."

The guy is so [censored] smug, and he backs it up. He makes his players back it up. Damn, we need some of that attitude. VY is the only guy we've had here who brought that to the team. None of the coaches do. They just want us to try hard, and they'll have some orange slices for everybody at halftime.

__________________________________________________
caryhornSponsor
1000+ posts
12/01/07 10:57 PM

Stoops
Edit post Reply to this post

Stoops has won 5 Big 12 titles in 8 yrs. With 5 different quarterbacks.

He is the best coach with the best staff in the Big 12.

Ou sucks.

But ou is the toughest, most highly motivated team in this league this year.

With a freshman QB.

And the entire offensive line and wide receivers and their best running back all returning.

The team reflects the attitude and swagger of the coach.

This ****es me off.


Post of the year candidate. :pop:

[sooner n houston]

As long as we're talking academic smack, someone started the following thread over there:
Jr. College Transfers


MiketheWOP

The title of my post was going to be " JC Transfers" but I didn'y want people freaking out thinking Jamaal was going to transfer somewhere else.

Anyway.......can anyone weigh in on exactly why Mack does'nt go after JC transfers. I have heard it's because they have to pass a tough entrance exam if transferring into a Texas state university and that if they have a "D" on their transcript we won't accept them......anyone?

If there was ever a year we needed some experienced players to step in this is it......at DT, Safety, and OT (hopefully Webb makes it back).
__________________________________________________ ______
This is the second reply


Mack doesn't care for junior college kids. It is his personal philosophy. It is also harder to qualify at Texas as a JUCO though it certainly can be done.

__________________________________________________ ______
This is the third reply and thread killer! :D

Sounds REAL tough! :rolleyes:

Prospective students may also communicate with admissions counselors through the Web site Be a Longhorn. The site offers the latest details about applying for transfer admission, as well as service by e-mail; secure access to personal information such as application status and admission decisions; and details about admissions, academics, financial aid, housing, and more.

Eligibility to Apply
To be eligible for transfer admission consideration, an applicant must

Have graduated from high school or earned a GED
Have enrolled in an institution of higher education following high school graduation or receipt of the GED
Have completed or have in progress the final coursework toward at least thirty semester hours of transferable credit

http://registrar.utexas.edu/catalogs/gi07-08/ch02/ch02b.html#Transfer-and-evaluation-of-credit

[TexasLidig8r]

Buddy, you've got players majoring in PE. The academic standards argument just doesn't hold water.

And OU doesn't?

Yeah.. right...

Do you really want to compare academics of Texas vs. OU?

[Flagstaffsooner]

GED:eek:

Git Edgicated in Dallas?:D

[sooner n houston]

And OU doesn't?

Yeah.. right...

Do you really want to compare academics of Texas vs. OU?

Yea, tell us Lid, how high do you have to score on that GED to get into UT? :D

[Flagstaffsooner]

And OU doesn't?

Yeah.. right...

Do you really want to compare academics of Texas vs. OU?Lots of your players are following you and majoring in criminal law.:rolleyes:

[KingDavid]

damn funny post. I'll give a "third" to the orange slices comment. And I truly could hear Mack Brown's voice coming through in that fictional quote.

Mack missed his calling as a politician. If he quit today, would guarantee that he'd be governor of Texas within 2 elections.

[BuckyB]

Man I hope Stoops has at least 10 more glory years in him.

[TexasLidig8r]

Lots of your players are following you and majoring in criminal law.:rolleyes:

All the better to discover the loopholes to get around it! :D

[Vaevictis]

And OU doesn't?

Yeah.. right...

I'm not claiming that OU has tougher academic standards.


Do you really want to compare academics of Texas vs. OU?

I'll grant that Texas has many programs that are better than OU programs. But that doesn't mean a lick with respect to athletics if your athletes can major in PE.

[Civicus_Sooner]

Horn fans are pathetically envious of Bob. I love it!

[toast]

I'm having a hard time hearing the ut smack with all the scraping at the bottom of the barrell.

[Stoop Dawg]

And OU doesn't?

Yeah.. right...


So you're going with the "UT has higher academic requirements because OU has players majoring in the same things" argument, eh?

You clearly don't hold the readers of this board in very high esteem if you think we're gonna bite on that one.

[Stoop Dawg]

I'm having a hard time hearing the ut smack with all the scraping at the bottom of the barrell.

When they break out the "number of trailer homes per capita" schtick you'll know they're almost done.

[TexasEx4OU]

Puddle- it starts with a lot of things. Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12? Why do we not even try to bend rules? Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs? We miss on judging some of these too, but that is the goal. This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game. That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.

that, my friends, is pure gold. you think texas didn't waive vince young's academics when he enrolled at UT. the man score a 6 on the wonderlick. A 6!!!!! you could NOT read the questions and get a 6. 6!!!!! i could check, but if i'm not mistaken, OU has the highest graduation rate in the big12 for athletes (even above baylor). don't let thse "academic standards" claims fool you. EVERY school has a certain number of "we'll let you in, even if you're stupid."

My favorite comment above is, "...we only take players with no background problems...".

I get it. So any character issues develop once they hit the Forty Acres? Hmmmmm...might want to avoid that nugget during any in home visits with Momma.

[Civicus_Sooner]

When they break out the "number of trailer homes per capita" schtick you'll know they're almost done.
Heh, I don't think they like that much anymore. They are actually the "Modulated home capitol of the planet."

[Half a Hundred]

Academic smack? Again? Then that really does mean that the last two years were just an aberration.

All is well... :D :D :D

[RedstickSooner]

Stoops runs as clean, or cleaner, a program as any coach in Division 1-A.

Not only is this the case, dirty programs seldom profit much -- just look at Kentucky, reputed to be the winner in that bidding war where, what, a couple hundred grand traded hands for the high school kid?

That program was, has been, and will continue to be a middle-of-the-road to bottom-dweller in the SEC. 'Course, some say that's because they just don't cheat as well as the rest of the conference... But that's probably another story.

Stoops has a solid record and rep as a top coach. He attracts kids that are as hard as he is. THAT, if anything, is where our edge comes from under Stoops.

I continue to feel that Leach does more with less on a regular basis, but Stoops challenged that notion when we won the Big-12 with ENA. Plus, teams are starting to figure out how to defend Leach, and he's drifting back into the mediocrity inherent to trying to recruit 1-A players to play at TTech.

[Frozen Sooner]

As for academic standards, wouldn't it be logical that the more difficult the academic standards, the lower the graduation rate?.. Similarly, the more lenient academic standards would result in higher graduation rates?

You know, I've pointed this very thing out to Notre Dame fans. They don't think it's funny at all.

[rubyspirit]

Lovin' it! http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~janicesmith/emotions/fingers.gif

[PLaw]

Originally Posted by fadada1
Puddle- it starts with a lot of things. Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12? Why do we not even try to bend rules? Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs? We miss on judging some of these too, but that is the goal. This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game. That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that, my friends, is pure gold. you think texas didn't waive vince young's academics when he enrolled at UT. the man score a 6 on the wonderlick. A 6!!!!! you could NOT read the questions and get a 6. 6!!!!! i could check, but if i'm not mistaken, OU has the highest graduation rate in the big12 for athletes (even above baylor). don't let thse "academic standards" claims fool you. EVERY school has a certain number of "we'll let you in, even if you're stupid."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obviously, fadada has been drinking too much koolaid. It's and old t-sip ploy that if they aren't winning every year, then it's because the others are cheating. As I recall, the whorns have a long history of running afoul of the rules (NCAA, felonies, misdemeanors, and the like).

Nobody reflected class more then Mr. Wilkinson and nobody does it more by the book than Bob. Do you think Mack would have sent VY or RW packing??? Yeah, I don't think Ricky discovered pot after he got to the NFL. Oh yeah, and let's not forget Hominy, the home fadada's infactuation.

BOOMER

[proudsoonergal]

That is a fun thread to read as a Sooner fan. I read it a few days ago for laughs. IIRC, a few posts after the 'tough academic standards' comment someone rips into him about character issues/academic standards. Or maybe that was another thread about OU/Stoops/Sooner envy. Anyway, you should definitely read the whole thing - good stuff.


:pop:

[AzianSooner]

Free America so Sooner fans can post wherever they want. But, I truly wish I can tell them to get out of thos pi..ss hole asap. There is no reaso to argue with those nemesis. Just beat them every year in Dallas. They deserve it.

[KC//CRIMSON]

In his 9 years at OU, Stoops is 6-3 against Texas and has won 5 conference championship.

In his 10 years at Texas, Mack Brown is 4-6 against OU and has won 1 conference championship.

This is sickening.

[goingoneight]

"Why are we so ghey?"

Interesting...

[Leroy Lizard]

As for academic standards, wouldn't it be logical that the more difficult the academic standards, the lower the graduation rate?.. Similarly, the more lenient academic standards would result in higher graduation rates?

The academic environment experienced by athletes has almost nothing to do with the reputation of the university as a whole. Do you really think that the UT athletes that were recently jailed are scholars? Did you see the MySpace account created by one of the football players?


Mr. Dodds said UT spends about $2 million annually on academic and life-skills support for its 600 athletes. An estimated $900,000 of that is spent on the 130 football players. An additional $600,000, Mr. Dodds said, funds NCAA rules compliance.

How smart can your players really be if the university has to spend $7000 per year on each player just to keep them eligible? Sure, if they were all majoring in chemistry I could understand.

Life skills support?

I find it amazing that some fans get sucked up into the academic argument and think that, because their university has a good academic reputation, the players on the teams must be scholars. In truth, the majority of football players on any major college team probably have no real business on a campus. That is, unless you really think that Edwin Simmons was some sort of Einstein.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Originally Posted by fadada1
Puddle- it starts with a lot of things. Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12? Why do we not even try to bend rules? Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs? We miss on judging some of these too, but that is the goal. This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game. That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.


And losers like us tend to go for players that don't already have criminal records or who aren't burglars, liars, and thieves.

Bad, Bad OU!

LMAO!

Do we need to get Sam to commit a felony to earn respect from gangstas like the uterus fans around here?

[Leroy Lizard]

Why do we have more strict academic rules than the Big 12?

They don't.


Why do we not even try to bend rules?

They do.


Why do we only take players that have no back ground problems or JC studs?

If those players that were recently arrested didn't have any background problems, then they developed them while playing at UT.


This Univ. stands for class and sportsmanship, respect for others and the game.

Actually, UT scores very low on its respect for others given all the nasty things said about OU, the State of Oklahoma, and players that leave Texas to play for OU.

Many UT fans confuse classy with arrogant.


That is a good way to look at it, but those that go for the jugular, break rules, bend rules and all that go with that mentality are going to win more than we are. You either be one or the other but not both. We will occasionally like 2005 after 30 years reach the goal. However, there is a lot of heartache in between. I guess I will still go for the way we do it. Darrell seemed to do it the best of all, but that was a different time and today it would be harder for him to.

We all know how DKR did it, with his insane promises of scholarships that went way beyond what his program could legally offer under SWC rules. DKR was the grand master of talent stockpiling, and hundreds of players that could have had a respectable career ended up riding the pine or being run off during one of his infamous s**t drills.

[SoonerShark]

I think I want Mack to win at the Holiday Bowl, just to ensure he keeps his job.

Mack Brown is not a bad coach. His teams are always fairly good. He has always been respectful of us. He has spoken highly of his time as an assistant at Oklahoma with Barry Switzer. He has done well at Texas, and if not for our resurgence after 1999 he would be where we are year in and year out nationally.

It is almost similar to when Switzer and Osborne ruled the Big Eight, although Switzer and Osborne seemed to have been to some degree friends, both having started as head coaches in 1973. When some balked at "outlaw" Barry Switzer being added to the Hall of Fame for college football, Osborne, who had the lag time before admission to the Hall was generally possible waived, stated that he could not beat Switzer, having gone 5-12 against Switzer. All those who said Switzer was an outlaw did not know any better. Osborne, who faced us yearly at that time, never once raised the false issue because he knew better. Would St. Tom consistently be attending events over the years with Coach Switzer if the recruiting things were true? No.

As an aside to those detractors who vilified us for our 1989 probation stemming from the Hart Lee Dykes situation, if given a chance to face a jury rather than the NCAA kangaroo court in 1989, I would only ask, "Why would wishbone era Oklahoma attempt to buy a wide receiver?" The answer is, "Oklahoma would not."

[tigepilot]

Good thread but it seems to me that no one here believes OU has a good academic program. That surprises me.

[LegallyCrimson]

Hey all,

I graduated OU last May and I'm up in Boston now, a buddy up here pointed this site out, so it's been great for getting a Sooner football fix.

Just wanted to say that I think OU has tremendous academics, and I put my money where my mouth is. I'm from north Texas and passed on in state tuition at UT-Austin for OU. Didn't get any initial scholarships from OU, so it was very much an investment. Maybe it's just a north TX thing, but I always viewed OU and UT's undergrad programs as equally solid. I thought OU's smaller size was better tailored to my academic needs and I was just more confident that an OU degree would lead me to better graduate/professional school options.

So sorry for the long post, but I'm also surprised to see so many write off OU's academics (especially relative to other Big 12 schools). I haven't regretted my decision in the least, nor have friends who made similar choices. Boomer Sooner!

[Vaevictis]

Good thread but it seems to me that no one here believes OU has a good academic program. That surprises me.

OU does have good academic programs. Some of them are top tier -- for example, Meteorology and Petroleum Engineering.

However, UT is generally regarded as being the superior school academically. Many of its departments "outrank" OU's departments by virtue of having more highly regarded faculty. You can't really argue with this; UT does tend to have more renowed faculty than OU.

It's really just a consequence of having money. Texas (as a state) didn't **** away its oil money. Oklahoma did.

It's also more highly regarded because of more stringent published admission requirements. This one, IMO, is a little bit misleading. They do have more stringent admission requirements, but only for their non-mandatory admits. Texas has some laws for their public universities which essentially state that admission is mandatory if a student was in the top 10% or so of their class. It doesn't matter how bad the quality of student coming out of that high school, if you're top 10%, you get admitted, period. Even if you scored, say, 300 on the SAT. There are an absolute buttload of high schools in Texas, so 10% is a ton of students -- and so, for the non-automatic admits, Texas has to set the bar very high just to have enough room on campus for all of their students.

And FWIW, I've done coursework at both schools, and they were about the same level of academic rigor (for the courses I took at least).

[Jacie]

Regarding the post about DKR:

Not many posters to Sooner message boards hammer on the orange bloods as much as I do. I simply cannot stand the culture of arrogance that is so pervasive from whorn fans. However, when the topic of Darrel Royal comes up I always feel a pang deep inside at how things turned out. He was one of OUrs and still holds a record for INTs by a Sooner. I don't know why he wound up hating OU as he publically seems to but wonder if there will ever be a day of reconciliation.

As for how he did things, every coach does what they can based on the rules in effect at the time. If players going to saxet were not smart enough to figure out that the odds of getting significant playing time were slim when the squad had well over a 100 guys on it then maybe those academic standards that are touted are not so great after all.

For me, in addition to his defection from Oklahoma, DKR's biggest sin was his attitude towards black kids and not recruiting them to play for him until well after almost every other major college had broken the color barrier, though once more I feel that the man was a product of his time.

Well, he made his choice and now he has Mack Brown as his legacy. That makes me smile!

[SoonerinSouthlake]

[QUOTE=Vaevictis]It's also more highly regarded because of more stringent published admission requirements. This one, IMO, is a little bit misleading. They do have more stringent admission requirements, but only for their non-mandatory admits. Texas has some laws for their public universities which essentially state that admission is mandatory if a student was in the top 10% or so of their class. It doesn't matter how bad the quality of student coming out of that high school, if you're top 10%, you get admitted, period. Even if you scored, say, 300 on the SAT. There are an absolute buttload of high schools in Texas, so 10% is a ton of students -- and so, for the non-automatic admits, Texas has to set the bar very high just to have enough room on campus for all of their students.

QUOTE]

To support your argument.....let me add that for large High School Campus, or even a medium size campus for that matter, this policy makes the bar that much higher for really good students. In a 5A school a kid can have 4.0GPA in honors classes and not be in the top "10%" While little schools all over the state are sending kids to UT, filling up available slots, with only decent grades because they are at the "top % of a class" even though they don’t have as good of credentials.... So a top notch kid from a big school may not make it into UT perpetuating the belief that their admission standards are that much higher.

[Leroy Lizard]

I'm not sure many other coaches displayed the level of indifference to the health of players that UT did during the DKR era. The s**t drills, as they have been described, were pretty callous and would have been grounds for numerous (and well-justified) lawsuits today.

The story about DKR's over-recruitment of players didn't break until well into the DKR regime, and even then I am not sure how many high school players understood the situation. They heard "guaranteed four-year scholarships" and thought, "If things don't work out, at least I can stay on and get my degree." I don't think they understood the levels to which DKR would sink to reclaim that scholarship.

[jage]

Hey all,

I graduated OU last May and I'm up in Boston now, a buddy up here pointed this site out, so it's been great for getting a Sooner football fix.

Just wanted to say that I think OU has tremendous academics, and I put my money where my mouth is. I'm from north Texas and passed on in state tuition at UT-Austin for OU. Didn't get any initial scholarships from OU, so it was very much an investment. Maybe it's just a north TX thing, but I always viewed OU and UT's undergrad programs as equally solid. I thought OU's smaller size was better tailored to my academic needs and I was just more confident that an OU degree would lead me to better graduate/professional school options.

So sorry for the long post, but I'm also surprised to see so many write off OU's academics (especially relative to other Big 12 schools). I haven't regretted my decision in the least, nor have friends who made similar choices. Boomer Sooner!

Haha, kinda similar here. Just heard about this site a couple weeks ago, have been browsing and reading here, and I like this site a lot better than some of the other Sooners boards.

Anyways, I'm a junior computer engineer at OU, also from North Texas and who also got admitted to UT. I chose OU for similar reasons, and I also liked the direction OU was headed compared to UT. I like what Boren is doing with the school, and the money he's putting into making it better. I personally can't wait till the new engineering building is done.

To say OU is worse at academics as a whole is false, to say it is worse in some fields of study is true. My wife was a Meteorology major at OU for a couple years, and OU is known as THE BEST school for that major. Thats why she moved from California to go here.

The point I'm making is, some majors are better at OU, some are better at Texas, but I see the schools as each having advantages and disadvantages. I like how OU is improving, rather than staying idle like UT because UT's reputation is good enough to get students to go there.

[Vaevictis]

Anyways, I'm a junior computer engineer at OU, also from North Texas and who also got admitted to UT.

I would just like to say for the record: I hope you enjoy the academic hazing that is ECE Lab III. And, while you may rant and rave about how nasty it is, always remember: Fitzmorris is a much, much more sympathetic individual than LaSpisa was ;)

[jage]

I would just like to say for the record: I hope you enjoy the academic hazing that is ECE Lab III. And, while you may rant and rave about how nasty it is, always remember: Fitzmorris is a much, much more sympathetic individual than LaSpisa was ;)


Greaaat. I had Fitzmorris for my lab this semester and also had him for my MicroProcessor class. One of the best teachers I've had at OU!

[Vaevictis]

Yeah, Fitzmorris is LaSpisa's "heir apparent" to be the gatekeeper.

He's supposed to be keeping Lab III like it used to be, so allow me to strongly recommend a light course load the semester in which you take ECE 3873. It is fugly.

When I took it, one of the project requirements was, "this half of the project will not draw more than 180 milliamps." Guy next to me at present had it go to 182 for a little less than a second. LaSpisa failed him on the spot -- and we're talking failed him for the whole class.

ENJOY! :D

[LegallyCrimson]

Jage, good to see I'm not alone here, good call. And I think Vaevictus is absolutely right on faculty. When I was considering UT they touted their faculty with degrees from elite schools like Yale, Chicago, and Duke. OU's faculty taken as a whole isn't nearly as well regarded.

OU, however, emphasized small classes with excellent [I]instructors[I] that created student success. One that stuck in my head was of a recent grad that had gone on to a Rhodes Scholarship and Harvard Medical School. This isn't to say that UT doesn't have similar stories, however undergraduate success did not seem a point of emphasis with that school. The relatively large amount of money OU spends directly on undergrads (increases in scholarships, new student centers like Price Hall that are sans faculty offices) is indicative of the seriousness that OU accords undergraduate achievement.

Ultimately I had the impression that I could go to Texas to learn from the elite (in a huge lecture format that could be effectively replicated by PBS or CSPAN) or I could go to Oklahoma and one day join their ranks. While I'll reiterate that I consider UT a fine school, it wasn't difficult to toss the "Dear Future Longhorn" letter.

So apologies for another long, somewhat off topic post, but I've gotta stick up for my alma mater!

[Frozen Sooner]

Hey, I'm not going to say that OU is a bad place to get your education at all. Heck, I had acceptance letters from several highly-ranked universities. OU offered a better value: I left OU only $4800 in debt whereas I would have left Stanford a couple of hundred thousand in debt.

P.S.-I'm not particularly smart or anything, I just fill in bubbles really well.

[LegallyCrimson]

Hope I didn't come across as confrontational (including to any UT students that may be reading this), just trying to voice my endorsement of the school's academics as a very satisfied recent alum.

And ditto on your P.S. Mike - I'm in law school but I see I had trouble with the italics symbols in my last post, lol. They probably shouldn't allow us near computers.

[Leroy Lizard]

Having a bunch of elite professors around a campus does the average undergraduate little good. Chances are the classes they take will be taught by a teaching assistant anyway.

Research institutes such as UT are meant for grad students. If you are an undergrad, you help the university pay its bills. Other than that, you mean nothing to that institution. (And I do mean nothing.)

I spent many years at OU and I was never taught by a TA, but a real professor who was, more often than naught, dedicated to teaching to a reasonable degree. Some were better than others, but I at no time did I ever feel the university wasn't dedicated to my success. (BTW, I am very impressed with David Boren as a university president -- one of the best in the country in my opinion.)

[tommieharris91]

I can say that, during my time here at OU, I could always talk to a professor (not just a TA) about anything I needed help with pertaining to their class, their field, or their life experiences. It seems that OU takes pride in the fact that undergrads are taught by professors in most classes. There has been only one class I have taken where the class itself was taught by a TA. All others have been taught by people with Ph.D.'s.

Anyway, all this talk 'bout academics makes me realize that it's finals week and I should be studying.

[Stitch Face]

Hope I didn't come across as confrontational

What's wrong with being confrontational?

:mad: Huh??? :mad:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

What's wrong with being confrontational?

:mad: Huh??? :mad:Isn't confrontational one of the most common things we do, here? Seems to me!

[bluedogok]

The sad thing is many Whorns actually believe they do it the "right way". I guess if you lie to yourself enough it actually becomes the truth in your mind.

[Leroy Lizard]

It seems that OU takes pride in the fact that undergrads are taught by professors in most classes.

Actually, that is a very strong source of pride for the school. Other than summer classes and maybe some majors, courses taught by TAs are a relative rarity. OU is a better school for most undergraduates, in my opinion.

[soonerboomer93]

the only time I was taught by a TA at OU was chem lab

[MamaMia]

http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~trj/comparing_ou_ut.html

[Little Al]

I just finished a stint on a Pac 10 research faculty. The only time underclassmen were the subject of the conversation, was when we were looking for someone to wash our lab glass.

[Shneeg11]

Having a bunch of elite professors around a campus does the average undergraduate little good. Chances are the classes they take will be taught by a teaching assistant anyway.

Research institutes such as UT are meant for grad students. If you are an undergrad, you help the university pay its bills. Other than that, you mean nothing to that institution. (And I do mean nothing.)

I spent many years at OU and I was never taught by a TA, but a real professor who was, more often than naught, dedicated to teaching to a reasonable degree. Some were better than others, but I at no time did I ever feel the university wasn't dedicated to my success. (BTW, I am very impressed with David Boren as a university president -- one of the best in the country in my opinion.)

I completely agree with everything you say, except for the bold. In a freshman orientation class first semester, they kept talking about OU being a research University

[Leroy Lizard]

By research institute, I mean a university whose overwhelming purpose is to publish papers and score research money. OU is a research university, no doubt. Faculty at OU publish papers just like everywhere else, and there is always the concern for research grants. But I think teaching quality factors far more into the faculty's conversation at OU than UT, which I consider a research institute.

Illinois, Michigan, the entire University of California system... these are all research institutes. Undergrads are considered vermin, with only a slight exaggeration. If undergrads only heard how they were talked about at some of these places...

One big difference between the two: At OU, your teaching skills will play a small role in the university's decision to hire you. At a research institute, it will play no role whatsoever. None. And why should it? Chances are the prof won't teach any students anyway (but his grad student will).

[Vaevictis]

Having a bunch of elite professors around a campus does the average undergraduate little good.

It depends. It certainly does something for the undergraduate after graduation -- the reputation of the professors has a lot to do with the reputation of the granted degree. For example, OU's Supply Chain Management program is ranked #18 nationwide, mostly because of one specific faculty member. IIRC, the rankings are basically based on: Admission criteria, salary upon graduation, and other academics perceptions of the program (read as: how many elite faculty are on staff?).

It also opens doors for research. Elite professors can rake in the grants, giving undergraduates more opportunity for undergraduate research and support if they decide to go for a graduate degree.

That said, you are correct that it is pretty bad for undergrads to have elite faculty with no corresponding commitment to instruction.


At OU, your teaching skills will play a small role in the university's decision to hire you.

It depends on the department and what you mean by 'hire.' If you mean "just passing through", yeah. If you mean permanent (ie, tenured), well, based on what I've seen of the process (and my advisor just went through it recently), it's basically, "Hmm, how many papers did you publish? Were they well received? How much money have you brought in? How well do you teach?(don't worry about that question, we only ask because the book says we have to.)"

[bluedogok]

It also depends on what you are looking to do in the future. If your desire is to stay in academia, get a Master's or PhD then the school with the more "recognized" faculty can do you much better when applying for those type of positions. In most "real world" careers it doesn't matter that much. As much as some Whorns think they are the Harvard of the Hill Country, they aren't.

[jrsooner]

Having a bunch of elite professors around a campus does the average undergraduate little good. Chances are the classes they take will be taught by a teaching assistant anyway.
Research institutes such as UT are meant for grad students. If you are an undergrad, you help the university pay its bills. Other than that, you mean nothing to that institution. (And I do mean nothing.)All I know is that a "elite" (according to other surgeons in the area) neurosurgeon at UT Health Medical School here in Houston blinded my wife's right eye, then wouldn't even check in on her after her surgery. Sent his "aides" to do all the followup, then refused to treat her after the fact. Luckily our family practioner was an ex-surgeon and took over her treatment. I have no respect for the school down here.

[Little Al]

[B]Bluedogok: [B]
As much as some Whorns think they are the Harvard of the Hill Country, they aren't.

HillBilly Harvard

Apologies to Steve Earle

[Leroy Lizard]

It depends. It certainly does something for the undergraduate after graduation -- the reputation of the professors has a lot to do with the reputation of the granted degree.

Not really. Sure, if you hold an advanced degree and are seeking a highly professional position (law, medicine, professorship), but not a bachelor's degree (except for a few fields of study).

Your prior work experience, GPA, and how you conduct yourself in the interview are far more important.


For example, OU's Supply Chain Management program is ranked #18 nationwide, mostly because of one specific faculty member. IIRC, the rankings are basically based on: Admission criteria, salary upon graduation, and other academics perceptions of the program (read as: how many elite faculty are on staff?).

True, but if a UT grad conducts himself even slightly better in the interview or has prior related experience, he will probably get the job. If all things are equal, the better degree can help. But things are never equal.


It also opens doors for research. Elite professors can rake in the grants, giving undergraduates more opportunity for undergraduate research and support if they decide to go for a graduate degree.

Unfortunately, elite professors are often the worst to work for, especially if you are an undergrad. There are exceptions, but elite professors consider undergrads grunts. Sure, they will employ you, but the grad students will perform the meaningful work.

All this does little good if you have been taught poorly. In my experience, the students coming from elite universities struggle the most on qualifier exams. Not really surprising if you think about it.

[Leroy Lizard]

It depends on the department and what you mean by 'hire.' If you mean "just passing through", yeah. If you mean permanent (ie, tenured), well, based on what I've seen of the process (and my advisor just went through it recently), it's basically...

That wasn't my experience at OU, but then again it depends on the major field of study.

[Vaevictis]

True, but if a UT grad conducts himself even slightly better in the interview or has prior related experience, he will probably get the job. If all things are equal, the better degree can help. But things are never equal.

You've got to make the cut to get the interview in the first place. There are a good chunk of jobs out there where the HR person doing the filtering does so based on which school granted the degree.

(This is, of course, most important for your first job.)



Unfortunately, elite professors are often the worst to work for, especially if you are an undergrad. There are exceptions, but elite professors consider undergrads grunts. Sure, they will employ you, but the grad students will perform the meaningful work.

The work may not be particularly meaningful, but it pays, has tuition wavers, goes on your resume as having worked for that professor, and can open the door to graduate study and assistantships later.


All this does little good if you have been taught poorly.

No argument there.

[AzianSooner]

after 5 yrs of working experiece, the degree is not much matter. It's all about your skills.

[SoonerKnight]

Depends. Is it the entrance requirements that are high or the graduation requirements? If you're only letting the "smart" people in in the first place, you should graduate more of them.



That thread started out praising Stoops, then turned into a "Stoops is a cheater, cheater, pumpkin-eater!!!" thread. This thread started out as a "look, they're jealous of Stoops" thread then turned into a "my god, they are grasping at straws down there" thread.


Their standards are so high that their football players have started a team in prison!!!!!!!!!

[Leroy Lizard]

You've got to make the cut to get the interview in the first place. There are a good chunk of jobs out there where the HR person doing the filtering does so based on which school granted the degree.

I have never heard of that happening. Honestly. Not to say it doesn't. The HR firms that I am acquainted with (and I have only worked with a few) filter their applicants according to whether the resume was professionally prepared, the applicant was qualified to do the work, and whether the person was seeking the position they were offering. That alone negates most of the applicants.

Dismissing an applicant because of the university he attended school is a very stupid thing to do. If you are seeking the best, you have to go beyond such superficialities. But there are a lot of stupid people out there.

[tulsaoilerfan]

Boy this thread sure got 'jacked.

[Vaevictis]

Dismissing an applicant because of the university he attended school is a very stupid thing to do. If you are seeking the best, you have to go beyond such superficialities. But there are a lot of stupid people out there.

If you've got a stack of 100 resumes for an entry level job, with applicants who all have 3.8-4.0 GPAs, good internships/research experiences, extracurriculars, etc, and you have to get that number down to a managable 5-15, you're going to start looking for other ways to discriminate.

Sometimes, that's the prestige of the associated school.

I've seen it happen. Hell, I've done it. School prestige matters when you're filling a high demand position and you need an extra point of discrimination. It's not a particularly good way, but it's better than nothing when you've got 5 times the resumes as you have interview slots.

[Leroy Lizard]

If you've got a stack of 100 resumes for an entry level job, with applicants who all have 3.8-4.0 GPAs, good internships/research experiences, extracurriculars, etc, and you have to get that number down to a managable 5-15, you're going to start looking for other ways to discriminate.

You can always separate yourself from the herd, no matter what major you are in or where you attended school.

[Wishboned]

You know, I've pointed this very thing out to Notre Dame fans. They don't think it's funny at all.


I think I may have read that...somewhere...

[aero]

Boy this thread sure got 'jacked.
No kidding. Back to the subject at hand. I pop in there every so often and that is one pathetic group. They have threads currently dissing Bob and another where they are bringing up every loss we've had in the last 5 years. :D Sad when you have to slam someone vicariously. Kind of like saying "yeah, so what. You kicked our *** but that other team beat you". :D I always looked at NU as our big rival and ut sort of like a pesky gnat but the more I hear them yap the more I hope they flounder for decades to come. Its only fitting their stadium is named after an Okie and better yet an OU football player. There could actually come a day when our academics are nearly equal but they will ALWAYS be 2nd rate to us when it comes to football. And that's a warm feeling. :D

[soonerboomer93]

If you've got a stack of 100 resumes for an entry level job, with applicants who all have 3.8-4.0 GPAs, good internships/research experiences, extracurriculars, etc, and you have to get that number down to a managable 5-15, you're going to start looking for other ways to discriminate.

Sometimes, that's the prestige of the associated school.

I've seen it happen. Hell, I've done it. School prestige matters when you're filling a high demand position and you need an extra point of discrimination. It's not a particularly good way, but it's better than nothing when you've got 5 times the resumes as you have interview slots.

I've never included my GPA in my resume. Any resume I've checked, I've completely disregarded any GPA listed, because it meant jack squat to me in the fields I work. I did include that I was in the Honors program at OU, but my degree isn't actually from OU. Actually, my degree actually has no impact on the work I currently do. My initial contacts paid off, that led to experience, that led to more work it just rolls on and on. I do need to do some more course work and have perused some options. I haven't decided because some of it will depend on my work status. I will admit, the contacts I made that got me into the job I currently do, I met while attending OU.

[Cam]

And OU doesn't?

Yeah.. right...

Do you really want to compare academics of Texas vs. OU?
How many players enrolling at ACC this Spring?

[jrsooner]

after 5 yrs of working experiece, the degree is not much matter. It's all about your skills.The one I love/laugh at is when you have 15+ years of experience in your field and they still ask you for your GPA in college. :)

[1stTimeCaller]

David Boren taught me how to read!

[Desert Sapper]

How many players enrolling at ACC this Spring?

None. It's impossible to enroll good players at schools that focus on academics. But then, Duke, Wake Forest, BC, UNC, Ga Tech, and Va Tech are nowheres near as HRD as the Unibersidy ub Teksas. Jus aks Veens Yung.

[bluedogok]

The ACC that Cam is referring to is Austin Community College (http://www.austincc.edu/). A well known credit factory for UT players.

[Desert Sapper]

The ACC that Cam is referring to is Austin Community College (http://www.austincc.edu/). A well known credit factory for UT players.

And I was referring to the Atlantic Coast Conference, a well-respected group of academic schools supplemented by well-respected athletic programs. As the whorns are attesting to their school being highly respected academically, and the argument was about the difficulty of bringing in great players to such an academic meat-grinder, I used the opportunity to make a connection between the two, and to denigrate the whorn education at the same time. Although my assumption was wrong, I still think we were attempting to say the same thing.:O