Hypothetical question. . . . . . . .

[OUMedMan]

Listening to the various whines and rants about Oklahoma's recent bowl records, a thought occurred to me.

Suppose God himself appeared to you and offered you a ten year deal.

The deal was that OU would win at least 10 games a year for the next 10 years, and sometimes as many as 12. They would beat Texas and Oklahoma State every year, and win at least 5 Big 12 championships. They would be in a BCS bowl every year. And there would be no beatdowns like USC or West Virginia and no "gutty little overachiever" games like Boise State.

But . . . . .while they might play in the BCS championship game, they would never be the national champions.

If you refuse the deal things will be like they are now. OU might go undefeated and win a national championship. But on the other hand, they would just as likely have a losing season, lose to Texas, lose to Okie State, and not even make it to a bowl game. And even in successful years there might be a USC, West Virginia, or Boise State game. Or three.

In other words, the next 10 years would be like the last 10 years.

What would be your preference?

I'm not sure what mine would be.

I do know, though, that there are only a few schools in the nation that wouldn't immediately swap their football success for the Sooner's success.

[bstuff1979]

Listening to the various whines and rants about Oklahoma's recent bowl records, a thought occurred to me.

Suppose God himself appeared to you and offered you a ten year deal.

The deal was that OU would win at least 10 games a year for the next 10 years, and sometimes as many as 12. They would beat Texas and Oklahoma State every year, and win at least 5 Big 12 championships. They would be in a BCS bowl every year. And there would be no beatdowns like USC or West Virginia and no "gutty little overachiever" games like Boise State.

But . . . . .while they might play in the BCS championship game, they would never be the national champions.

If you refuse the deal things will be like they are now. OU might go undefeated and win a national championship. But on the other hand, they would just as likely have a losing season, lose to Texas, lose to Okie State, and not even make it to a bowl game. And even in successful years there might be a USC, West Virginia, or Boise State game. Or three.

In other words, the next 10 years would be like the last 10 years.

What would be your preference?

I'm not sure what mine would be.

I do know, though, that there are only a few schools in the nation that wouldn't immediately swap their football success for the Sooner's success.

So, you're saying that we'd be John Cooper Ohio State/Tom Osborn Nebraska (pre-mid to late '90's run). No thanks. I'll take the occassional 8 or 9 win season followed up by a BCS win (champ. game or otherwise) once every five years. The usual year being 10-2/11-2 with a 50/50 on a bowl win. I think all the panic (and, aside from the scattered presence of those who are awaiting the apocalypse, that's what I'm seeing) is overwhelmingly unbased. Stoops refuses to place any undue attention/credit to Granger, but I think his absence has almost everything to do with the lack of D pressure. Take him away and you've got an extra blocker to doubleteam English or go after Lofton. Add that with the 3rd and 4th string guys starting at corner and you've got trouble. As for the O, that's 100% terrible blocking (confusion on assignments and just slow reaction time) and, while this isn't really a total slam on the staff, a lack of anything truly new on playcalling. Same screen plays, same formations. The only new thing I thought I could see was a trips set that was run 3 or 4 times. Not much else. When you've got a month to prep for an opponent and they run the same basic schemes (along with a handful of key players out), that game is what will happen. That's why, unless there's the talent to just impose your will without much opposition, OU could continue to get to a BCS game and then lose said game.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

I'd definately take the latter. I'd rather have a shot at winning the National Title, than no shot at all.

[Aries]

Door number two.

[sooneron]

I'd definately take the latter. I'd rather have a shot at winning the National Title, than no shot at all.
We already won the 08 conf title?

[Curly Bill]

Take Deal #2.

Deal #1 would lack suspense and possibility.

[SwitzerFan]

At Oklahoma, only National Championships are the goal. We have a rich tradition. Anything less is not what we do. We are and will always be better than everyone else. Just the way I have grown up. I know that sounds arrogant, but Crimson runs through my veins.

[The Maestro]

If you are playing sports with no chance of being the best then there is really no reason to play at all.

Sports are all about championships. That HAS to be the goal.

[OUmillenium]

I wish all players' parents had the same views as the Maestro!

[Dickl42]

As an old Sooner (1964 and 1972 classes), I'm glad to see the football team so successful. My chief problem with the program is the lack of discipline among the players and the fact that the team embarrasses the state, the university, the fans, and themselves at least twice a year, and now it's on national television.

[starclassic tama]

this is one of the dumbest threads i have ever seen.