FACT!

[The Maestro]

Fact: It doesn't suck to be us!

http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/superlatives.html

Fact: Oklahoma has the best winning percentage in college football over the last 75 years.
Oklahoma is the winningest program in what is widely considered the modern era of college football. OU has the most victories and best winning percentage of any team since the end of World War II. Going further back, the Sooners have the most wins and best winning percentage in major college football over the past 75 years (since 1935).

Fact: Oklahoma is the only school to have appeared in all five BCS bowl games.
The current BCS games include the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange and Rose Bowls plus the BCS National Championship Game (started in 2007). Oklahoma is the only program in the nation to have appeared in all five games. Since 2000, the Sooners have been to three Fiesta Bowls, two Orange Bowls and made one appearance in each of the Rose, Sugar and BCS games. Overall, OU has played in eight BCS bowl games including four for the national title.

Fact: Oklahoma has more 10+ win seasons than any other program.
No team has more seasons with 10 or more wins than Oklahoma. The Sooners have amassed 32 seasons with 10 or more victories -- the most of any program in the nation. OU also leads the nation in seasons with 11+ wins with 20. Oklahoma's enduring success on the gridiron is further reflected in the fact that the Sooners have recorded seasons with 10 or more wins in eight different decades since the first double-digit win season in 1915 (10-0).

Fact: Oklahoma has scored more points than any team in college football.
Michigan began playing football in 1879 and has since scored the second-most points in college football history. Who do the Wolverines trail? Oklahoma,which didn't start playing football until 16 years later in 1895. The Sooners have scored 31,437 points in their history, churning out a record average of 27 points over 1,168 games.

Fact: Oklahoma has the longest winning streak in college football history.
Oklahoma holds the NCAA record for most consecutive wins by a major college program at 47-straight. The streak spanned five seasons from 1953-57. Oklahoma's 47-game winning streak is considered one of the greatest feats in college football history. Since World War I, there have been only four streaks of more than 30 wins in major college football. OU owns two of the four.

Fact: Oklahoma has been ranked No. 1 by the AP more times than any other team.
OU has a long and illustrious history with the Associated Press Poll since the service began in 1936. The Sooners have been ranked No. 1 more than any team (97 weeks). The Sooners also own the most weeks in the Top 2 and the Top 5. The Sooners top the nation in average poll ranking and have the highest average finish in the final poll of any team.

Fact: No team has been No. 1 in the BCS more weeks than Oklahoma.
Since the introduction of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) in 1998, Oklahoma has been ranked more weeks at No. 1 and in the Top 5 than any other program in college football. The Sooners have been at the top of the BCS standings for a record 20 weeks and ranked in the top five for 46.

Fact: ESPN ranked Oklahoma the most prestigious college football program.
ESPN's research department ran all the numbers through the computer to come up with the No. 1 program of the past 73 seasons. "When you look at the big picture of college football since 1936, no program has achieved greatness as consistently as Oklahoma. We didn't even count the fact that Oklahoma owns the longest win streak in FBS history (47) or leads the nation with a .765 winning percentage since World War II."

Fact: Oklahoma is the only school to have four head coaches with at least 100 wins each.
Oklahoma is the only program in major college football to produce four head coaches with at least 100 wins each. Bob Stoops reached the mark against Washington in Seattle on September 13, 2008. The others? Barry Switzer (157 wins), Bud Wilkinson (145) and Bennie Owen (122).

Fact: No team has produced more unanimous All-Americans than Oklahoma.
Of Oklahoma's 152 All-Americans, 31 were accorded the highest honor -- unanimous selections -- as designated by the NCAA (named by all five official selectors: FWAA, AFCA, AP, Walter Camp andSporting News). No school in the nation has produced more unanimous All-Americans than Oklahoma in the history of college football.

Fact: Oklahoma has had at least one first team all-conference player every year since 1926.
Oklahoma has produced 448 first team all-conference players since Owen Acton first earned the honor in 1907. OU has placed at least one all-conference player on the first team every year since 1926 (85 seasons). In fact, OU has only had one season when playing in a conference without first-team honors (1925). That's 95 of 96 seasons.

Fact: OU has nearly as many Big 12 Championships as all the other teams combined.
Oklahoma won its seventh Big 12 title with a victory against Nebraska in the 2010 Big 12 Championship Game. Since the conference was formed in 1996, OU has won seven championships while all the other teams have combine for eight. OU is the only team to win back-to-back titles (2006-2007) and three-in-a-row (2006-2008).

Fact: The Sooners win a conference title nearly every other year.
Oklahoma won its first conference championship in 1915 and has since tacked on another 42. In other words, the Sooners average a conference title nearly every two seasons. That's precisely the pace Bob Stoops' teams have been on in recent years with Big 12 Conference crowns in 2010, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2004, 2002 and 2000.

Fact: Oklahoma is No. 4 in the nation in players selected in the NFL Draft.
OU has supplied 346 players all-time in the NFL Draft. Forty-two of those players were taken in the first round including three overall No. 1 picks (Bradford, Sims, Selmon). With Sam Bradford No. 1, Gerald McCoy No. 3 and Trent Williams No. 4 in 2010, Oklahoma became the first school ever to supply three of the first four NFL Draft picks.

Fact: OU is recognized for more national titles than any other team since 1936.
Utilizing the official selectors as recognized by the NCAA since the advent of the Associated Press poll in 1936, Oklahoma has earned national titles in more seasons (16) than any other team. The Sooners are followed in the Top 5 by Notre Dame (15), Ohio State (14), Alabama (12) and Southern Cal (12).

[badger]

Fact: It doesn't suck to be us!

Sucks to be you!

just kidding :D

[texaspokieokie]

thanx for adding 9 national titles.

[Herr Scholz]

Oklahoma is the winningest program in what is widely considered the modern era of college football. OU has the most victories and best winning percentage of any team since the end of World War II.
I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.

[sooner59]

I've actually heard it several times in national sports media when they have spoke of the post-WWII era in college football.

[badger]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites.
If you prefer, we can stop quoting "1950" for us and quote "5-7" for you instead.

[Herr Scholz]

If any of you have a link, I'd appreciate it. I've never heard this in the sports media nor have I read it. And I watch and read about sports a lot. To me it just seems like a convenient thing for Sooners to say because it makes their post WWII wins look good and diminishes the time before that. But I will stand corrected if wrong.

[The Maestro]

Herr, it is because that is when we won our first national title...DUH!!!

Hey, any thread that gets Herr to show up is solid.

(patting myself on back)

[Herr Scholz]

Hey, Maestro. Yeah, it sounds to me like when our aggies are saying they've won 3 of the last 5 instead of saying they've lost 2 of the last 3.

[OhU1]

If you look at the very modern era of UT football Texas is 5-7 going back to 2010.

[MeMyself&Me]

Actually, I've usually heard the national media to use the advent of the AP poll in 1936 as the 'modern era' but I think OU is still the winningest program if you go back to 1936 as well.

[101sooner]

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/In_the_modern_era_since_1936_which_top_ten_NCAA_Di v_1_football_teams_have_the_best_winning_percentag e

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=7051

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/modern/jb_modern_stagg_1.html

[47straight]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.


1950? Who said anything about 1950 genius?

[47straight]

Keep in mind that Greg Davis knows how to craft an offense around the talent at hand.

FIFY

[Herr Scholz]

1950? Who said anything about 1950 genius?

Sooners are always talking about post WWII as the modern era. Like the multiple guys right above you (not that any of those are credible sources and they definitely don't constitute that timeframe as "widely considered").

And Greg Davis has a more recent national title ring than your coaches.

[sooner59]

Sooners are always talking about post WWII as the modern era. Like the guy right above you (not that any of those credible sources and they definitely don't constitute that timeframe as "widely considered").

And Greg Davis has a more recent national title ring than your coaches.

It doesn't take a genius OC to win a title with Vince Young.

Hell, even Vince Young could coach Vince Young to a title.

[Herr Scholz]

Stoops didn't want him as a QB. Which begs the question...

[The Maestro]

Stoops didn't want him as a QB. Which begs the question...

Since when has Stoops ever had a running quarterback? Wrong fit. And VY went 1-2 against OU.

[rekamrettuB]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.

8th all time ain't bad either.

[Herr Scholz]

I believe Stoops just recruited a running QB in Charles Thompson's kid. He just didn't see it in VY. If it was so easy to win a natty with him, it should've been obvious.

Anyway, 47 is still fixated on Greg Davis. I'm still waiting on a credible source that shows post WWII was the modern era. If it was "widely considered" this, it should be easy, no?

[101sooner]

Thompson is not a running QB.

[fwsooner22]

C'mon we all know VY couldn't have gotten into OU.

[LakeRat]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.

1936 based on the start of the AP poll. Has nothing to do with helmets or schollies, but Bama and Notre Dame not being able to claim a National Title b/c they beat their own JV squad.

[rekamrettuB]

Hey, Maestro. Yeah, it sounds to me like when our aggies are saying they've won 3 of the last 5 instead of saying they've lost 2 of the last 3.

I didnt' realize Mack Brown was an aggie.

[Herr Scholz]

Torrance Marshall did, fw. He was denied at Miami btw. And some of your players scored single digits on the wonderlic test as well (Chjoke Onyegetcha?) scored a 7 or 8.

[Herr Scholz]

I didnt' realize Mack Brown was an aggie.

He's not. Your contrived timeframes are aggieish.

[picasso]

Stoops didn't want him as a QB. Which begs the question...

Shall we go over the Texas kids that Mack has let slip away?

Jim Thorpe was a consensus best athlete in the world for the first half of the century. WTF was that all about anyway?

[LakeRat]

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/7502/cals-best-sets-modern-era-record-with-5-tds

Here is an Espn article using the term. I could quote Bleacherreport, but thats worthless!! There are several articles with CBS, NBC using the phrase. Don't know how many you want?

[Sooner_Tuf]

Herr would like for it to start in 1956. When the Horns went 1-9 and lost to OU 45-0.

I think that is the team the pokes patterned their program after.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Torrance Marshall did, fw. He was denied at Miami btw. And some of your players scored single digits on the wonderlic test as well (Chjoke Onyegetcha?) scored a 7 or 8.

So about 30% higher than VY?

[Herr Scholz]

Shall we go over the Texas kids that Mack has let slip away?

Not the point. 59sooner said anybody could've coached VY to a title (which is ridiculous besides the other ridiculous point that he won that title on his own) to detract from our coaches who won a ring. If he was so great, Stoops was pretty dumb not to recruit him at QB, no?

[badger]

If you look at the very modern era of UT football Texas is 5-7 going back to 2010.

5-8 if you include ALL of 2010.

http://media.al.com/alabama-sports/photo/ingram-kisses-trophy-almondpng-06feb463b668d81e_large.png

[picasso]

Not the point. 59sooner said anybody could've coached VY to a title (which is ridiculous besides the other ridiculous point that he won that title on his own) to detract from our coaches who won a ring. If he was so great, Stoops was pretty dumb not to recruit him at QB, no?

How can it not relate to your point? There's a few players across the country that Macked goofed on as well. Ignore it if you like.

[Herr Scholz]

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/7502/cals-best-sets-modern-era-record-with-5-tds

Here is an Espn article using the term. I could quote Bleacherreport, but thats worthless!! There are several articles with CBS, NBC using the phrase. Don't know how many you want?

A single credible one would suffice. That blog doesn't even define what the modern era is. You guys sure are having trouble with something so "widely considered".

[Herr Scholz]

How can it not relate to your point? There's a few players across the country that Macked goofed on as well. Ignore it if you like.

I explained it to you but you ignore that if you like. I'm not the one saying anyone in the country could've won a national title with Derrick Strait.

[StoopTroup]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.

Look what crawled up out of the Bevo dung pile. :texan:

[LakeRat]

A single credible one would suffice. That blog doesn't even define what the modern era is. You guys sure are having trouble with something so "widely considered".

Your not defining what a credible source. If Wikipedia, Bleacherreport, NBC, CBS, ESPN, Soonersports, doesn't work? Your right, I don't have a credible source. Modern Era is an OU term.

[Herr Scholz]

Haven't seen anything from ESPN, CBS or NBC claiming that post WWII is the modern era. Still waiting on a single credible source to back up that claim.

Bleacher report? Really? And one of the sources said it was when leather helmets went away which was in the 1930s.

[LakeRat]

5-8 if you include ALL of 2010.

http://media.al.com/alabama-sports/photo/ingram-kisses-trophy-almondpng-06feb463b668d81e_large.png

Wasn't this the coming out party for the next "great" QB at Texass?

15/40 37.5% 186 yards 2 Tds vs 4ints? Those are some amazing stats. Sign of the amazing things that are to come.

[Herr Scholz]

Nice topic change.

[Doged]

Haven't seen anything from ESPN, CBS or NBC claiming that post WWII is the modern era. Still waiting on a single credible source to back up that claim.

Bleacher report? Really? And one of the sources said it was when leather helmets went away which was in the 1930s.

Use Google, genius. You'll land around 864,000 results in less than half a second using "modern era of college football". Being a whorn, none of them will be "credible" to you, I'm sure.

[LakeRat]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/197212-the-10-best-coaching-turnarounds-in-modern-college-football

http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2010/08/31/best-college-football-program-of-the-modern-era/

http://www.secsportsfan.com/oklahoma-is-the-best-college-football-program-of-the-modern-era.html

http://www.realclearsports.com/blognetwork/the_college_football_notebook/2010/12/auburn-was-robbed-in-1983.html

This is 4 different authors talking about the "modern era of football". All have differnt time tables, but all use the term. So I can see you struggling with our use of "1936" or "1950" or whatever other year, but to say Sooners are the only ones that use that term is absurd.

IN my opinion it a widely used term, that has different meanings.

[sooner59]

I explained it to you but you ignore that if you like. I'm not the one saying anyone in the country could've won a national title with Derrick Strait.

Derrick Straight never carried a team for an entire season and single-handedly pulled wins out of his *** by scrambling for TDs.

[TahoeSOONER]

Since when has Stoops ever had a running quarterback? Wrong fit. And VY went 1-2 against OU with a big g00se egg on the board in one.


Fify

5-7

[Herr Scholz]

Why don't you post a credible one then (meaning no esoteric blogs, wiki answers or bleacher report). Still waiting on that even though it's so "widely considered".

[Doged]

Why don't you post a credible one then (meaning no esoteric blogs, wiki answers or bleacher report). Still waiting on that even though it's so "widely considered".

See? Told ya' so. :cool:

[badger]

Nice topic change.

All right Wherr the Whorn, I'll be fair to you - the modern era is defined by programs differently depending on when the most successful times were for these programs. However, in OU's case, there's been constant, continued success since this "modera era" defined start.

So, start the modern era whenever you want. The start of the AP poll, the start of the BCS, the start of major television deals, whatever.

I like the 50s as being the start of the modern era, since this is when college football was starting to get opened up to black players... for awesome schools like OU, that is. Hook em took a bit longer.


the 1969 Longhorns were the last all-white team to win a national college football championship.

you guys must be soooo proud.

[Herr Scholz]

IN my opinion it a widely used term, that has different meanings.

I've heard the term. I wasn't saying Sooners were the only ones using the term. I'm saying that that era starts at different times to a lot of different people and that it's not "widely considered" to be post WWII as I often hear from Sooner fans. That's what I'm questioning. To me, it's just a convenient time frame for the Sooner fan to tout your team's particular record.

But it's OK. You can claim it if you want. I was just being the devil's advocate and enjoying the witty repartee as usual. Y'all have a good one.

[TahoeSOONER]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3849468

1. Oklahoma Sooners
Total points: 1,968
Positives: When you look at the big picture of college football since 1936, no program has achieved greatness as consistently as Oklahoma. We didn't even count the fact that Oklahoma owns the longest win streak in FBS history (47) or leads the nation with a .765 winning percentage since World War II. The 1956 Oklahoma team catapulted the Sooners past Notre Dame to the top of the Prestige Rankings, and it's been in the top spot ever since. OU's seven national titles have spanned four decades. The Sooners have finished in the final poll's top 5 an astounding 29 times. But the real fuel for OU's rise to the top of our rankings has been its conference dominance. The Sooners finished the regular season with at least a share of their conference's best record a stunning 39 times, seven more than any other program in the country.

[oudavid1]

I believe Stoops just recruited a running QB in Charles Thompson's kid. He just didn't see it in VY. If it was so easy to win a natty with him, it should've been obvious.

Anyway, 47 is still fixated on Greg Davis. I'm still waiting on a credible source that shows post WWII was the modern era. If it was "widely considered" this, it should be easy, no?

So a jump ball to limas sweed, and a designed QB sneak on 4th down in a 3 point game is easy?

Oh ya, when OU won their last title, the only points the team they beat for it scored were scored by Oklahoma.



Torrance Marshall did, fw. He was denied at Miami btw. And some of your players scored single digits on the wonderlic test as well (Chjoke Onyegetcha?) scored a 7 or 8.

yeah, you just compared a nobody corner to your greatest QB ever. Is that a joke? The guy that lead your ONLY team in the last 50 years to a national title is as smart as an OU corner.


Haven't seen anything from ESPN, CBS or NBC claiming that post WWII is the modern era. Still waiting on a single credible source to back up that claim.

Bleacher report? Really? And one of the sources said it was when leather helmets went away which was in the 1930s.

No, but i found a source that says we are the best. Ever. Period.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3849468

Boomer.

[Cornfed]

Ok I'll play your silly little game, define modern era yourself. Then lets look at numbers again.

[sooner518]

I believe Stoops just recruited a running QB in Charles Thompson's kid. He just didn't see it in VY. If it was so easy to win a natty with him, it should've been obvious.


black QB = running QB. thanks for clearing that up. :rolleyes:

1936 seems the most logical choice since that was the start of the AP poll. I dont care really when you start counting. Any way you count it, our history (and our current) kicks Texas's ***.

[oudavid1]

black QB = running QB. thanks for clearing that up. :rolleyes:

1936 seems the most logical choice since that was the start of the AP poll. I dont care really when you start counting. Any way you count it, our history (and our current) kicks Texas's ***.

but texas wins head to head -Whorn


Check the polls, that sh** dont mater.

[sooner518]

but texas wins head to head -Whorn


Check the polls, that sh** dont mater.

the logical retort to that is pretty obvious: "so you prefer beating OU to winning national and conference titles? sounds like something an A&M fan would do...."

[CrescentCityOUAlum]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3849468

Dude, Her, do you watch or read about college football? Yes, I have heard the "modern era" spoke of many times. Generally, it's considered to be when the AP poll came into being. We own it. Take your series record, the product of which is victories that came before the helmet or the forward pass, and the fact that the game is played in your home state, roll it up and shove it up your ***. We don't care. We'd rather be the best program in the nation and wouldn't trade it for victories over your underachieving program.

[sooner ngintunr]

**** texas.

[StoopTroup]

**** texas.


BOOMER ! ! !

[oumartin]

Here's something we can all agree on. Mack Brown has had a losing record at TExas in the modern era whereas Bob Stoops has not had a losing record in the modern era at OU.

[101sooner]

I define the modern era as October 23rd, 2010.

[CrimsonRez]

I've heard the term. I wasn't saying Sooners were the only ones using the term. I'm saying that that era starts at different times to a lot of different people and that it's not "widely considered" to be post WWII as I often hear from Sooner fans. That's what I'm questioning. To me, it's just a convenient time frame for the Sooner fan to tout your team's particular record.

But it's OK. You can claim it if you want. I was just being the devil's advocate and enjoying the witty repartee as usual. Y'all have a good one.

your mascot is a cow...

[SoonerDomiNation]

Heres something thats widely considered and defined as "the modern era" ....... 5-7, no bowl and lets forget total SUCKAGE from " the modern era" bonghorns.

[CrimsonRez]

if you type in "modern era of college football" into google, there are several sites that have the "modern era" as starting in 1945. However, it is merely personal preference as to what the definition of it is. So there you go Herr, we can call it whatever we want, so get off our nuts son!

[47straight]

Sooners are always talking about post WWII as the modern era. Like the multiple guys right above you (not that any of those are credible sources and they definitely don't constitute that timeframe as "widely considered").

And Greg Davis has a more recent national title ring than your coaches.

Again, who said anything about 1950?

It seems your history knowledge and football knowledge are about the same.




Jack ****ing squat.

[47straight]

if you type in "modern era of college football" into google, there are several sites that have the "modern era" as starting in 1945. However, it is merely personal preference as to what the definition of it is. So there you go Herr, we can call it whatever we want, so get off our nuts son!

It's not a question of personal preference, he just doesn't know when WWII ended.

He also thinks that Greg Davis can mold an offense around the talent at hand.

[47straight]

Keep in mind that Greg Davis knows how to craft an offense around the talent at hand.

FIFY

[CrimsonRez]

It's not a question of personal preference, he just doesn't know when WWII ended.

He also thinks that Greg Davis can mold an offense around the talent at hand.

you know damn well WW2 ended in 1950 ;)

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.


Since your reading comprehension is bad, perhaps you missed that blurb from ESPN that lists us as the No 1 program going back to 1936. Soonersports uses the end of WWII - 1945. So, to answer your question, there's a national media organization recognizing us as the No 1 program in the "modern" era. Deal with it whorn!

[oudavid1]

I must have missed the part where Herr responded to anything i said.

[47straight]

you know damn well WW2 ended in 1950 ;)


Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

[3rdgensooner]

Defining "modern" is hard!

[Herr Scholz]

I would use 1936 due to the AP poll as some have mentioned.

And 1950 was an obvious reference to your first national title, 47. Really not that hard to understand my meaning on that one but your panties are in a bunch at this point so I understand your motivation. I'm quite aware of when WWII ended.

[MeMyself&Me]

I would use 1936 due to the AP poll as some have mentioned.

And 1950 was an obvious reference to your first national title, 47. Really not that hard to understand my meaning on that one but your panties are in a bunch at this point so I understand your motivation. I'm quite aware of when WWII ended.

To the first part, OU is STILL the winningest program of the 'modern era' using that definition so your point is useless.

As to the second, you were the one to criticize the use of 1950 at the starting point when people were saying post WWII.

[70sooner]

But it's OK. You can claim it if you want. I was just being the devil's advocate and enjoying the witty repartee as usual. Y'all have a good one.


too bad is it so one sided. maybe you'll think of something witty, eventually.....

you have a good one, too!~

[Herr Scholz]

To the first part, OU is STILL the winningest program of the 'modern era' using that definition so your point is useless.

Congrats. Definitely something to be proud of. UT is the 2nd winningest program of all time (no arbitrary time frames necessary). Also something to be proud of.

[CrimsonCommando]

Wait..a World War...there was one?

by the way, is Greg Davis employed anywhere?

[StoopTroup]

Congrats. Definitely something to be proud of. UT is the 2nd winningest program of all time (no arbitrary time frames necessary). Also something to be proud of.

DELUSIONAL!

whorns ruled the SWC. that's about it.

[SoonerPr8r]

The end of WWII is used because of the influx of students after the war was over. This increase in students was due to the introduction of the GI bill. All of a sudden there were a ton of young men in good athletic shape in going to college for free in almost every state in the union. Boom! History-ed

[MeMyself&Me]

Congrats. Definitely something to be proud of. UT is the 2nd winningest program of all time (no arbitrary time frames necessary). Also something to be proud of.

So what's the point of you being here and posting in this thread again?

[Cornfed]

Congrats. Definitely something to be proud of. UT is the 2nd winningest program of all time (no arbitrary time frames necessary). Also something to be proud of.

So you cede that the whorns are second to the Sooners , thank you thread over.

[Soonermagik]

Interesting article. If Stoops stays another 7-8 years I bet OU can land a couple of more national titles to add to the resume.

[Quik Sand]

Interesting article. If Stoops stays another 7-8 years I bet OU can land a couple of more national titles to add to the resume.Starting this upcoming season :D :D :D

[Soonerwake]

It's threads like these that remind me why I refuse to go to message boards of other teams. :mad:

The question I have is, why is there a Horn here?? Go back to your own board and discuss how Mack will have you back to national champ contender this year. I mean, you come to an OU message board to argue with OU fans about an arbitrary point of OU statistics. Must suck to be you.

[Herr Scholz]

DELUSIONAL!

whorns ruled the SWC. that's about it.

Nope. UT has the 2nd most wins of any team all time. Including a 59-41 record against OU.

[Herr Scholz]

So you cede that the whorns are second to the Sooners , thank you thread over.

No, UT is 2nd on the all time wins list. OU is 8th I believe.

[StoopTroup]

Nope. UT has the 2nd most wins of any team all time. Including a 59-41 record against OU.

Nope. You guys twist **** around until you can polish a bevo turd into a trophy. It's OK though.....we all know how you guys are. There's no sense arguing with us. If you want....you can head over to ShaggyBevo or whornfans and have a nice group polishing session over there though.

[fwsooner22]

Please don't forget who ** plays every year. For decades they were in a conference with Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU (when they weren't what they are today), and Baylor. You are gonna rack up some wins that way. Fast forward to the Big 12 and take a look at that non-con.....they just brought the lower tier of the SWC and kept playing 'em.

[Quik Sand]

No, UT is 2nd on the all time wins list. OU is 8th I believe.Quick topic change....would like to hear what your thoughts are on the upcoming season for Texas. W/L record, etc.

[KantoSooner]

The end of WWII is used because of the influx of students after the war was over. This increase in students was due to the introduction of the GI bill. All of a sudden there were a ton of young men in good athletic shape in going to college for free in almost every state in the union. Boom! History-ed

ding ding ding! Winnah.

Herr, The so-called 'modern era' can be said to have started with the influx of GI Bill players released from military service in 1945. Why? Because previously college was a far more elitist institution and one that was disproportionately white, anglo-saxon and protestant. It's thus kind of unfair to compare what went before with what came after.
<although many pre-war players would have made the cut after, a good many would not have - the quality of athlete went up drastically.>
<Further note; there should also be an asterisk denoting when teams started recruiting and playing black players. As Texas learned to its horror up to what? 1971? Once opponents integrated, the days of lily white teams winning much of anything was pretty much over. Again, you have to recognize these titanic shifts in college athletics for 'records' over time to mean much of anything.>
<final note: I have no citation for this. I relied on my own reasoning. Take it for what it's worth and feel free to wrap thyself around the nearest axle if you want to focus more on the 'widely accepted' part than on the 'modern era' part.>
Cheers

[Herr Scholz]

You guys twist **** around until you can polish a bevo turd into a trophy.
What's spin about having the 2nd most wins of any team all time? We're not the ones picking an arbitrary time frame to make our overall record look better.

[Herr Scholz]

Please don't forget who ** plays every year.
TCU, SMU, Arkansas and A&M all won national titles while in the SWC. You're the ones who only had a single tough team to play, the rest being dwarfs in your former conference.

[Herr Scholz]

Quick topic change....would like to hear what your thoughts are on the upcoming season for Texas. W/L record, etc.

7 or 8 wins sounds reasonable with all of the new schemes and I think most UT fans would be happy with that as long as we're improving. I blame last season on a variety of factors, 3 big ones of which were QB play, OT play and DT play. I think we'll be improved on the interior of the D line but not sure how much we will be better at the first two. Don't know how our O line got so bad so fast and I'm not a Gilbert fan. Hopefully Harsin's offense will allow us to score more than 21 per game on average though.

Oh and for what it's worth, good discussion on the modern era.

[CrescentCityOUAlum]

Dude, when did all-time wins become the indicator? This is a stupid way to determine who the best is. Michigan would be No.1 by virtue of the fact that they've been playing longer than anyone else. Winning percentage is a much better indicator.

Care to compare number of national titles in the Big 8 vs. SWC? Care to compare conference titles? Heismans?

OU has more hardware, period. UT is just like Michigan, lots of wins with little to show for it.

[oudavid1]

I must have missed the part where Herr responded to anything i said.

Uh yep. Still waiting.

[owenfieldreams]

Regardless of the arbitrary reference to the "Modern Era" and all incumbent statistics therein, there is one undeniable fact......Texas, with all it's assets, is the most underachieving major college football program in the nation.

If OU had the wealth of bounty to draw from that UT has, we'd have won 20-30 NC's.

Teams like OU, Alabama, & yes, even Nebraska, shame the Horns in terms of success overcoming adversity. How do you fail as a coach @ UT? I mean, Fred Akers, David McWilliams, John Mackovic couldn't get it done. How does that happen? I mean, poor little OU & it's football program, a product of the dust bowl, made it possible for the late Walter Fondren to use his considerable support of the Coastal Conservation Association to overshadow his days as QB @ Texas when he was getting his *** handed to him by the Sooners.

We even gave the Horns a coach who was able to marshall all the considerable UT assets into a winning program but even he couldn't sustain it.

Don't get me started on UT.......classic underachievers. If Bob Stoops had been in Austin these past 10 years, the Horns would have probably won 3 NC's.

[rekamrettuB]

What's spin about having the 2nd most wins of any team all time? We're not the ones picking an arbitrary time frame to make our overall record look better.

Don't forget to mention that you have 43 or so games on OU and are only up 41 in the win column. Looks like the win % is pretty darn even. 5-7 must have really hurt this year.

[Herr Scholz]

Dude, when did all-time wins become the indicator? This is a stupid way to determine who the best is. Michigan would be No.1 by virtue of the fact that they've been playing longer than anyone else. Winning percentage is a much better indicator.

Care to compare number of national titles in the Big 8 vs. SWC? Care to compare conference titles? Heismans?

OU has more hardware, period. UT is just like Michigan, lots of wins with little to show for it.

Never said it was the best indicator, just one. It's an impressive stat. And for the record, UT has played exactly two years longer than OU (1893 vs. 1895). UT is ahead of OU in winning % as well. You have to look at both of them. Boise St. is 4th all time in winning %. You can't look at those things in a vacuum. Tell me again which indicator is stupid?

OU has 3 more national titles than UT which were won in the 1950s when Bud Wilkinson had a big bag of cash funded by Oklahomans trying to create a positive image for the state. We have 4 clean national titles. I'll take that all day long.

[Herr Scholz]

Uh yep. Still waiting.

What would like to know? I'm not going to go back and re-read the whole thread.

[Herr Scholz]

Regardless of the arbitrary reference to the "Modern Era" and all incumbent statistics therein, there is one undeniable fact......Texas, with all it's assets, is the most underachieving major college football program in the nation.


Nah. That would be Texas A&M. We have 4 national titles which is fine by us. But of course we didn't buy them all like you guys.

[Herr Scholz]

If Bob Stoops had been in Austin these past 10 years, the Horns would have probably won 3 NC's.
Really? Because he just got done whiffing on 5 BCS games in a row, INCLUDING 3 national title chances. And that's with higher ranked recruits than UT. Look it up.

[Cornfed]

No, UT is 2nd on the all time wins list. OU is 8th I believe.

Obviously consistency is not your strong point.

[KantoSooner]

We have 4 clean national titles. I'll take that all day long.

I enjoy your posts, but this can not be let alone.

Herr, you seem a man of mature years (ie, over 40, like Gundy), so you must remember that the SWC was the poster child for corruption, player payment and general cheating and filth for many decades. Hell, the SEC even refers to themselves as still chasing the SWC's unequaled records in this regard to this day.

Whatever you choose to think of OU and our record(s), please retain a nodding acquaintance with reality by acknowledgeing that the SWC bowed to no man in terms of playin the game dirty.

[Cornfed]

Really? Because he just got done whiffing on 5 BCS games in a row, INCLUDING 3 national title chances. And that's with higher ranked recruits than UT. Look it up.

Jealousy is not a virtue.

[texaspokieokie]

Please don't forget who ** plays every year. For decades they were in a conference with Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU (when they weren't what they are today), and Baylor. You are gonna rack up some wins that way. Fast forward to the Big 12 and take a look at that non-con.....they just brought the lower tier of the SWC and kept playing 'em.

houston beat the crap out of tejas @ least 3 times while both were in SWC.

[MeMyself&Me]

I enjoy your posts, but this can not be let alone.

Herr, you seem a man of mature years (ie, over 40, like Gundy), so you must remember that the SWC was the poster child for corruption, player payment and general cheating and filth for many decades. Hell, the SEC even refers to themselves as still chasing the SWC's unequaled records in this regard to this day.

Whatever you choose to think of OU and our record(s), please retain a nodding acquaintance with reality by acknowledgeing that the SWC bowed to no man in terms of playin the game dirty.

This.

[Herr Scholz]

Whatever you choose to think of OU and our record(s), please retain a nodding acquaintance with reality by acknowledgeing that the SWC bowed to no man in terms of playin the game dirty.

Not us. Akers dabbled in it but it never got beyond a pair of boots, some steak dinners and some football tickets. SMU and A&M and Arkansas were the major culprits.

[MeMyself&Me]

And Tejas IS the most underachieving program in the college football history. A&m is just the most delusional.

[MeMyself&Me]

Not us. Akers dabbled in it but it never got beyond a pair of boots, some steak dinners and some football tickets. SMU and A&M and Arkansas were the major culprits.

Uh huh. So it's not cheating if you don't get caught then...

[Herr Scholz]

And Tejas IS the most underachieving program in the college football history. A&m is just the most delusional.

Not even close. Talk about delusion. We're a top 10 team all time. A&M has the resources (money, fanbase, recruiting hotbed) but has done exactly nothing with it.

[Herr Scholz]

Uh huh. So it's not cheating if you don't get caught then...

More delusion and the Sooner mantra. Everyone does it. Do you really think we would've gone throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s with no national titles if we were cheating? We could buy quite a bit with our resources. Case in point, where did Marcus Dupree end up? Who bought that double wide for his momma? It certainly wasn't UT and we wanted him badly.

[70sooner]

TCU, SMU, Arkansas and A&M all won national titles while in the SWC. You're the ones who only had a single tough team to play, the rest being dwarfs in your former conference.

smu won it 1935

tcu won it 1938

aTm won it 1939

ark claims one from 1964. But not from either the AP or the UPI. The Helms Athletic Foundation and the Football Writers Assoc of America were the ones who deemed Sooie U the MNC for 1964. The AP & the UPI went with Bama as their MNC.

yep, mitee impressive.....

[KantoSooner]

....in related news:

Nixon had no enemies list!

Dogs are fond of cats!

Texans are without ambition, pride or competitive spirit!

Sir, you had a stable full of studs through those decades. Some turned out to be busts, some of your coaches were semi-slow in the brain in terms of keeping up with the game and you had some awful luck. But the root of Texas' drought in those years was NOT a lack of players.

[70sooner]

....in related news:

Nixon had no enemies list!

Dogs are fond of cats!

Texans are without ambition, pride or competitive spirit!

Sir, you had a stable full of studs through those decades. Some turned out to be busts, some of your coaches were semi-slow in the brain in terms of keeping up with the game and you had some awful luck. But the root of Texas' drought in those years was NOT a lack of players.

This....

[CrescentCityOUAlum]

Yeah, we know Her, UT is the only program that never cheated. Keep drinking the kool aid. You guys throw more rocks than any fanbase I know of. It's disgusting. I don't even hate UT, but the arrogance is digusting from Michigan of the South.

If you're happy with your program that's fine, we don't give a ****. We'll take the hardware and the records you can't match because we are happy with our program too. I can't wait to beat your team again this year. And if Stoops notches another title or two (which I think he will, and Mack won't because Superman is gone) then OU dominance of all of college football will be even more difficult to rebut.

And the two year difference in seasons played you mentioned doesn't tell the whole story does it. How many more games has UT played than OU? Answer that one, and you will understand why you have more wins than us. Because % is about dead even if I'm not mistaken.

[badger]

We could buy quite a bit with our resources.

It's fun debating a whorn brave enough to show their face around here after last season, btw. So, I must say that I respect you a tiny bit, even as you insult OU repeatedly.

As for what you can and cannot buy with your resources, I have no question that you and every program *yes us included* have used resources (with or without the school's knowledge) to bring in players in ways the NCAA might not like... hiring family members in do-nothing jobs, untraceable cash gifts, etc.

I think what differentiates whorn from other programs doing this is YOU AREN'T GETTING YOUR MONEY'S WORTH. Mack and UT have the pick of the litter for the state of Texas recruiting-wise and YOU HAVE CHOSEN POORLY.

[Herr Scholz]

yep, mitee impressive.....

5 teams with national titles is better than 2 and a bunch of dwarves.

[Herr Scholz]

But the root of Texas' drought in those years was NOT a lack of players.
Really? Marcus Dupree and Eric Dickerson say hi. Billy Sims. The list goes on and on. Cheating levels the playing field quite well.

[Cornfed]

5 teams with national titles is better than 2 and a bunch of dwarves.

You forget Colorado?

[sooner ngintunr]

What's spin about having the 2nd most wins of any team all time? We're not the ones picking an arbitrary time frame to make our overall record look better.

You're #3 dip****. Derp derp. Almighty CFB powerhouse Yale is #2.:rolleyes:

[Herr Scholz]

Yeah, we know Her, UT is the only program that never cheated.
Never said that but there are things known as frequency and severity. A jaywalker can call a murderer a criminal, no? Or are all crimes the same no matter how severe or their duration?


And if Stoops notches another title or two (which I think he will, and Mack won't because Superman is gone) then OU dominance of all of college football will be even more difficult to rebut.
One coach has won a national title with players he recruited and one has not. I'll let you guess. And dominant? Losing 3 of those games in a row is dominant? How many chances are you going to give Bowl Flop Bob?


And the two year difference in seasons played you mentioned doesn't tell the whole story does it. How many more games has UT played than OU? Answer that one, and you will understand why you have more wins than us. Because % is about dead even if I'm not mistaken.
You're correct but the fact remains we're ahead in both categories. And far ahead in head to head wins.

[MeMyself&Me]

Not even close. Talk about delusion. We're a top 10 team all time. A&M has the resources (money, fanbase, recruiting hotbed) but has done exactly nothing with it.

A&M doesn't have the same money and fanbase. I'll give you the recruiting hotbed though. But you must admit that Tejas is WAY ahead of aTm in overall available resources.


More delusion and the Sooner mantra. Everyone does it. Do you really think we would've gone throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s with no national titles if we were cheating? We could buy quite a bit with our resources. Case in point, where did Marcus Dupree end up? Who bought that double wide for his momma? It certainly wasn't UT and we wanted him badly.

Hmmm, well to your first question... apparently yes. Because Tejas is the ultimate underachiever. Be proud, you're the best at something... underachieving!

And to your second point, I guess you didn't pick up on the point that part of the reason that lead to Dupree leaving was that he was NOT getting anything while people back home were saying he should.

Regarding the double wide, the only person that suggested that OU bought her a double wide was a known liar. But I guess the only evidence you need is that she said she wanted one and later got one so the liar doesn't even matter. You know, I say I want a lot of things before I go out and buy/finance them.

I also find it funny that you even bring up Dupree since it's documented that Tejas coaches bought him a very expensive pair of boots. Of course Tejas doesn't cheat though so I'm sure there's a good explanation for that coming.

[toast]

ut fans are the only ones I know who talk crap after having a losing record

[Herr Scholz]

You're #3 dip****. Derp derp. Almighty CFB powerhouse Yale is #2.:rolleyes:

Wrong. We're #2 in Div 1-A wins.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/misc/div_ia_wins.php

[sooner59]

Sounds like envy. Why else would someone come onto the board of their rival and try to prove their their team is better and more ethical? Buy a ticket or watch your team on tv, cheer for them, and STFU.

5-7

[sooner ngintunr]

Wrong. We're #2 in Div 1-A wins.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/misc/div_ia_wins.php

I was just correcting your incorrect statement of "2nd most wins of any team." You didn't say FBS originally.

Yale and texas got alot of wins before 1930.

[MeMyself&Me]

I was just correcting your incorrect statement of "2nd most wins of any team." You didn't say FBS originally.

Yale and texas got alot of wins before 1930.

That's at least the second time in this thread that he's tried to change what he originally said to try to make it sound like he wasn't ever wrong.

[The Maestro]

Since I started this...

FACT: OU beat Texas last year...and very well should this next year.

FACT: OU has all the makings of a national championship team this year. The Whorns are hoping to return to a bowl game this year, whether it be the Texas Bowl, PoulanWeedeater.org Bowl, or the inagural bowl game in The Garden State, The Jersey Shore Bowl!

FACT: The Whorns have a lot of new coaches. Meanwhile, their coach in waiting is long gone...and no longer waiting.

FACT: Good news for OU--the offensive line returns! Bad news for Texas--so does theirs!

[MeMyself&Me]

ut fans are the only ones I know who talk crap after having a losing record

When you're full of crap, the only thing that can come out is crap.

[47straight]

I have no interest in debating whose program is better with a ********* whorn who blames Frank Alexander for getting stabbed.

His laughable opinions about football coaching, football talent, and basic American history aside, that's just ****ty.

[cleller]

Mr Herr, or Mr Scholz,

When you are not at the Oklahoma website talking about Texas, do you spend your time at the John Wayne website, talking about how the indians really won all those battles?

[70sooner]

5 teams with national titles is better than 2 and a bunch of dwarves.

nice spin attempt, but considering 3 of the MNC's were way back when and numerous organizations were handing out trophies, again, mitee impressive....but you keep on clinging to that weak a$$ shiite since it seems to boost your spirits.

[oudavid1]

What would like to know? I'm not going to go back and re-read the whole thread.

ehh forget it, everyone cant help but jump on the whorn. Ill wait until it calms down.

[Herr Scholz]

Hmmm, well to your first question... apparently yes. Because Tejas is the ultimate underachiever. Be proud, you're the best at something... underachieving!
Take away the 1950s and Bud Wilkin$on's documented big bag of cash and and we'd be even in national titles. In fact, we'd have 5 if the correct team went to the big game in 2008.

Concerning Dupree, a double wide was obviously better than a pair of boots. The proof is in the pudding by where he ended up.

[Herr Scholz]

ut fans are the only ones I know who talk crap after having a losing record

To be fair, I came over here to have a tongue in cheek conversation about what the modern era is (and it was fun). Then as usual over here, it devolved (not by my doing) into insults about UT and me personally. Enjoy your circle jerk over here. This is why people don't visit. Mindless okie hate.

[Herr Scholz]

Yale and texas got alot of wins before 1930.

Again with the arbitrary time frames that make your team look better. We don't have to spin like that.

[sooner59]

Take away the 1950s and Bud Wilkin$on's documented big bag of cash and and we'd be even in national titles. In fact, we'd have 5 if the correct team went to the big game in 2008.

Concerning Dupree, a double wide was obviously better than a pair of boots. The proof is in the pudding by where he ended up.

Beat Texas Tech and you don't have to cry about it. Its not like you were Auburn in 2004 with an undefeated record. You lost a game. If you wouldn't have, you would have played in the title game that year. You only have yourselves to blame. :texan:

[Herr Scholz]

nice spin attempt, but considering 3 of the MNC's were way back when and numerous organizations were handing out trophies
A&M, TCU and SMU all have AP titles after 1936. But OK. I thought that was the be all/end all with you guys. Oh, unless it doesn't fit your argument....

[Herr Scholz]

Beat Texas Tech and you don't have to cry about it. Its not like you were Auburn in 2004 with an undefeated record. You lost a game. If you wouldn't have, you would have played in the title game that year. You only have yourselves to blame. :texan:

Well, a majority of people in the country thought the tiebreaker was faulty and the wrong team went. That includes the Big XII conference which subsequently changed the tiebreaker rule. We had beaten both teams that played in the Big XII title game that year in KC.

[sooner59]

Here comes the waaaaambulance.

[Herr Scholz]

What about 2008? Nah. We would've won. Both UT and Florida beat you guys by double digits that year.

[Cornfed]

Well, a majority of people in the country thought the tiebreaker was faulty and the wrong team went. That includes the Big XII conference which subsequently changed the tiebreaker rule. We had beaten both teams that played in the Big XII title game that year in KC.

Well actually the majority did not or they would have voted the whorns over the sooners in the BCS polls where it obviously mattered. Beat tech and you don't have to worry about it.

[Ardmore_Sooner]

This is comical.

[Herr Scholz]

Well actually the majority did not or they would have voted the whorns over the sooners in the BCS polls where it obviously mattered. Beat tech and you don't have to worry about it.

Well, actually 3 of the 4 human polls had UT higher than OU the week that was being decided. What fell in your favor was that you played the very worst team in Div II that year in Chatanooga and some of the computers didn't even know how to handle that and threw it out. Had you played a real team that weekend, we would've gone because your SOS would've dropped even lower (ours was higher than yours). Congrats on gaming the system.

Also, 80% of an online ESPN poll that week said UT should go. Also, every talking pundit save $witzer and that dumbass grandma Holtz said UT should go. So, a vast majority of people said it was the wrong result. The faulty computers (and Stoops' cronies who were jobbing us in the coach's poll) got your undeserving asses in there. And you lost, just like everyone knew you would.

Care to try again?

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Man, you are bitter. Get over it.

[Herr Scholz]

The Big XII admitted the wrong result was reached btw by them later changing the tiebreaker rule. This shouldn't be overlooked. The Big XII admitted the wrong team went.

We would've won too. We wouldn't have cried like girls about having to play in Florida either like your fans. We went to Pasadena and beat USC.

[Herr Scholz]

Man, you are bitter. Get over it.

I'm over it. I'm just pointing out the wrong, lesser team went and lost a BCS game in the name of the conference for the 5th time in a row.

[Mongo]

The Big XII admitted the wrong result was reached btw by them later changing the tiebreaker rule. This shouldn't be overlooked. The Big XII admitted the wrong team went.

We would've won too. We wouldn't have cried like girls about having to play in Florida either like your fans. We went to Pasadena and beat USC.

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001335077/CryingTUfan_xlarge.jpeg

[Ardmore_Sooner]

And I'm sure that you were all up in arms about the tie breaker rule before the season started?

Of course not, by your logic, Texas Tech should have been in too.

[Herr Scholz]

And I'm sure that you were all up in arms about the tie breaker rule before the season started?

Of course not, by your logic, Texas Tech should have been in too.

No. Tech wasn't in the conversation in the rankings. Also, UT was the only team not to get a home game in that trio.

The Big XII said it was wrong but continue the weak spin.

[picasso]

We had beaten both teams that played in the Big XII title game that year in KC.

Aggie!

And you don't know if you would have beaten Florida. You guys have gotten lucky in some bowl games. Big ****in deal.

[Ardmore_Sooner]

No. Tech wasn't in the conversation in the rankings. Also, UT was the only team not to get a home game in that trio.

The Big XII said it was wrong but continue the weak spin.

The weak spin is your whole Chattanooga argument.

Rice? UTEP? Florida Atlantic? Arkansas was downright awful that year.

You don't think that had anything to do with it? OU played a two loss TCU team and Big East Champions Cincinnati.

You just need to get over it. You guys didn't get in, and you can keep saying you won.

Oh yeah, 5-7

[gaylordfan1]

Well, at least you wont have to worry about being in that situation for a while.
:texan: :( :D

[agoo758]

Well, a majority of people in the country thought the tiebreaker was faulty and the wrong team went. That includes the Big XII conference which subsequently changed the tiebreaker rule. We had beaten both teams that played in the Big XII title game that year in KC.

I know I sound like a broken record, but I have to keep explaining it so that the pea-brain morons from te*as can understand it:

OU played Cincinnati and TCU OOC.

Who did texas play? Rice and a 5-7 Arkansas team??


That is why we went, oh and you almost lost to an Ohio State team that got pummeled by USC. Shut up.

[picasso]

No. Tech wasn't in the conversation in the rankings. Also, UT was the only team not to get a home game in that trio.



That wasn't part of the criterion. You probably shouldn't have lost to a team that we demolished a few weeks later.

The truth is you hate the fact that a tiny little school like OU from a tiny little poor *** state is a one big ****ing thorn in your side.

I know, it sucks.

[Herr Scholz]

Aggie!

And you don't know if you would have beaten Florida. You guys have gotten lucky in some bowl games. Big ****in deal.

Yeah, we would've. You guys have been in 2 separate national title games you didn't deserve to be in btw.

[agoo758]

The Big XII admitted the wrong result was reached.



What makes them the all-knowing football genius think thank? Do you realize how stupid you are sounding right now??

[Herr Scholz]

The weak spin is your whole Chattanooga argument.

Look, we had the stronger SOS but the computers threw out your pitiful Div II game. It affected the national title game berth. That's a valid argument.

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Yeah, we would've. You guys have been in 2 separate national title games you didn't deserve to be in btw.

5-7

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Look, we had the stronger SOS but the computers threw out your pitiful Div II game. It affected the national title game berth. That's a valid argument.

5-7

[Herr Scholz]

I know I sound like a broken record, but I have to keep explaining it so that the pea-brain morons from te*as can understand it:

OU played Cincinnati and TCU OOC.

Who did texas play? Rice and a 5-7 Arkansas team??


That is why we went, oh and you almost lost to an Ohio State team that got pummeled by USC. Shut up.

Wrong, moron. Our SOS was stronger. Is that so hard to understand?

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Wrong, moron. Our SOS was stronger. Is that so hard to understand?

5-7

[Herr Scholz]

What makes them the all-knowing football genius think thank? Do you realize how stupid you are sounding right now??

No. You guys use the conference rules as the be all/end all of the conversation. Since they later admitted the wrong team went, it's very cogent. To thinking people.

[Herr Scholz]

5-7

Perfect. :D

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Perfect. :D

;) 5-7

Those mean ole Baylor Bears...
Those mighty ISU Cyclones...
Those scary K-State Wildcats...

[Cornfed]

No. You guys use the conference rules as the be all/end all of the conversation. Since they later admitted the wrong team went, it's very cogent. To thinking people.

You play the hand youre dealt , if you whine and cry you get nowhere but looking like a whinebag.

[agoo758]

Wrong, moron. Our SOS was stronger. Is that so hard to understand?

Really? Name, a team on your OOC that was better than Cinci and TCU that year. Sure, we played a couple of duds, as well, but the point is that we played 2 duds and you played four, and not only did we have a better schedule, we absolutely blew the teams out. If you think your SOS was better, than you just don't know football.

[MeMyself&Me]

Take away the 1950s and Bud Wilkin$on's documented big bag of cash and and we'd be even in national titles. In fact, we'd have 5 if the correct team went to the big game in 2008.

Concerning Dupree, a double wide was obviously better than a pair of boots. The proof is in the pudding by where he ended up.

Where's the proof? Like I said, he left OU because we wasn't getting anything. If you want to use circumstantial evidence as 'proof' then I can say that he left because he wanted to get something and he wasn't getting it. It goes both ways you know. By the way, by your earlier posts it sounded like you think if you don't get caught then it isn't cheating. Well, YOU got caught. OU didn't.


The Big XII admitted the wrong result was reached btw by them later changing the tiebreaker rule.

Changing the rule two years later is hardly admitting it was wrong. Just that they would like to do it differently in the future. By the way, they voted to keep it the same following that actual season.


We would've won too.

You know what? I think we would have beaten Ohio State when LSU played them and we had the same record as LSU. I also think that if Jason White was healthy that we would have beaten LSU in the Sugar Bowl. Doesn't make it relevant. Certainly doesn't make it relevant enough to go to a rival's board and say so. Go cry somewhere else.


What fell in your favor was that you played the very worst team in Div II that year in Chatanooga and some of the computers didn't even know how to handle that and threw it out. Had you played a real team that weekend, we would've gone because your SOS would've dropped even lower (ours was higher than yours).

You want to compare schedules for that year? REALLY?

[agoo758]

No. You guys use the conference rules as the be all/end all of the conversation. Since they later admitted the wrong team went, it's very cogent. To thinking people.

No, you are using the BIG 12 as proof that Te*as should have gone. They should not have. And the new tiebreaker is stupid anyway. Do you know why Texas Tech was significantly further down than us? Because we beat them by 40+, if we had just edged by them, they would have been right up there with us. Are you saying it makes sense that it should hurt us to blow a top five team out rather than just beating by one?:rolleyes:

[Herr Scholz]

You play the hand youre dealt , if you whine and cry you get nowhere but looking like a whinebag.

Hilarious coming from the whiniest fanbase in America. You loons think the RRS is fixed every year and cry about the refs no matter what. I heard a LARGE Sooner contingent saying the refs cost you that game in 2005 even though we won 45-12 and we had 120 penalty yards vs. your 60.

[Herr Scholz]

Really?... If you think your SOS was better, than you just don't know football.

If you don't think we had a higher overall SOS, you don't know facts. We played Mizzou that regular season. Our SOS was higher. Your Div II game and the faulty computers got you in. Sorry to upset your ignorance.

[Cornfed]

Look, we had the stronger SOS but the computers threw out your pitiful Div II game. It affected the national title game berth. That's a valid argument.

Sorry no you didnt , Google is a click away.

Pre bowl AP had OU 2 and tx 3.

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Hilarious coming from the whiniest fanbase in America.

But if if if Colt hadn't got hurt...

We we we should've gotten in, 45-35...

[Quik Sand]

Why even come on here and argue that bull**** from 2008?? Not one thing you say will change what happened and it has been beaten to death. The rules/tie breakers were set BEFORE the season. Live with the results and move on.

[Herr Scholz]

Where's the proof?
Read "Meat on the Hoof". Or stay ignorant and/or dishonest. Your call.


If you want to use circumstantial evidence as 'proof'
No need. 6 of your 7 titles were either immediately preceded or followed by major violations and probations. Heck, in two of your "title" years, you weren't even able to play in a bowl game because you were being punished for egregious cheating. Your 7th title is definitely in question because of the BRSI scandal.


It goes both ways you know.
No. It doesn't. Our 4 titles are clean.


Changing the rule two years later is hardly admitting it was wrong. Just that they would like to do it differently in the future.
:D

[picasso]

Why even come on here and argue that bull**** from 2008?? Not one thing you say will change what happened and it has been beaten to death. The rules/tie breakers were set BEFORE the season. Live with the results and move on.

But, everyone said Texas should have been there. And Texas would have won and everyone in China knew OU would lose. They just knew we'd lay an egg twice inside the 5 and and Herr's *** still hurts I guess.

[agoo758]

We played Mizzou that regular season. .

So what? Missouri wasn't that good. We beat them by 100.

[Herr Scholz]

No, you are using the BIG 12 as proof that Te*as should have gone.
Yes, the Big XII agreed with the rest of the country.

[picasso]

Our 4 titles are clean.


:D

And mostly pasty white.

[Herr Scholz]

Sorry no you didnt , Google is a click away.

Pre bowl AP had OU 2 and tx 3.

Talking about the week the tiebreaker was decided, Einstein.

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Why even come on here and argue that bull**** from 2008?? Not one thing you say will change what happened and it has been beaten to death. The rules/tie breakers were set BEFORE the season. Live with the results and move on.

That's the problem though. These idiots won't admit that they had no clue what the tie breaker was, and wouldn't have had any issue with it if it wasn't needed. I wonder if the same thing would be said if Texas would've been ranked higher?

The whole 45-35 thing was one of the most embarrassing and idiotic moves by a fanbase in college football history. For someone to say that OU has the whiniest fans when you are still talking about something almost 30 months ago is just being a baby.

[Herr Scholz]

And mostly pasty white.

Larry Cochelle says hi. That was what, a decade ago?

[Herr Scholz]

But if if if Colt hadn't got hurt...

We we we should've gotten in, 45-35...

Great. At least we don't blame every loss in history to dirty refs. That's a gutless, p*ssy response your fans always take.

[agoo758]

Yes, the Big XII agreed with the rest of the country.

Who's the rest of the country? You, the rest of puke Orange and ESPN? Unlike you, I actually have some friends who know a little bit about the sport (and are also LSU fans and are not biased) who believed that there was a solid case for oklahoma considering the fact that we blew out pretty much every top 20 team we played except for you guys.

[Herr Scholz]

So what? Missouri wasn't that good. We beat them by 100.

It means our overall SOS was higher than yours when the tiebreaker was being decided.

[silverwheels]

I gotta give Herr props for sticking around here despite his team taking it in the *** without lube in nearly every game of 2010.

[agoo758]

It means our overall SOS was higher than yours when the tiebreaker was being decided.

But why are you acting like you guys when through hell and high water playing an average Missouri team?

[agoo758]

I gotta give Herr props for sticking around here despite his team taking it in the *** without lube in nearly every game of 2010.

I'll give him that. More nuts than Lid that's for damn sure.

[Herr Scholz]

Who's the rest of the country?
3 of 4 human polls. 80% of ESPN poll. Every columnist and talking head in the country. A vast majority of college football fans.

[Herr Scholz]

I'll give him that. More nuts than Lid that's for damn sure.

Thanks. Truth be told, I'm just bored.

[MeMyself&Me]

Great. At least we don't blame every loss in history to dirty refs. That's a gutless, p*ssy response your fans always take.

Then what does it make whorens that cry about how the rules are unfair when it doesn't benefit them?


I'll give him that. More nuts than Lid that's for damn sure.

As much as I was annoyed by Lid, he was more fun to argue with than this guy. This one is just dumb.

[agoo758]

Then what does it make whorens that cry about how the rules are unfair when it doesn't benefit them?



As much as I was annoyed by Lid, he was more fun to argue with than this guy. This one is just dumb.

Lid smart? I am going to have to disagree with you on that sir. :mad:

[Ardmore_Sooner]

Great. At least we don't blame every loss in history to dirty refs. That's a gutless, p*ssy response your fans always take.

You must not have frequented Shaggybevo after the Arizona basketball game this year.

Or after the TCU baseball games in the tournament.

Oh yeah 5-7!

[usaosooner]

Love how horns come out of the wood work.. They disappeared in October of 2010 after overrunning Sooner boards in 2009, now they are feeling their oats again.

As far as Texas not being dirty

Someone needs ask Sergio Kindle how he payed off the family of the house he drunk drove into. He'll have a laugh & if he is drunk enough he'll tell you a interesting story

[Herr Scholz]

Then what does it make whorens that cry about how the rules are unfair when it doesn't benefit them?


Because the rule was wrong, guy. As expressed by a vast majority of the country as well as accepted by the actual conference you're still in.

[70sooner]

Yeah, we would've. You guys have been in 2 separate national title games you didn't deserve to be in btw.

bitter, much? LMAO!~ this one is for you, Schultzy, LMAO!~

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v618/sooner/whaaaAmbulance2.jpg


a&M, TCU and SMU all have AP titles after 1936. But OK. I thought that was the be all/end all with you guys. Oh, unless it doesn't fit your argument....


you obviously have me mixed me up with some other poster as I have never said as much, but nice try.

Point being if you want to go that route, then Yale, Harvard, Pennsylvania, Princeton, all have better history/more MNCs in CFB, than anybody in the history of CFB.

Texas is a mere pimple on their a$$es when it comes to MNC's, history etc.....

Heck, Cornell has 3, one less than yer boys. And to top it off, the U of Chicago has 1, so I guess that put's them on par with SMU, TCU and aTm, correct?

Damn son. Get it straight, will ya?

[Herr Scholz]

You must not have frequented Shaggybevo after the Arizona basketball game this year.

I'll give you that one. I would still argue that crappy call was more of a screwjob than the infamous Oregon call. In that game, OU let Oregon run up and down the field on them in the 4th quarter on the way to 3 TDs. And then OU missed a very makeable FG at the end. But that one call cost them the game?

The UT call was with 14 seconds left. Apples and oranges. I will say it was our fault we didn't get the ball in on that out of bounds play. I put that on Rick Barnes. You'll never hear a Sooner accepting blame for throwing up their dresses on D in the 4th quarter of that Oregon game though. Our fanbases are different that way.

[Herr Scholz]

Someone needs ask Sergio Kindle how he payed off the family of the house he drunk drove into. He'll have a laugh & if he is drunk enough he'll tell you a interesting story
A) It's "paid".

B) He ran into an apartment building. Nobody was hurt. No crime was commited (that's simply a civil matter running into a building).

C) Keep up the complete falsehoods and ignorance and delusion.

[70sooner]

our fanbases are different that way.

so your continual whining about the perceived slap in the face in 2008 makes us different?

Viva la difference!~

[Herr Scholz]

Point being if you want to go that route, then Yale, Harvard, Pennsylvania, Princeton, all have better history/more MNCs in CFB, than anybody in the history of CFB.
You got me. None of those teams have an AP title that started in 1936. But thanks for comparing us to the Ivy League.


Heck, Cornell has 3, one less than yer boys. And to top it off, the U of Chicago has 1, so I guess that put's them on par with SMU, TCU and aTm, correct?
No for the same reason. 1936 is the starting point because everyone can claim numerous undefeated seasons as retroactive, fictional national titles before that. SMU, TCU and A&M have actual tangible, verifiable, tangible titles.

OU has won more than anyone else in the past 75 years*. Happy?

*Dirty

[Herr Scholz]

our fanbases are different that way.

so your continual whining about the perceived slap in the face in 2008 makes us different?

Viva la difference!~

Yes, there's not a continual black helicopter/dirty ref conspiracy with our fanbase. 2005? Your fans blamed the refs despite an *** whipping.

And it wasn't a slap in the face in 2008. It was simply the wrong result.

[silverwheels]

Suuuuuuure it was.

[Herr Scholz]

Suuuuuuure it was.

The country and the conference said it was.

[usaosooner]

A) It's "paid".

B) He ran into an apartment building. Nobody was hurt. No crime was commited (that's simply a civil matter running into a building).

C) Keep up the complete falsehoods and ignorance and delusion.

A) Correct:

B) A hit & run while drunk should be reported, if he wasn't a player for Texas it would have been. Hell it would have been reported if the other carload of Texas players wasn't following Sergio so closely.

C) A lawyer acting on Sergios behalf, paid 12K to the family to the owners of the apartment to remain quiet on Sergio's condition. Posted on a horn board by a respected horn poster around the time Sergio "texted" his way down a flight of stairs.

I've also heard that story from Sooner players who were friends with Sergio. Choose to bury your head in the sand if you want to.

[silverwheels]

The country and the conference said it was.

Totally.

[MeMyself&Me]

Lid smart? I am going to have to disagree with you on that sir. :mad:

I never once said Lid was smart... which says a lot of what I think about this one.


Because the rule was wrong, guy. As expressed by a vast majority of the country as well as accepted by the actual conference you're still in.

By that logic, you can say that it's OK to complain about the refs because they made the wrong call.

[70sooner]

Yes, there's not a continual black helicopter/dirty ref conspiracy with our fanbase.

nope, just planes with banners trailing behind.....

[sooner ngintunr]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Herr Scholz again.

This guy is a ****ing clown.

[Seamus]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Herr Scholz again.

This guy is a ****ing clown.


Yeah, he's a colon-ram, but you have to give it to him. He's a persistent colon-ram.

[Sooner Cal]

No matter what you say or how you say it, Texas still sucks.

[Cornfed]

Hilarious coming from the whiniest fanbase in America. You loons think the RRS is fixed every year and cry about the refs no matter what. I heard a LARGE Sooner contingent saying the refs cost you that game in 2005 even though we won 45-12 and we had 120 penalty yards vs. your 60.

Whats funny is you continually use the Te*as example as OU, Why else would yo be here whining about your shoulda wouldas?

[Ardmore_Sooner]

5-7

[47straight]

I don't see why you guys want to argue with a guy who says that Frank Alexander is a felon for being the victim of a stabbing.


No, he's not a better guy than Lid.

He's a piece of **** dirtbag.

[silverwheels]

I don't see why you guys want to argue with a guy who says that Frank Alexander is a felon for being the victim of a stabbing.


No, he's not a better guy than Lid.

He's a piece of **** dirtbag.

Well, he's a Horn fan, so that goes without saying.

[Herr Scholz]

I don't see why you guys want to argue with a guy who says that Frank Alexander is a felon for being the victim of a stabbing.

Yes, maybe you can let your daughter date him. Or tell Chaisson's ex about him. She'd probably be pretty excited about a guy with a knife or tire iron. Idiot.

[olevetonahill]

To be fair, I came over here to have a tongue in cheek conversation about what the modern era is (and it was fun). Then as usual over here, it devolved (not by my doing) into insults about UT and me personally. Enjoy your circle jerk over here. This is why people don't visit. Mindless okie hate.

:texan: If you will look around from atop that pile of bevo crap that you are standing on. you will see that there have been a Number of Fans from opposing schools that have shown up here and been treated quite nicely . Of course THEY acted with decorum Unlike most :texan: s

So please feel free to leave at any time.Have a nice day;)

[Herr Scholz]

OK. Yeah, I'm sure they're greeted with special icons about their schools (or do you just hate the state of Texas?). Why don't you read this thread and try to be objective. I only responded to personal insults.

[sooner59]

Well I personally insulted your mom in a neg spek comment, so....yerr welcome.

[Herr Scholz]

Well I personally insulted your mom in a neg spek comment, so....yerr welcome.

I speked you.

[yankee]

Why don't you read this thread and try to be objective. I only responded to personal insults.

I can't, I'm squinting too hard.

[SoonerBread]

No need. 6 of your 7 titles were either immediately preceded or followed by major violations and probations. Heck, in two of your "title" years, you weren't even able to play in a bowl game because you were being punished for egregious cheating. Your 7th title is definitely in question because of the BRSI scandal.

You know something the rest of the world doesn't? Care to elaborate? #7 was in 2000. "BRSI scandal" was years later. Years as in more than one.

Tie the two together. Make some type of connection. Please.

[BoonesFarmSooner]

In fact, we'd have 5 if the correct team went to the big game in 2008.





Thats funny. You weren't even the best team in your own state in 2008, and here you are claiming that you would've won a national title?

Texas Tech was the best team in Texas in 2008. Head to Head, remember?

[Breadburner]

Nice topic change.

Get back under lids desk.....

[picasso]

Thats funny. You weren't even the best team in your own state in 2008, and here you are claiming that you would've won a national title?

Texas Tech was the best team in Texas in 2008. Head to Head, remember?

heh. Tech must have cheated.

[bornnbredou]

Thats funny. You weren't even the best team in your own state in 2008, and here you are claiming that you would've won a national title?

Texas Tech was the best team in Texas in 2008. Head to Head, remember?

He wont ever understand this concept. Bottom line is OU was the best team in the Big 12 in 2008. Every athletic director in the conference agreed to the tiebreaker rules years before that season and because OU was clearly the most exciting team and had the least recent loss and highest margin of victory they got the nod.

Herr is a hypocritical idiot to say that our fanbase is the only one that complains about officiating and other outside influences (tiebreaker rules) while he is consistently whining about the 2008 tiebreaker. His team flew a g-damn banner over an OU game! He also backs this up with false claims that the "majority" of the sports world agreed that texas was better. Well thats funny because the people that matter (poll voters) didnt think so, so step outside of your bevo bubble every once in a while and realize that texas aint all that, actually quite the opposite.

Oh, BOOMER SOONER!

[meoveryouxinfinity]

When did Texas start playing football? (Wiki says 1893)
The University of Oklahoma started playing football in 1895, per the article.
Oklahoma became a STATE in Nov. 1907.

Are you really going to count all those wins...before STATEHOOD? Just sounds silly to me.
In 1904 against OSU, players dove into a nearby creek to recover an OSU punt. Is THAT "modern"? No.

Modern era is defined as the point where football actually resembles modern day football. It differs across the country.

[Breadburner]

http://soonerpsycho.com/spfarksandpics/sinkingut.jpg

[olevetonahill]

OK. Yeah, I'm sure they're greeted with special icons about their schools (or do you just hate the state of Texas?). Why don't you read this thread and try to be objective. I only responded to personal insults.

Me Personally ? I hate the whole ****ing STATE.
I Hated the fact that I had to be there for the Big 12 Champ game.;)

[LakeRat]

I'll give you that one. I would still argue that crappy call was more of a screwjob than the infamous Oregon call. In that game, OU let Oregon run up and down the field on them in the 4th quarter on the way to 3 TDs. And then OU missed a very makeable FG at the end. But that one call cost them the game?

The UT call was with 14 seconds left. Apples and oranges. I will say it was our fault we didn't get the ball in on that out of bounds play. I put that on Rick Barnes. You'll never hear a Sooner accepting blame for throwing up their dresses on D in the 4th quarter of that Oregon game though. Our fanbases are different that way.

You are correct, Apples and Oranges. UT would have had to make a bucket to win.

OU would have had to take three knees.

So the bad call in Oregon was a lot worse than the call against you. You are correct, apples and oranges, and I finally have agreed with you on something in this thread.

[MeMyself&Me]

You are correct, Apples and Oranges. UT would have had to make a bucket to win.

OU would have had to take three knees.

So the bad call in Oregon was a lot worse than the call against you. You are correct, apples and oranges, and I finally have agreed with you on something in this thread.

OH! And don't forget it took three bad calls by the refs on that one play to give Oregon the ball. The first was the non-call on player touching the ball before it goes 10 yards. The second was that Allen Patrick actually recovered the ball. The third was the replay official deciding to NOT look at the side video showing the player touching the ball before it went 10 yards in the interest of expediency despite the fact he did see Allen Patrick recover the ball from the endzone feed (he admitted that later).

Any one of those three things happens the way it's written in the rule books and OU takes a knee three times and wins.

Yeah, not in the same league.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

I thought the Big 12 rules were designed specifically to screw Nebraska, not ut. Maybe this year Beebe will create the rule that texass automatically wins the title just by fielding a team. Then Mack can retire on top.

[Salt City Sooner]

A&M, TCU and SMU all have AP titles after 1936. But OK. I thought that was the be all/end all with you guys. Oh, unless it doesn't fit your argument....
SMU does not have a AP NC :

http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/national_championships/ap_poll.php?year=1934

[Cornfed]

I thought the Big 12 rules were designed specifically to screw Nebraska, not ut. Maybe this year Beebe will create the rule that texass automatically wins the title just by fielding a team. Then Mack can retire on top.

Or that all burnt orange teams start each game with 21 points.

[70sooner]

SMU does not have a AP NC :

SMU won theirs in 35, before the AP started. I pointed out a few things to Herr Dummkopf, but he just either ignored the facts or made up his own, ie: the SMU/AP claim.

[Mad Dog Madsen]

What?

[sooner518]

Because the rule was wrong, guy. As expressed by a vast majority of the country as well as accepted by the actual conference you're still in.

the rule was wrong? thats the most embarassingly dumb thing you've said in this thread.

at least spout off the typical horn "head-to-head is the only thing that counts" crap while conveniently ignoring that it was a 3-way tie, not simply a 2 way tie where head to head WOULD actually be relevant. instead of simply realizing that the rule had been in place for years and accept that there is no 100% fair outcome, cry, complain and pay thousands of dollars to fly a plane over a stadium and prove to the entire country what a whiny bunch of entitled bitches your fanbase has.

THAT is what a real Texas fan would do.

[UTgradOUfan]

OK, it appears Herr "Oilcan" Scholz has gone back to his crack pipe so allow me to give you some background on what all is going on here in Austin among the whorn faithful. It is pathetic. It would be sad as well except that so many of the whorn faithful are, like our "Oilcan" here, bitter, resentful and delusional little haters. To be more specific this really only applies to their football fans. As a UT alum and Austinite I do go to a lot of UT sporting events. I love the baseball crowd and go to almost every home game. Although the basketball games resemble a morgue I enjoy them.
But the whorn football fanatics are a strange and infantile bunch. It is common at the baseball games to hear someone comment about a fan being obnoxious and/or making an *ss of himself how he must be a football fan.
This has been going on for a long time and is acknowledged openly by people who live here. Whorn football fans are way over-represented by cranks, drunks and racists. They are, perhaps, the worst bunch of racists left in the country. In EVERY gathering of alums I hear the boast about how UT was the last all-white national championship team. Really? It's sad but entirley predictable.
Ask "Oilcan" if he ever comes back to explain the Donnie Little saga.
Just know that 5-7 produced a mass tantrum in Austin. Their football team sucked. Mack Brown is a total tool. And since I get to hear what they say amongst themselves they deeply admire Stoops and would trade MB for him in a heartbeat. Ignore "Oilcan" and the other Kool-Aide drinkers like him. His avatar tells you all you need to know. It's perfect! Like Cartman he is a bitter, jealous hater given to fits of rage and self-delusion. He is a child. Thus the tantrums. They are all over town. You don't see them at other UT sporting events but hear them constantly whining "but, but we are the Jones's".
The good news is that it is going to only get worse. I saw both spring scrimmages, here and in Norman. The whorns are really, really bad. None of their QB's is ready for primetime. And even if they were I'm not sure it would really matter. Their O line is godawful bad. As for their RB's let me just say Fozzy is still the best they got. What they have in the secondary was hard to tell in the scrimmage b/c their WR's are not good.
But they will certainly have the biggest and flashiest media guide in the country and not doubt "Oilcan" and his friends will sleep with it.
As for what I saw in Norman?
Welllll
Theres only one Oklahoma
Roll On Big Red

[Breadburner]

That made me jizz my pants......!!!!!!

[picasso]

There's also only one scoreboard and right now we've got it.


So does Baylor.

[MeMyself&Me]

There's also only one scoreboard and right now we've got it.


So does Baylor.



And Iowa State.

[picasso]

I see this quoted by Sooners all the time but I've never seen it "widely" written about or quoted except for on OU websites. Why is 1950 the barometer in your minds besides the fact that this is when OU started winning? Was the forward pass common then? No. Was the equipment modern (helmets in particular)? No. Were there scholarship limits to even the playing field? No.

We were recently voted the number one program in the modern era. It wasn't by OU fans or an OU website. We're enjoying our success here. You weren't invited.
You sound like a little kid that never got picked for a game on the playground.

[UTgradOUfan]

Relax Picasso, he's not coming back. He is sulking on his stool at Oilcan Harry's. He's a fag, or worse. He picked the name Scholz to fool the board that he is a grownup. Scholz's Beergarten is for grownups. Oilcan Harry's is for fags. But he tipped his hand when he picked his avatar. Who else would choose an avatar of a cartoon character who is an eight year old boy except a
Well you get the point.
Now where is Lid?

[KantoSooner]

Lid?

Last time I heard, he was down at the Galleria trying to impress the aging menswear clerks with how much money he intended on spending on bowties.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

At least Lid's embarrassed enough to stay away. Hell, Lid used to be a regular on the SO. Schlitz is coming over here to talk trash about what? When the modern era of college football starts? His team's domination over us 100 years ago? Come on man.

[KantoSooner]

We could always restart the conversation regarding what a racist azzhole and pimp DKR was.
That always seems to get things rolling.