Please give me a therapy moment

[The Maestro]

Having two kids under two keeps me from hardly posting anymore, but I have been a diehard OU fan since 1978 when I was 7 and have posted on this board since 2001. So...a few things.

First, I am mindful that if you took away the following combinations, things might be rough.

At Florida, Tebow and Cooper.

At Texas, McCoy and Shipley. Focusing on this one, think OU would have won by 3 if Shipley tore his ACL before the season and McCoy went out on the second possession of the game? Hell, OU would have won by 50 if the shoe was on the other foot.

Take Manning and Clark away from Indy. Take Brady and Moss or Welker from the Pats. That is what OU is facing. Gresham and Bradford being lost is the most freaking devastation an offense in college has faced...maybe ever.

Having said that, the uncanny ability for Stoops to NOT win close games is puzzling. Three games. Five points. Three losses. When OU finds itself down in the fourth quarter under Stoops...game over. We just don't win. Switzer did. Mack Brown does. Stoops teams DO NOT. Bradford and Gresham THIS year aside, it just doesn't happen. Blowout wins? Not a problem. Stoops has plenty of them and they are earned. But watching Florida and USC find ways to win yesterday while OU continually finds ways to lose close games HAS to eventually come back to coaching.

And for those who aren't afraid to admit we were OU fans in the 90's, didn't WE blame stupid penalties and turnovers on the likes of Blake and Schnelly? Wasn't that considered poor coaching when we weren't winning Big 12 titles every year? So why does that NOT mean this year is POOR coaching? Does the bad luck of injuries override the fact we STILL never rally late for wins in close games under Stoops?

A few other things...did anyone else think we should just abandon attempting the run that wasn't going to work and go no huddle and four to five wides on every play yesterday? Or was it just me? Seemed obvious the run wasn't going to work...but Wilson was intent on forcing it to work...and it never did. Secondly, Barry Tramel nailed it today...Sooner Magic is gone. If it were alive, Clayton scores at least one touchdown and Brian Jackson hurdles McCoy yesterday.

Bottom line, Stoops caught every break imaginable to win national title number one, but he has a firm grip on the bronze medal right now. He is no Switzer or Wilkinson. I just wonder if the injury bug forgives the stupid penalties and five turnovers...Blake and Schnelly didn't get the free pass for that kind of crap. I can handle losing in our circumstances. NOT when we find every way possible to lose when we could find ways to win those games.

Okay, therapy complete. Good night.

[Curly Bill]

Hope you feel better, and good post. I'm right there with ya.

[StoopTroup]

No Maestro....

You should be able to win out with backups.

That's why we pay the Coaches the big bucks.

That way you automatically get a BCS title game.

;)

[soonerboy]

Exactly what I was thinking, no matter what we still have some damn good coaches and some damn good players

[The Maestro]

No Maestro....

You should be able to win out with backups.

That's why we pay the Coaches the big bucks.

That way you automatically get a BCS title game.

;)

5 TO's and 10-plus penalties. We didn't blame Garrick McGee or Eric Moore when it happened to them...we blamed the coaches.

A few more thoughts...

1. We have and will always miss Jonathan Hayes since he left. Dude deserves a wing in the Switzer Center for special teams greatness.

2. What happened to DeJuan Miller's "change"? Seemed like a 6'4, 220 pound freak was still on the sidelines watching attempted reverses to 5'10 JUCO transfers yesterday.

3. Where was DeMarco for quarters two and three? I mean you either ARE or ARE NOT injured...and he had 104 yards receiving after four catches...same for Broyles. Seemed like he was rarely on the field in the first half.

4. I applaud BV and the defense. Sure, a few errors, but they had no help. The offense and special teams basically said, "Screw you guys and your effort...you are on your own!" And they were one Keenan Clayton third grade ability catch or one Brian Jackson two foot high vertical from winning the game on their own. Awesome job. Loved the first half disguises...second half did good, too...but the disguises were gone.

[SOONER44EVER]

Great post Maestro. You nailed what a lot of people on here have been trying to say.

[Camomaha]

I don't think Sooner Magic is gone, I just think it never existed. "Sooner Magic" was that OU players of that era were just better than everyone else and played down to the competion, only to come up with some great plays late to win games, because they were much more talented to begin. Barry himself has said that many times. Football of today is different in that many teams now have the same amount of difference makers.

[GottaHavePride]

I think the difference is that - to use a bad metaphor - right now when an opponent dares to punch our team in the mouth, our team seems to play not to get hit again. Now, if an opponent punched our 2000 team in the mouth, they went Mike Tyson on the opponent and punched THEM three or four times.

It's the difference between playing not to lose and playing to stomp your opponent into the ground and send them home in tears.

[rawlingsHOH]

3. Where was DeMarco for quarters two and three? I mean you either ARE or ARE NOT injured...and he had 104 yards receiving after four catches...same for Broyles. Seemed like he was rarely on the field in the first half.

Can't give the ball to him if he can't answer the bell.

Broyles played a lot.

[budbarrybob]

But watching Florida and USC find ways to win yesterday while OU continually finds ways to lose close games HAS to eventually come back to coaching.

I'm not gonna argue the point that OU hasn't lost the game winning Intangible Something or Other. But you can't look at last game and call it a "coaching" snafu.
More like a WTF were you thinking snafu when you field a punt after a big bounce with a gunner 3 ft away. WTF where u thinking when you threw 2 interceptions on BACK TO BACK posessions (how could you see the OU reciever when he was wearing a TEXAS BLANKET!!!!) (Double coverage under and over the top??! WTF. WTF where you thinking when we were fumbling the ball at will.

If you wanna call out a coach for bad calls fine. I saw few "bad" calls. I saw many instances of a player THINKING and trying but FAILING. Can you fault Franks for trying to change the game? No. But it wasn't a wise decision. Landry? 2 picks!??! consecutive series!! WT... well he was trying. But losing the game this week was NOT Bob Stoops or even KW fault. That O-line couldn't block US Grant HS for 4 quarters.

[wishbonesooner]

So did Bob sell his soul to the devil for that 2000 MNC?

[The Maestro]

That O-line couldn't block US Grant HS for 4 quarters.

Agree with every point you made...but who is to blame for this? Again, don't give me the "we lost four guys" story. Ummm...this is Oklahoma. Don't we sign about five or six O-lineman every year? We should reload at this position, not need to rebuild.

Again, I can forgive them cause no one recovers from losing Sam and Jermaine type talent. But just strange that Stoops teams are KNOWN for the inability to win close games or rally in the fourth quarter when down.

[yermom]

So did Bob sell his soul to the devil for that 2000 MNC?

Blake's players

:O

[okiewaker]

That is a good post and I think what a lot of Sooner fans feel. Everytime we get in a tight game I have no confidence we are going to win. Been burned too many times to think otherwise.

[Johnny Utah]

Agree with every point you made...but who is to blame for this? Again, don't give me the "we lost four guys" story. Ummm...this is Oklahoma. Don't we sign about five or six O-lineman every year? We should reload at this position, not need to rebuild.

Again, I can forgive them cause no one recovers from losing Sam and Jermaine type talent. But just strange that Stoops teams are KNOWN for the inability to win close games or rally in the fourth quarter when down.

Good thread Maestro. I've brought this up a bunch of times, but didn't Alabama have to replace 3 starters on its offensive line?

[The Maestro]

Now this nugget from the DO...

"OU currently is leading the nation with 84.5 penalty yards per game.

Against Texas, the Sooners committed 10 penalties for 125 yards."

Hey, at least we lead the nation in SOMETHING!!!

[jduggle]

Point up on OP. I've said all along that penalties and turnovers are the hallmarks of a poorly coached team. The defense played great against a very average Texas offense Saturday and OU had every chance to win and could not close the deal because of the penalties and turnovers. Couple this with a confused, conservative OC and you get a 3-3 record. What was it Wilson said about the o-line in August????

[The Maestro]

Just researched it. Stoops has 3 wins by single digits over teams that finished ranked. KSU in Big 12 title game in 2000, Oregon in Holiday Bowl and Texas in 2007.

He has 8 losses by single digits to teams that finished ranked and four losses by exactly 10 to teams that finished ranked.

[primetime43]

Someone please explain to me why Ratterree and Kenney are even on the field? Why are we throwing fades to Kenney when we have a 6'4 monster on the bench (Dejuan Miller)? Why is Chris Brown continually getting most of the carries. I'm starting to think the only reason Chris Brown is in there is because of ball security. The guy has no big play ability. Why did we run a reverse to a guy that has no speed and no moves? Why didn't we get Broyles the ball more? I need answers!!

[primetime43]

Just researched it. Stoops has 3 wins by single digits over teams that finished ranked. KSU in Big 12 title game in 2000, Oregon in Holiday Bowl and Texas in 2007.

He has 8 losses by single digits to teams that finished ranked and four losses by exactly 10 to teams that finished ranked.

Wow 3 wins!! I wander how many of those were come from behind wins.

[The Maestro]

Someone please explain to me why Ratterree and Kenney are even on the field? Why are we throwing fades to Kenney when we have a 6'4 monster on the bench (Dejuan Miller)? Why is Chris Brown continually getting most of the carries. I'm starting to think the only reason Chris Brown is in there is because of ball security. The guy has no big play ability. Why did we run a reverse to a guy that has no speed and no moves? Why didn't we get Broyles the ball more? I need answers!!

I agree with all your questions. I mean, I like what Kenney can bring and he seems to get 100% effort, but he doesn't look like a big time playmaker. A reverse to Broyles makes more sense. Throwing to Ratterree and Kenney on third downs is nuts.

On our fourth and 1 play, did anyone doubt it was gonna be a slow handoff to Chris Brown? I was surprised he got so close to getting it. I figured it would have been stuffed.

[budbarrybob]

Someone please explain to me why Ratterree and Kenney are even on the field? Why are we throwing fades to Kenney when we have a 6'4 monster on the bench (Dejuan Miller)? Why is Chris Brown continually getting most of the carries. I'm starting to think the only reason Chris Brown is in there is because of ball security. The guy has no big play ability. Why did we run a reverse to a guy that has no speed and no moves? Why didn't we get Broyles the ball more? I need answers!!

Chris Brown is in the game so that the opposing defense will know that we are going to give him the ball off tackle.... :mad:

[cheezyq]

It's hard to pin this one on anything other than just bad luck and turnovers, really. You could say that the skirts that UT's players were wearing where part of it. You could say that the defense was less aggressive in the 2nd half. You could say it was offensive playcalling....and it would probably be all of that. You could also say that reviewing every other play puts a serious damper on the "hurry up" offense (which is yet another reason we should scrap it). But the bottom line is that we had a chance to win a close one...and we lost.

I read a stat last week somewhere (trying to find out where), that the last time OU won a game where it was behind by 3 points or more in the 4th quarter...was 2000 Texas A&M. Ouch.

I think we have a great scheme on both sides of the ball (hear me out on this one). Our offensive scheme works brilliantly against most teams, and really is well-thought out and efficient...most of the time. There are weaknesses in it, as with any scheme. The biggest problem is that our current scheme relies on the offensive line's pass protection. It's NOT aggressive by nature, only aggressive in the fact that we TRY to get the defense on its heals by getting to the line quickly. The problem is also that we run a spread. The spread itself isn't a problem, but we don't do what most of the other spread teams do, which is run the wider line splits. This creates a problem on the edges, where we are vulnerable to holds, as the tackles have to run out further to meet the DL. Often, it makes the interior OL look weak, too, because as a tackle goes out to meet the end, a blitzing linebacker will attack the vacated spot, and the guard can't recover. It's a passive scheme that is exploitable by good teams. There's nothing aggressive about the scheme itself, just the fact that we run it quickly...sometimes.

On defense, the scheme isn't horrible...most of the time. It relies on the fact that we have great, fast, and powerful athletes. Most plays are kept in front of the backers and we rely on speed and fundamental tackling skills to make the play. But, again, it's passive. We blitz, yeah. But we almost always do it with linebackers (predictable), and instead of disrupting timing on the receiver's routes, allowing a chance for the blitz to work, we sit 10 yards off the LOS, allowing all the receivers a free run. When we don't blitz, the linemen aren't allowed to stunt or twist, or even create pressure with any special moves. We bull rush. I believe that this is because sometimes a stunt or twist can backfire, and so we're scared of it. We bull rush so that the backers (on running plays) can hit their gap without worrying that the DL might be in the way. It's a passive scheme, a read-and-react type of scheme.

While those schemes are, overall, very effective in the college game, especially when you recruit like we recruit...they are very passive. Herein lies the problem. When the other team is dictating to US, and being aggressive, we aren't flexible enough with our schemes to be able to hit them back, to respond in like manner. Nothing works anymore, and it comes out looking like poor tackling, which is really just a defender that is out of position and unable to make a sound tackle. On offense, it comes out in the form of holds on the OL, blitzing defenders lighting up our QB, missed blocks, fumbles, etc.

The REAL problem with this team, to me, is that we are just too inflexible with our schemes, and that the schemes are just too passive at the point of attack. But, I'm criticizing the coaching, so I'll take the responses offline. I already know I'm a whiner and I'm trying to run the coaches out of town, and I'm not a coach so I don't know what I'm talking about. :rolleyes:

[rawlingsHOH]

Why is Chris Brown continually getting most of the carries. I'm starting to think the only reason Chris Brown is in there is because of ball security. The guy has no big play ability. Why did we run a reverse to a guy that has no speed and no moves? Why didn't we get Broyles the ball more? I need answers!!

Murray can't answer the bell.

[rawlingsHOH]

I read a stat last week somewhere (trying to find out where), that the last time OU won a game where it was behind by 3 points or more in the 4th quarter...was 2000 Texas A&M. Ouch.

Don't believe everything you read.

Of the top of my head... 2006 Texas Tech.

Ouch!

[rawlingsHOH]

The spread itself isn't a problem, but we don't do what most of the other spread teams do, which is run the wider line splits. This creates a problem on the edges, where we are vulnerable to holds, as the tackles have to run out further to meet the DL. Often, it makes the interior OL look weak, too, because as a tackle goes out to meet the end, a blitzing linebacker will attack the vacated spot, and the guard can't recover. It's a passive scheme that is exploitable by good teams. There's nothing aggressive about the scheme itself, just the fact that we run it quickly...sometimes.

I can't agree with your analysis.

[primetime43]

Murray can't answer the bell.

I really don't agree with that. Even so why not give Jonathan Miller a few carries or Calhoun. When those guys have played albeit against inferior oponents they look more explosive than Brown. You know what your going to get with Brown. What you see is what you get. I'm ready to see what these young bucs got!

[cheezyq]

Don't believe everything you read.

Of the top of my head... 2006 Texas Tech.

Ouch!

Yeah, I guess. Maybe it was "against ranked opponents" and I didn't catch that part or something. It wasn't a blog or anything like that. It was a reputable news site (if there is such a thing).

[cheezyq]

I can't agree with your analysis.

You're free to do so. I might agree with you if you had a counter-argument of some kind.

[westbrooke]

Agree with every point you made...but who is to blame for this? Again, don't give me the "we lost four guys" story. Ummm...this is Oklahoma. Don't we sign about five or six O-lineman every year? We should reload at this position, not need to rebuild.

Again, I can forgive them cause no one recovers from losing Sam and Jermaine type talent. But just strange that Stoops teams are KNOWN for the inability to win close games or rally in the fourth quarter when down.

I don't think this is true, though I'd love to see Rhino, snp, CK, or some of the other recruiting gurus speak to this. We generally pull in a few, and in years where we target the position we may pull in as many as you say, but it doesn't mean they'll all develop into first-rate talent. We saw attrition coming two years ago, targeted the position, and that's how we ended up with Stephen Good and Ben Habern leading a class that, IIRC, had five linemen in it. Good and Habern were the best, but they're still young.

I'm not sure the reload/rebuild argument really applies in this case. It's one thing to reload when you lose a couple receivers or a pair of linebackers or need to slide around some defensive backs or a quarterback when you've been grooming talent behind him. Reloading only works when there are pillars remaining to hold up a unit while the replacements develop. We've had our pillars systematically taken away by graduation and then injury. We had to replace four linemen. No one "reloads" in that situation, not even us. We had the same problems in 2005, with a great running back and inexperienced quarterbacks with nowhere to go as a young line collapsed around them. They'll get better. As someone else brought up (may have been a different thread) a line's overall play is dependent on the ability to play together and gel over time. Total starts on the offensive line is one of the single biggest predictors of quality play. We're sorely lacking in this respect.

And to speak to Johnny Utah's point, I think Alabama is clearly an exception, and not even a difficult one to explain. Alabama hasn't had the deficits in other areas that we've had to face due to injury. If Bradford and Gresham were playing, I think we all agree we'd be undefeated right now, and our OL problems wouldn't look so bad. Bama has a young QB, true, but they have a running back who can run between the tackles and make something out of nothing (from what I've seen, I'd take Ingram over Brown any day) and McElroy also has people like Julio Jones to throw to (maybe the single best game-changing receiver in the college game right now; wouldn't Landry look better if he could throw to Gresham?). Bama has had their struggles, but they look good because they haven't lost. Our OL deficit is glaring because we haven't been able to overcome the sum of our problems.

Now, the larger point is that we're incapable of winning close games, and I wholeheartedly agree on that. Coaching has definitely been an issue in many or most of those incidents. I just don't think it was the primary cause in this game. More than coaching, I think our failings in this game were due to injury, inexperience, mental lapses, and a damn good opponent.

[Salt City Sooner]

Don't believe everything you read.

Of the top of my head... 2006 Texas Tech.

Ouch!
First ones that came to my mind were the '02 Bama & RRS games.

[Johnny Utah]

I don't think this is true, though I'd love to see Rhino, snp, CK, or some of the other recruiting gurus speak to this. We generally pull in a few, and in years where we target the position we may pull in as many as you say, but it doesn't mean they'll all develop into first-rate talent. We saw attrition coming two years ago, targeted the position, and that's how we ended up with Stephen Good and Ben Habern leading a class that, IIRC, had five linemen in it. Good and Habern were the best, but they're still young.

I'm not sure the reload/rebuild argument really applies in this case. It's one thing to reload when you lose a couple receivers or a pair of linebackers or need to slide around some defensive backs or a quarterback when you've been grooming talent behind him. Reloading only works when there are pillars remaining to hold up a unit while the replacements develop. We've had our pillars systematically taken away by graduation and then injury. We had to replace four linemen. No one "reloads" in that situation, not even us. We had the same problems in 2005, with a great running back and inexperienced quarterbacks with nowhere to go as a young line collapsed around them. They'll get better. As someone else brought up (may have been a different thread) a line's overall play is dependent on the ability to play together and gel over time. Total starts on the offensive line is one of the single biggest predictors of quality play. We're sorely lacking in this respect.

And to speak to Johnny Utah's point, I think Alabama is clearly an exception, and not even a difficult one to explain. Alabama hasn't had the deficits in other areas that we've had to face due to injury. If Bradford and Gresham were playing, I think we all agree we'd be undefeated right now, and our OL problems wouldn't look so bad. Bama has a young QB, true, but they have a running back who can run between the tackles and make something out of nothing (from what I've seen, I'd take Ingram over Brown any day) and McElroy also has people like Julio Jones to throw to (maybe the single best game-changing receiver in the college game right now; wouldn't Landry look better if he could throw to Gresham?). Bama has had their struggles, but they look good because they haven't lost. Our OL deficit is glaring because we haven't been able to overcome the sum of our problems.

Now, the larger point is that we're incapable of winning close games, and I wholeheartedly agree on that. Coaching has definitely been an issue in many or most of those incidents. I just don't think it was the primary cause in this game. More than coaching, I think our failings in this game were due to injury, inexperience, mental lapses, and a damn good opponent.

Nice well thought-out post. I somewhat agree with your assessment of the Bama situation. However, weren't Bradford's injuries directly related to OUs young offensive line failing to properly protect him? Bama's young line is evidently protecting its young qb as well as opening holes for the rbs. BTW, I agree with you on Ingram, who I'd take over any back in the country including anybody in usc's "stable".

[westbrooke]

Nice well thought-out post. I somewhat agree with your assessment of the Bama situation. However, weren't Bradford's injuries directly related to OUs young offensive line failing to properly protect him? Bama's young line is evidently protecting its young qb as well as opening holes for the rbs. BTW, I agree with you on Ingram, who I'd take over any back in the country including anybody in usc's "stable".

You're right, of course, about the hit to Bradford. And I think we can safely say Bradford's health was going to become an issue as the hit counter ticked up and they took their toll over the course of a season. An injury is a bit more of a fluke, though, like Tebow's concussion. I haven't watched enough of Bama to know how often McElroy is getting hit, but it just takes one to change that conversation.

I'm perfectly willing to concede to anyone with greater knowledge of Bama's play this year that their line is playing better than ours. But even in that case, I still say it's one data point in a history of college football that indicates a strong correlation between massive turnover in a team's offensive line to subsequent poor play by that unit. That our team isn't the exception to the rule is frustrating but not entirely surprising.

And continuing on your RB comment, I really wish Murray would get more of the load (if he's healthy). He has been running so hard these past few games, harder than I've ever seen him run. He wants to win, he wants to make something happen, and he's the only back we have that I trust to be able to do it. What Ingram has done is very impressive. I might have to get behind Ingram for the Heisman if he keeps it up.

[The Maestro]

Not to criticize Sam, but...um...get your hand out there and break your fall once in awhile. Both times he fell directly on the shoulder. Easy for me to say since I am not the one being tackled, but the horns player tackle was low...Sam didn't break the fall and fell right on the shoulder. You'd think the injury would make him prone to break the fall on the shoulder.

[primetime43]

And continuing on your RB comment, I really wish Murray would get more of the load (if he's healthy). He has been running so hard these past few games, harder than I've ever seen him run. He wants to win, he wants to make something happen, and he's the only back we have that I trust to be able to do it. What Ingram has done is very impressive. I might have to get behind Ingram for the Heisman if he keeps it up.


Amen to that. The guy was laying the wood to Texas when he was running North/South. He made the safety Gideon look that the b**ch he is a few times. He seems to be running AD hard. If we needed one yard I would bet the house on Murray over Brown.

[Johnny Utah]

Not to criticize Sam, but...um...get your hand out there and break your fall once in awhile. Both times he fell directly on the shoulder. Easy for me to say since I am not the one being tackled, but the horns player tackle was low...Sam didn't break the fall and fell right on the shoulder. You'd think the injury would make him prone to break the fall on the shoulder.

I posted about this in another thread either yesterday or Sat night. On the espn wrap-up show "Dr Lou" and Mark May both said that Bradford should have been taught (coached?) to turn his body to land on his back, not his shoulder, when being sacked.

[stoopified]

While I understand how frustrated everyone is I still can wrap my mind around the widespread criticism of OUR coaches.We have played 3 Top 20 teams and lost by a total of 5 points.You either grin and bear it and trust the coaches to right the ship or you don't.I hate losing as much as anyone BUT I trust Bob knows what he is doing and by extension that trust carries over to the staff.

I also understand that Bob has not done well in close games and this frustrates people who recall Barry's record in close games.If changes need to be made then Bob is the one to make them,not fans.If Bob is the problem in anyone's opinion ,then adress that by calling,writing .or e-mailing Boren,Castiglione or the regents.Many of the people who now praise Barry are the people who critcized him '81-'83 when he went 7-4-1.8-4,8-4. Many others are those who don't remember him but know the record.

I have said this in many threads but if anyone has any advice for Bob call on Tuesday night between 7-8PM at 1-877-600-6432.I can't help but realize that while I want the season to turn around , two years as a HS reserve LB and 40 years as a fan does not qualify me as a coaching expert.If any of you are more qualified,please offer your assistance,this is your team.

If not then I hope these rant threads are helping you through the 5 stages of grief(Denial-anger-bargaining-depression-accetance).

[soonervegas]

We will all look back and laugh about our numerous concerns if Stoops is here another 10 years. Fact is we are on a down cycle of "moxy" right now. Texas had it early this decade...now it's our turn. It will turn back and Stoops will win another 1...or 2.

That being said, I will hate Venables soft zone. Continue......

[Funky G]

5 turnovers, 12 penalties, starting QB goes down, and 2 dropped interceptions. Also, no rushing game, but that is largely due to our OL being made up of 2nd stringers due to injury. You aren't going to beat many teams with that, much less, the overrated longhorns.

OU will get better from this. I got way more than I expected from this game due to situation of the team. I am also glad we don't play the cupcake schedule just to get to the BCS.

[cheezyq]

Why do people criticize government authorities? I don't get it. I mean, these are people charged with our safe-keeping and welfare. They always have our best interests at heart and so rarely make mistakes. They obviously know what they are doing all the time. Who of us has ever been a police officer or a mayor or a senator? If you haven't been one of those, you have no right to criticize or point out flaws in the system. If you think you could do better, run for office!

[SoonerNate]

Having two kids under two keeps me from hardly posting anymore, but I have been a diehard OU fan since 1978 when I was 7 and have posted on this board since 2001. So...a few things.

First, I am mindful that if you took away the following combinations, things might be rough.

At Florida, Tebow and Cooper.

At Texas, McCoy and Shipley. Focusing on this one, think OU would have won by 3 if Shipley tore his ACL before the season and McCoy went out on the second possession of the game? Hell, OU would have won by 50 if the shoe was on the other foot.

Take Manning and Clark away from Indy. Take Brady and Moss or Welker from the Pats. That is what OU is facing. Gresham and Bradford being lost is the most freaking devastation an offense in college has faced...maybe ever.

Having said that, the uncanny ability for Stoops to NOT win close games is puzzling. Three games. Five points. Three losses. When OU finds itself down in the fourth quarter under Stoops...game over. We just don't win. Switzer did. Mack Brown does. Stoops teams DO NOT. Bradford and Gresham THIS year aside, it just doesn't happen. Blowout wins? Not a problem. Stoops has plenty of them and they are earned. But watching Florida and USC find ways to win yesterday while OU continually finds ways to lose close games HAS to eventually come back to coaching.

And for those who aren't afraid to admit we were OU fans in the 90's, didn't WE blame stupid penalties and turnovers on the likes of Blake and Schnelly? Wasn't that considered poor coaching when we weren't winning Big 12 titles every year? So why does that NOT mean this year is POOR coaching? Does the bad luck of injuries override the fact we STILL never rally late for wins in close games under Stoops?

A few other things...did anyone else think we should just abandon attempting the run that wasn't going to work and go no huddle and four to five wides on every play yesterday? Or was it just me? Seemed obvious the run wasn't going to work...but Wilson was intent on forcing it to work...and it never did. Secondly, Barry Tramel nailed it today...Sooner Magic is gone. If it were alive, Clayton scores at least one touchdown and Brian Jackson hurdles McCoy yesterday.

Bottom line, Stoops caught every break imaginable to win national title number one, but he has a firm grip on the bronze medal right now. He is no Switzer or Wilkinson. I just wonder if the injury bug forgives the stupid penalties and five turnovers...Blake and Schnelly didn't get the free pass for that kind of crap. I can handle losing in our circumstances. NOT when we find every way possible to lose when we could find ways to win those games.

Okay, therapy complete. Good night.

You are dead on. The injury nightmare just won't end. I guess it just hurts twice as bad when we have chances to win these games even with these injuries but can't quite pull them out.

We'll be fine. Oklahoma tradition didn't begin this season and it won't end this season. Just a year of poor luck. Let's get eligible and win our bowl game.