Arizona vs. Oklahoma...

[OU_Sooners75]

I have stated that Arizona is a lateral move at best. I also stated that before Lute Olson, Arizona was a very mediocre program. Kinda like Okie State before Eddie Sutton and after Eddie Sutton.

Anyway...I am not calling any names or trying to be negative. I thought it would be best to research what I thought was my opinion. So here it goes!

The history of Arizona Basketball:
All-time Record: 1567-861 (64.5%)
Record without Lute Olson: 978-673 (59.2%)
Conference Titles: 21 (11 PAC-10 titles all under Olson)
Conf. Tourney Titles: 4
NCAA Tourney Appearances: 28*
NCAA Sweet 16 Appearances: 14 (all but 3 under Olson)*
NCAA Elite 8 Appearances: 8 (all but 1 under Olson)
NCAA Final Four Appearances: 4 (all under Olson)
National Championship Games: 2 (Both under Olson)
National Championships: 1 (1997, yep under Olson)

The history of Oklahoma Basketball:
All-time Record: 1497-940-0 (61.3%)
Conference Titles: 18
Conf. Tourney Titles: 7
NCAA Tournament Appearances: 26*
NCAA Sweet 16 appearances: 8*
NCAA Elite 8 appearances: 6*
NCAA Final Four appearances: 4
National Championship Games: 2
National Championships: 0

*= Includes 2009

Pretty much a lateral move. Also take into account Lute Olson, though a great coach IMO, got real lucky when he arrived at Arizona.

He did not have to contend much with UCLA, Oregon State's program collapsed, and his biggest recruiting rival was Roy Williams.

[bluedogok]

I agree, Lute Olson made Arizona matter. Since he is gone they will more than likely drop back to being a "good" program. There is no natural recruiting hotbed and it is not a tradition rich program over many years and coaches like a Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina and a few others. Lateral at best.

[Frozen Sooner]

You should probably note that the Pac-10 only implemented a conference tournament a few years ago. Those numbers aren't really comparable.

[OU_Sooners75]

You should probably note that the Pac-10 only implemented a conference tournament a few years ago. Those numbers aren't really comparable.


They have had a tournament from 1987-1990 and 2002 to present.
The Big 8 started theirs in 1977.
The Big 12 started in 1996.

[Frozen Sooner]

Right. So 12 years vs. 23 years. The numbers aren't really comparable.

[OU_Sooners75]

Right. So 12 years vs. 23 years. The numbers aren't really comparable.


Oh well...you get the point from the original post.

They are even at most.

[Lott's Bandana]

Rednecks v. Wrinklenecks

[Harry Beanbag]

Under Lute Olson, U of A was far and away the better program. Whether it remains a top ten program without him remains to be seen.

[soonerfan28]

We won!

[soonervegas]

Thank you for posting this. This whole "better program" junk comes from the fact that we have a monster about 1 mile to the North of the LNC. The fact is there are probably 6-8 super jobs that anyone would be nuts to turn down and after that there are a grouping of very good programs. OU and Zona are both one of those very good programs.

[PhiDeltBeers]

Doesn't even matter now.

[brown town sooner]

Does it matter again since Floyd turned them down?

[OU_Sooners75]

Under Lute Olson, U of A was far and away the better program. Whether it remains a top ten program without him remains to be seen.


This is untrue as a statement as well.

Look at the everything. He did turn them into a national contender. But to say with Olson that Arizona was far and away the better program is not true....

Arizona under Olson (1983-2007):

Record: 598-188 (76.1%)
Post Season Appearances (NIT and NCAA): 23
Sweet 16: 12
Elite 8: 7
Final Four: 4
Championship Game: 2
National Champions: 1

Oklahoma from 1983-2007:

Record: 597-227 (72.5%)
Post Season Appearances (NIT and NCAA): 24
Sweet 16: 7
Elite 8: 4
Final Four: 2
Championship Game: 1
National Champions: 0


Not exactly far and away the better program. Were they a better program? Yes, slightly. But not by much. You also have to look at the conference they played in.

Outside of Arizona while Lute was their coach, they rarely had any problems from their conferecne foes. Their biggest competition in conference was Stanford. UCLA had a few decent years while Olson was at U of A, but not many.

Now, UCLA and a few other teams have been making strides to topple U of A. UCLA is back on top, and Arizona is struggling. They were before Olson called it quits. The strangle hold he had on the PAC-10 was coming off and he knew it.

[OU_Sooners75]

Does it matter again since Floyd turned them down?


IMHO...No it really doesn't matter. Capel is aware of what he has here at OU. It would be very foolish for him to leave OU to go to Arizona.

1. The Big 12 is a much more competitive conference.
2. He is at a school that has deep pockets.
3. He is turning our program into something better.
4. There is not that much pressure on him to win at all costs, like there would be at Arizona.
5. It is a lateral move...nothing more.

[Harry Beanbag]

This is untrue as a statement as well.

Look at the everything. He did turn them into a national contender. But to say with Olson that Arizona was far and away the better program is not true....

Arizona under Olson (1983-2007):

Record: 598-188 (76.1%)
Post Season Appearances (NIT and NCAA): 23
Sweet 16: 12
Elite 8: 7
Final Four: 4
Championship Game: 2
National Champions: 1

Oklahoma from 1983-2007:

Record: 597-227 (72.5%)
Post Season Appearances (NIT and NCAA): 24
Sweet 16: 7
Elite 8: 4
Final Four: 2
Championship Game: 1
National Champions: 0


Not exactly far and away the better program. Were they a better program? Yes, slightly. But not by much. You also have to look at the conference they played in.

Outside of Arizona while Lute was their coach, they rarely had any problems from their conferecne foes. Their biggest competition in conference was Stanford. UCLA had a few decent years while Olson was at U of A, but not many.

Now, UCLA and a few other teams have been making strides to topple U of A. UCLA is back on top, and Arizona is struggling. They were before Olson called it quits. The strangle hold he had on the PAC-10 was coming off and he knew it.


Your own numbers show Arizona being roughly twice as good in the tournament, the real one, not the NIT. And yeah, UCLA had a few decent years, like 4 final fours and a national championship in that time span.

[OU_Sooners75]

Your own numbers show Arizona being roughly twice as good in the tournament, the real one, not the NIT. And yeah, UCLA had a few decent years, like 4 final fours and a national championship in that time span.


That is the point harry...

Arizona without Lute Olson has virtually no tradition whatsoever..


So like I said, what you posted before is not entirely true. Yes, from 1983-2007, they were one of the best teams...however, so was OU.

yes, from 1983-2007, Arizona trumps OU...but the rest of their history, not so much.

get the point?

[Harry Beanbag]

That is the point harry...

Arizona without Lute Olson has virtually no tradition whatsoever..


So like I said, what you posted before is not entirely true. Yes, from 1983-2007, they were one of the best teams...however, so was OU.

yes, from 1983-2007, Arizona trumps OU...but the rest of their history, not so much.

get the point?


Maybe you should go back and read what I posted for clarity. Under Lute, they were without a doubt a better program, without him, who knows. Of course we did beat Arizona twice in the tournament, maybe that evens it up some. :D