Status Quo for 2012

[FriscoTXsooner]

It would appear that nothing is going to change in regards to Coaches for our Sooners in 2012. I had thought that we might see a couple of folks move on i.e. BV and Martinez, and bring back Mike S. But the lack of movement leads me to believe that we aren't going to make any of those changes. I don't think Bob would wait until after the bowl game to make any announcements, and I would have thought that BV would have been considered and gone for a HC job somewhere. I must say I am a little disappointed that changes aren't being made. We have become stagnant, in our scheming, and something needs to be done about it.

I'm not an expert here, no am I second guessing Bob, but we haven't been consistent over the past 8 or 9 years in our preparation to play. We tend to under prepare for games and those are the ones that bite us in the butt! Execution is the name of the game, and the coaches need to put the players in position to win. Granted the coaches can't run the plays for the players, but they can certainly prepare them. If the same thing happens in 2012 that happened this year, I suspect there will be a mass-call for swift action against existing coaches, and it may very well start at the top. I hope I'm wrong, but having to stand behind the Alabama's and LSU's of the world, is starting to get a little old. I'm am tired of the SEC love-fest that we see every year. It's time for the Big XII to start making some noise, and we have to take the lead. In order to do that, we need to right this ship and get back to what we were in the early 2000's.

[cvsooner]

It would appear that nothing is going to change in regards to Coaches for our Sooners in 2012. I had thought that we might see a couple of folks move on i.e. BV and Martinez, and bring back Mike S. But the lack of movement leads me to believe that we aren't going to make any of those changes. I don't think Bob would wait until after the bowl game to make any announcements, and I would have thought that BV would have been considered and gone for a HC job somewhere. I must say I am a little disappointed that changes aren't being made. We have become stagnant, in our scheming, and something needs to be done about it.

I'm not ... second guessing Bob...Yes, you are.

[SouthFortySooner]

How do you feel about the band director?

[En_Fuego]

First, BV is not HC material. If he was, he would be doing that. I'm not sure he is even DC material. I don't think Mike Stoops will ever come back to OU because to the national media it would appear that he is running back to his brother. And even if MS were to come back he would not be the savior of the team. MS doesn't coach offense. MS can't correct dropped passes. MS doesn't coach offensive lineman.

All we can do is trust Bob Stoops will make the right decisions.

[Boomer.....]

I still expect some coaching changes.

[achiro]

I still expect some coaching changes.
Yep, based on a couple of things coach has said and some happenings around college football, I will be very surprised if there aren't some changes.

[Dan Thompson]

I am very surprised.

[achiro]

I am very surprised.

About what?

[Scott D]

I know I fully expect Mike Stoops to be named the defensive coordinator at no fewer than 7 more schools.

[sooneron]

As far as position coaches are concerned, a lot of moves usually happen in the Spring. I'm pretty sure that is when we got WM and Patton, (the last two that I can recall).

I love how Frisco knows how well we prepare or not for a given opponent. Very thankful to have him posting here- lucky to have such an insider.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

First, BV is not HC material. If he was, he would be doing that. I'm not sure he is even DC material. I don't think Mike Stoops will ever come back to OU because to the national media it would appear that he is running back to his brother. And even if MS were to come back he would not be the savior of the team. MS doesn't coach offense. MS can't correct dropped passes. MS doesn't coach offensive lineman.

All we can do is trust Bob Stoops will make the right decisions.

Mike Stoops does coach faking a punt to Michael Thompson that goes for a first down. Among a host of other things. Mike was more than a defensive coordinator and secondary coach and despite his failures at Arizona, he was very much like having a second head coach on the field for Oklahoma. He also challenged Bob to do things and make calls we wouldn't normally otherwise do.

[sooneron]

And by Spring, I mean after bowl season.

[Scott D]

Mike Stoops does coach faking a punt to Michael Thompson that goes for a first down. Among a host of other things. Mike was more than a defensive coordinator and secondary coach and despite his failures at Arizona, he was very much like having a second head coach on the field for Oklahoma. He also challenged Bob to do things and make calls we wouldn't normally otherwise do.

That may be, but since he's coaching 3 defenses next year already and will probably have another 7 to coach by the end of January, he just won't be able to give as much attention to any single team and they'll all be worse off for it.

[soonervegas]

Why would there by any changes? We have won 7 Big 12 Titles in 13 years.

If you think we are trying to keep up with the Joneses (The SEC) you are sadly mistaken.

[SoonerorLater]

If anybody here is thinking there will be any changes that will make OU a tough smashmouth football team next year then I think they are going to be disappointed. We aren't built that way and the staff doesn't recruit that way.

[goingoneight]

Mike Stoops does coach faking a punt to Michael Thompson that goes for a first down. Among a host of other things. Mike was more than a defensive coordinator and secondary coach and despite his failures at Arizona, he was very much like having a second head coach on the field for Oklahoma. He also challenged Bob to do things and make calls we wouldn't normally otherwise do.

I'd love to know how it is you claim to know this. Because I remember the post-game show where Mike and a lot of players said they though Bob was bat**** crazy for coming up with that call against Alabama. Maybe if James Hanna or Trent Ratterree caught those fake punt-passes that hit them on the hands we're not having this conversation. Maybe if Jermaine Gresham even tries to block Earl Thomas on a fake field goal, we're not having this conversation.

I'd love to have Mike back on staff; but let's face it... Bob would have found a way to make it happen already if he could get his family back. This revisionist theory that Mike was the mastermind or the figurehead of anything but coaching DBs and co-coordinating defense is just getting silly. It would be like claiming Kevin Wilson to be the reason why OUr special teams were so good in 2007 here in a couple of years if both our offense and ST suck. I think Mike did good in that even though he ran off some players and pissed off some people, he got the most out of his guys he threw out there. Brandon Everage, TRRW, Derrick Strait and the like may have been equally as talented as guys BJW and Martinez have thrown out there, but the secondary (DBS, even on special teams) has been lackadaisical an awful lot in recent years and it always seems to be at a point in time that we can ill afford a ****-poor defensive effort. Not saying Mike would magically stop OUr annual meltdowns (see: 2002 Missouri, aTm, OSU, 2003 KSU), but his guys were just a hell of a lot more determined than the "sharks" are. The game against FSU this year is proof that OU's defense can still come out with attitude and win the game for a struggling offense. Why didn't they do that at home a few weeks later against a terrible Texas Tech team? Inconsistency. Period.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Typically they don't do coaching moves until right around signing day (leaving to be a head coach exceptioned)

[soonerloyal]

How do you feel about the band director?

First, BB is not BD material. If he was, he would be doing that. I'm not sure he is even DM material. I don't think Coach Thrailkill's type of talent can ever come back to OU because to BB it would appear that the band had returned to actual technique and style, and we can't have that, now can we? And if "Coach" were to come back he would be the savior of the Pride. BB doesn't coach actual beauty of sound. BB won't allow true performance. BB doesn't encourage true excellence.

All we can do is accept that Brian Britt will make the same old decisions, and that the legacy of the Pride of Oklahoma will suffer because of it.



(Paraphrased from my mama who adored The Pride all her life, and hated BB with a true musician's passion. Sorry, Badger and Pride.)

[Crimsontothecore]

It would appear that nothing is going to change in regards to Coaches for our Sooners in 2012. I had thought that we might see a couple of folks move on i.e. BV and Martinez, and bring back Mike S. But the lack of movement leads me to believe that we aren't going to make any of those changes. I don't think Bob would wait until after the bowl game to make any announcements, and I would have thought that BV would have been considered and gone for a HC job somewhere. I must say I am a little disappointed that changes aren't being made. We have become stagnant, in our scheming, and something needs to be done about it.

I'm not an expert here, no am I second guessing Bob, but we haven't been consistent over the past 8 or 9 years in our preparation to play. We tend to under prepare for games and those are the ones that bite us in the butt! Execution is the name of the game, and the coaches need to put the players in position to win. Granted the coaches can't run the plays for the players, but they can certainly prepare them. If the same thing happens in 2012 that happened this year, I suspect there will be a mass-call for swift action against existing coaches, and it may very well start at the top. I hope I'm wrong, but having to stand behind the Alabama's and LSU's of the world, is starting to get a little old. I'm am tired of the SEC love-fest that we see every year. It's time for the Big XII to start making some noise, and we have to take the lead. In order to do that, we need to right this ship and get back to what we were in the early 2000's.

Wow, what original thoughts. Wouldn't it have been easier to just post a "ditto" on one of the other 11,349 threads people have started over the last month and a half?

[soonerloyal]

Wow, what original thoughts. Wouldn't it have been easier to just post a "ditto" on one of the other 11,349 threads people have started over the last month and a half?

Need a hug? :biggrin:

[En_Fuego]

In a Nutshell

Our fragile little gimmicky Tech offense is killing us. The hurry up that runs the play clock down anyway is not a hurry up. This "Belldozer" crap is going to kill the recruiting of solid QB's and WR's. The "Belldozer" is just another gimmick. Our line cant run block because of this gimmicky offense. We lose our best WR and the whole system goes in the toilet. This offensive style needs change in a big way. Dropping passes sure doesn't help the cause.

As for the defense.........Their not very good to say the least. All this "Shark" self-love crap has gotten really old. It's pretty bad when some kid asks his parents why the DB's are playing so far off the WR's. Or why do they launch themselves at the runners only to find out they bounced off of them and they are scoring.

And as far as the exodus is concerned. Who the **** knows. Why are there so many unhappy campers in Norman.

Only time will tell. I hope Bob Stoops stays around for another 10-15 years. I think he's great, in a big way. None of us want Stoops to leave. I just hope his loyalty to his coaches doesn't tarnish his record.

Yes, Bob Stoops is a winner. MNC title, 4 MNC appearances, numerous Big 12 Championships. over .800% winning percentage. Coached top NFL draft picks. But you would have to be deaf and blind to not know something is internally wrong the program. And if your Wife, that doesn't know anything about football asks questions about the defense, then you know something is wrong.

[En_Fuego]

First, BB is not BD material. If he was, he would be doing that. I'm not sure he is even DM material. I don't think Coach Thrailkill's type of talent can ever come back to OU because to BB it would appear that the band had returned to actual technique and style, and we can't have that, now can we? And if "Coach" were to come back he would be the savior of the Pride. BB doesn't coach actual beauty of sound. BB won't allow true performance. BB doesn't encourage true excellence.

All we can do is accept that Brian Britt will make the same old decisions, and that the legacy of the Pride of Oklahoma will suffer because of it.





(Paraphrased from my mama who adored The Pride all her life, and hated BB with a true musician's passion. Sorry, Badger and Pride.)

Excellent....:excitement:

[PalmBeachSooner]

How do you feel about the band director?

Bring back Gene Threllkell!

[En_Fuego]

Maybe we just need Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz

[Scott D]

Actually, in regards to the band, it's a national epidemic. Just watch any televised parade.....they obviously quit teaching marching band kids how to march prior to reaching college, and apparently most college band leaders just figure it's too late by then. Clearly we need to go about firing high school band directors for not teaching these kids how to march in the first place ;)

[stoopified]

All we can do is trust Bob Stoops will make the right decisions.[/QUOTE]That is all that needs to be said.I trust Bob and I have no trouble sleeping as I await the bowl game and next season as well as futre campaigns.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Only time will tell. I hope Bob Stoops stays around for another 10-15 years.

Very VERY small chance he makes it another 10. I wouldn't look for him to last more than another 5-6 years. We, yes, you and I, are very demanding. And we are a teensy weensy little blip at the top of the iceberg. The pressure to win here IS bigger than other schools...It is Alabama and Ohio State big. Heck, it's bigger than USC and Texas big. Don't get me wrong, SC and Texas have huge expectations, but they don't quite go into apoplexy the same way we do at a 2-3 loss season. (Some would argue that's because there are other things to do in LA and Austin, for one thing.) And now that ND has spent years on end with their expectations unfulfilled... But I digress..

Point is, Stoops is in a pressure cooker like only a handful of others, equal to that of some NFL teams. I don't care how stout you are, that's going to wear on a guy. Besides... life happens outside of people's control sometimes. That's why Bud and Barry only lasted 16 years apiece. Bob's now on 13. I wouldn't bet on too many more. Heck, he has made statments in the past that he doesn't plan on doing this forever. I'd be ecstatic if he made another half dozen.

Basically, at some point he well could decide he would just as soon watch Isaac and Drake on Friday nights than worry about talking to a bunch of ink-stained wretches and tv bobbleheads and baby-sit a bunch of over-entitled 18-21 year-olds. Lord knows he has the cash to just shut 'er down anytime.

[cleller]

Gotta cool off and wait till after bowl season to start shaking things up.

[Pricetag]

Yeah, I just don't see now as the time Bob starts telling us stuff that he doesn't have to.

[goingoneight]

Coaches are hired and fired away in December anymore. That's why I feel like if there was going to be a change made, it would already be done. Aaaaand... there's still room to question the departing players and supposed coaching rivalries with players. By that, I mean if all of these players are leaving because of a big, bad meanie coach; they're leaving because they know Bob won't do anything about it. With his track record for success, it's hard to see why he'd give into a bunch of kids who are essentially not buying into what is a proven formula for success. Yeah, yeah, yeah... BV this, KW that... hey, we've been in the hunt way more than 95% of the other guys out there.

[En_Fuego]

Coaches are hired and fired away in December anymore. That's why I feel like if there was going to be a change made, it would already be done. Aaaaand... there's still room to question the departing players and supposed coaching rivalries with players. By that, I mean if all of these players are leaving because of a big, bad meanie coach; they're leaving because they know Bob won't do anything about it. With his track record for success, it's hard to see why he'd give into a bunch of kids who are essentially not buying into what is a proven formula for success. Yeah, yeah, yeah... BV this, KW that... hey, we've been in the hunt way more than 95% of the other guys out there.

But why ? If you replace coaches at or near Febuary. What does this do to the players that want to play for that coach ? If I were a player I would want the security of the coach that recruited me. If I found out that after I gave my sign to OU that a coach was fired I would be pissed.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

But why ? If you replace coaches at or near Febuary. What does this do to the players that want to play for that coach ? If I were a player I would want the security of the coach that recruited me. If I found out that after I gave my sign to OU that a coach was fired I would be pissed.

You don't sign with the coach, you sign with the school. If you don't want to go there because a coaches leaves you are free to go to another school...on your own dime.

[En_Fuego]

You don't sign with the coach, you sign with the school. If you don't want to go there because a coaches leaves you are free to go to another school...on your own dime.

There are too many personal relationship conflicts for your statement to be true. If it was just the "University" then everyone would be going to the beach...East Coast and West Coast...........Why would I want to play for Okla, Mizzou, Nebbish, Colorado, etc...etc ????

[En_Fuego]

We don't want this to end with a Florida and USC domination. But it would be refreshing since the SEC has drilled everyone in the A$$

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

There are too many personal relationship conflicts for your statement to be true. If it was just the "University" then everyone would be going to the beach...East Coast and West Coast...........Why would I want to play for Okla, Mizzou, Nebbish, Colorado, etc...etc ????

No, the letter of intent spells this out very clearly. You are signing with a school, not a coaching staff. This is similar to you signing a lease with the company who owns an apartment complex, not with the current complex manager.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

We don't want this to end with a Florida and USC domination. But it would be refreshing since the SEC has drilled everyone in the A$$

Newsflash: They can't sustain this, just like the big 8 couldn't sustain it through the early 70's (71, 72, 74, 75)

[bigfatjerk]

This just means in every game we play we are arguably the worst coached team of whoever we play. That's not been a new thing for the last 5 years or so though. We'll have to once again rely on talent alone to win games.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

This just means in every game we play we are arguably the worst coached team of whoever we play. That's not been a new thing for the last 5 years or so though. We'll have to once again rely on talent alone to win games.

Seriously, can football fans find some happy medium between "We are the best" and "the sky is falling?"

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Seriously, can football fans find some happy medium between "We are the best" and "the sky is falling?"

Well what fun would that be? ;)

[sooneredaco]

This just means in every game we play we are arguably the worst coached team of whoever we play. That's not been a new thing for the last 5 years or so though. We'll have to once again rely on talent alone to win games.

You are so off base it's hilarious. Now go be a whorn fan or something

[zeke]

Seriously, can football fans find some happy medium between "We are the best" and "the sky is falling?"

+1

[Scott D]

I've got it on good authority that Mike Stoops has been offered the DC job with Hawaii and with the New England Patriots

[Neath a Western Sky]

It would appear that nothing is going to change in regards to Coaches for our Sooners in 2012. I had thought that we might see a couple of folks move on i.e. BV and Martinez, and bring back Mike S. But the lack of movement leads me to believe that we aren't going to make any of those changes. I don't think Bob would wait until after the bowl game to make any announcements, and I would have thought that BV would have been considered and gone for a HC job somewhere. I must say I am a little disappointed that changes aren't being made. We have become stagnant, in our scheming, and something needs to be done about it.

I'm not an expert here, no am I second guessing Bob, but we haven't been consistent over the past 8 or 9 years in our preparation to play. We tend to under prepare for games and those are the ones that bite us in the butt! Execution is the name of the game, and the coaches need to put the players in position to win. Granted the coaches can't run the plays for the players, but they can certainly prepare them. If the same thing happens in 2012 that happened this year, I suspect there will be a mass-call for swift action against existing coaches, and it may very well start at the top. I hope I'm wrong, but having to stand behind the Alabama's and LSU's of the world, is starting to get a little old. I'm am tired of the SEC love-fest that we see every year. It's time for the Big XII to start making some noise, and we have to take the lead. In order to do that, we need to right this ship and get back to what we were in the early 2000's.

Frisco, I'm sure the gaggle of jokes, slurs, arrogance, and sunshine pumping that greeted your post did not shock you. I don't have to agree with each of your many points to say there was much that I did agree with, it was thought provoking, and I'm glad you posted what you did. I have similar concerns, and I DON'T have confidence in Bob to fix it, especially without Mike on board. I'm hoping some of the other posters on this thread are correct that perhaps that and other coaching changes are on the way after the, uh--what was the name of that bowl we're playing in?

[soonerinbixby]

My gut still tells me there is a decent chance that Mike ends up in Norman in a few weeks. I was reading a deal where Mike was talking about possibly becoming the South Carolina DC and he said he was going to look at all of his options and would probably make a decision by the 2nd week of January. I didn't expect Bob to make any changes between the OSU debacle and the bowl game. I think we will hear something shortly after the bowl game but that might just be wishful thinking.

[goingoneight]

Chuck Long was ousted before the Nobody Cares Bowl. Methinks if changes were going to be made, it'd be done already.

[BoulderSooner79]

I really don't understand why this bowl game would be a factor in the timing of any coaching decisions. I think closing out the recruiting class for '12 would be a factor though.

[Pricetag]

Chuck Long was ousted before the Nobody Cares Bowl. Methinks if changes were going to be made, it'd be done already.
I'm not saying it's not possible for a coach to be "ousted" to another job, but the school hiring them has to be ready to make a move, too. It's not like OU could force another school's hand by pushing a coach out the door.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Why does everyone want Mike Stoops back? So he can yell and scream his way to the same crappy defensive performances we saw this year? Did none of you see any of Arizona football under Mike? Their defense flat out sucked a lot, if not most, of the time. Do you think it is possible those players were so beaten down they didn't want to play for him any more?

Our defense will be just as well off continuing under Venables IF he gets the right players. Another dominant DT (so that we don't have to blitz to generate pressure) would be a great start. See 2009. [Edit: As I'm sure it would be for Mike, too. But there is no question his routine was wearing thin at AZ, and I'm not convinced he would be all that and a bag-o-chips in re-tread mode here. I like what he did for us in the past. But maybe you can't go home again... And I don't understand the drooling obsession.]

I think the most telling thing that Stoops has said in his press conferences over the last two weeks is that he likes to operate as "the good cop". That tells me he relies on his assistants to play the role of bad cop.

On the offensive side of the ball I suspect that the over-the-top bad cop is exactly what is going on with Huepel, hence all these defections. Look who Huepel's OC's were... Leach, Mangino, and Wilson not particularly known for they're calm fatherly encouragement. And though I took it with a grain of salt, I met one of his dad Ken's players who told me Ken was the screaming green meanie type. Not that one guys opinion is worth all that much. But it is possible there is an ingrained history there.

T be clear, I don't disagree with letting players have it if they are really screwing the pooch. This isn't a sewing circle. But it's a fine line. You do it 100%, or close to 100%, of the time and players start either walking around on eggshells afraid to make a move (drained confidence), or they start tuning it out completely.

And for all you Heupel-the-golden-child defenders... He is a 6-figure coach. I don't give two sh*ts if this is "just his first year give him a chance". That's BS. He is as open to criticism as anyone. Re-watch the ESPN All-Access. Huepel probably got the "most bleeped" award. Again... it's a fine line. And maybe that is part of his development as a professional that he needs to get a handle on, too.

Let me just add that no, the sky is not falling. Our staff is as good and professional a staff as there is out there. As such I am sure in their year-end reviews they will assess and recognize some things they have to get squared away. But ultimately it does not mean that the staff is immune to some changes.... including at the top.

[FriscoTXsooner]

Western Sky,

you are correct this post seems to have brought out some interesting comments! First I am not proposing that I know anymore or less then most posters on this board, I am simply an OU grad that loves sooner football, I don't dig on folks when they place comments on here, because that's just being ugly. When I see people that make negative comments about a persons post, and they have a gazillion posts on here, I start to wonder why they have so much time to spend responding in a nasty way to another person's comments. I don't agree with everything that is said on here, but I respect the fact that we have the right to say whatever we want. Granted some posts will generate a lot of responses, but I would hope that the responses would be respectful.

I am spoiled, I want us to compete for a National Championship every year, and when we have poor performances, it kills me. I don't claim to know more then bob, if I did, then perhaps I would be in a different vocation. I come on this board to read peoples comments about Sooner football, and when I comment I try and be as professional as I can. Too bad others feels it's necessary to comment in a negative way to others posts. I won't call anyone out personally, but I will say that maybe it's time for people to stop thinking so much of themselves, and consider others before they shoot someone's posts down. Everyone has their own thoughts, and should be respected for sharing them, regardless if you agree or disagree. If you disagree do it in a respectful way. Otherwise you'll simply let people know what an A$$ you are. Western Sky that's not directed at you, but to those that wish to respond negatively. There is nothing worse then other schools thinking that Sooner fans are A$$'s, and I don't want to extend that thought process.

[goingoneight]

The look on Bob's face, shaking his head in embarrassment as Randle was gashing us is proof that he's frustrated with *something.*
It reminded me of the shot of Joe C. Shaking his head on National TV before he got rid of Capel last year.

[Mile High Sooner]

First, BB is not BD material. If he was, he would be doing that. I'm not sure he is even DM material. I don't think Coach Thrailkill's type of talent can ever come back to OU because to BB it would appear that the band had returned to actual technique and style, and we can't have that, now can we? And if "Coach" were to come back he would be the savior of the Pride. BB doesn't coach actual beauty of sound. BB won't allow true performance. BB doesn't encourage true excellence.

All we can do is accept that Brian Britt will make the same old decisions, and that the legacy of the Pride of Oklahoma will suffer because of it.

(Paraphrased from my mama who adored The Pride all her life, and hated BB with a true musician's passion. Sorry, Badger and Pride.)


That was funny! :very_drunk:

[ObiKaTony]

Why does everyone want Mike Stoops back? So he can yell and scream his way to the same crappy defensive performances we saw this year? Did none of you see any of Arizona football under Mike? Their defense flat out sucked a lot, if not most, of the time. Do you think it is possible those players were so beaten down they didn't want to play for him any more?

Our defense will be just as well off continuing under Venables IF he gets the right players. Another dominant DT (so that we don't have to blitz to generate pressure) would be a great start. See 2009. [Edit: As I'm sure it would be for Mike, too. But there is no question his routine was wearing thin at AZ, and I'm not convinced he would be all that and a bag-o-chips in re-tread mode here. I like what he did for us in the past. But maybe you can't go home again... And I don't understand the drooling obsession.]

I think the most telling thing that Stoops has said in his press conferences over the last two weeks is that he likes to operate as "the good cop". That tells me he relies on his assistants to play the role of bad cop.

On the offensive side of the ball I suspect that the over-the-top bad cop is exactly what is going on with Huepel, hence all these defections. Look who Huepel's OC's were... Leach, Mangino, and Wilson not particularly known for they're calm fatherly encouragement. And though I took it with a grain of salt, I met one of his dad Ken's players who told me Ken was the screaming green meanie type. Not that one guys opinion is worth all that much. But it is possible there is an ingrained history there.

T be clear, I don't disagree with letting players have it if they are really screwing the pooch. This isn't a sewing circle. But it's a fine line. You do it 100%, or close to 100%, of the time and players start either walking around on eggshells afraid to make a move (drained confidence), or they start tuning it out completely.

And for all you Heupel-the-golden-child defenders... He is a 6-figure coach. I don't give two sh*ts if this is "just his first year give him a chance". That's BS. He is as open to criticism as anyone. Re-watch the ESPN All-Access. Huepel probably got the "most bleeped" award. Again... it's a fine line. And maybe that is part of his development as a professional that he needs to get a handle on, too.

Let me just add that no, the sky is not falling. Our staff is as good and professional a staff as there is out there. As such I am sure in their year-end reviews they will assess and recognize some things they have to get squared away. But ultimately it does not mean that the staff is immune to some changes.... including at the top.

I love it. IF Venebles gets the right players! Apparently that has been a big part of the problem. Furthermore, Bob Stoops (who knows more about his football team more than any of us) stated this is his most athletic team. The logical conclusion to what the problem might be would be COACHING. Eitherway Venebles has done a below average job, period. To answer your first question. Perhaps people want Mike back to get our defense in the top 5 again, I know I know, that sounds stupid right?

I have seen on this board flat out denial about where this program is headed. If no changes are made to this staff we con't our downhill slide. At this point, I believe all those wanting V to stay or have the opinion that if he stays all will be fine are either ignorant of facts on the football field, or they are just trying to be 'different' to somehow rise above the argument. It's getting flat out pathetic. BTW all those who stated several years ago that Venebles should be let go were obviously right. That bugs the heck out of most who were supportive of V.

I expect a coaching change after the bowl... If not, we con't to be an above average team.

[Scott D]

I love it. IF Venebles gets the right players! Apparently that has been a big part of the problem. Furthermore, Bob Stoops (who knows more about his football team more than any of us) stated this is his most athletic team. The logical conclusion to what the problem might be would be COACHING. Eitherway Venebles has done a below average job, period. To answer your first question. Perhaps people want Mike back to get our defense in the top 5 again, I know I know, that sounds stupid right?

I have seen on this board flat out denial about where this program is headed. If no changes are made to this staff we con't our downhill slide. At this point, I believe all those wanting V to stay or have the opinion that if he stays all will be fine are either ignorant of facts on the football field, or they are just trying to be 'different' to somehow rise above the argument. It's getting flat out pathetic. BTW all those who stated several years ago that Venebles should be let go were obviously right. That bugs the heck out of most who were supportive of V.

I expect a coaching change after the bowl... If not, we con't to be an above average team.

most athletic does not = best football players.

ywia

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I love it. IF Venebles gets the right players! Apparently that has been a big part of the problem. Furthermore, Bob Stoops (who knows more about his football team more than any of us) stated this is his most athletic team. The logical conclusion to what the problem might be would be COACHING.

You need to refresh yourself on syllogisms.

There are a couple of problems with your arguments:

1. This statement was made at the beginning of the year when the entire roster was healthy. I'll concur that the 22 starters were his most athletic roster, but I do NOT concur that the 44 people on his 2 deep as a whole made for his most athletic roster. Once we got through those initial 22 that statement wasn't true at all (meaning that once you lost 5 starters, the 22 left were NOT his most athletic team).

2. Notice he doesn't say that this is his best football team, just most athletic. I've diagrammed time and again how they are good athletes but not very good at the game of football. Anyone who has coached little kids at all knows that there are some things that kids just don't get. Anyone who has trained people in the workforce knows that that doesn't change when you get older. Michael Jordan may have been the most athletic guy in the minor leagues, but he wasn't a very good baseball player.

3. People on this board tend to disregard the lack of practice time in college football as if its easily overcome. Sometimes as a coach you have to sacrafice Peter to pay Paul. If your starter requires 75% of your time to prep him to be effective instead of 40%, the backups suffer. Regardless of how much money you are making, that is the reality. Go back and rewatch those ESPNU videos and see Martinez with the DBs. He might as well have been the peanuts teacher out there squawking wonk wonk wonk wonk. The problem is that 1/2 the people on this board can see the logic in what he was saying but the DBs didn't get it. I've never coached football in my life but I instantly recognized where he was at -> trying to teach the unteachable.

[ObiKaTony]

You need to refresh yourself on syllogisms.

There are a couple of problems with your arguments:

1. This statement was made at the beginning of the year when the entire roster was healthy. I'll concur that the 22 starters were his most athletic roster, but I do NOT concur that the 44 people on his 2 deep as a whole made for his most athletic roster. Once we got through those initial 22 that statement wasn't true at all (meaning that once you lost 5 starters, the 22 left were NOT his most athletic team).

2. Notice he doesn't say that this is his best football team, just most athletic. I've diagrammed time and again how they are good athletes but not very good at the game of football. Anyone who has coached little kids at all knows that there are some things that kids just don't get. Anyone who has trained people in the workforce knows that that doesn't change when you get older. Michael Jordan may have been the most athletic guy in the minor leagues, but he wasn't a very good baseball player.

3. People on this board tend to disregard the lack of practice time in college football as if its easily overcome. Sometimes as a coach you have to sacrafice Peter to pay Paul. If your starter requires 75% of your time to prep him to be effective instead of 40%, the backups suffer. Regardless of how much money you are making, that is the reality. Go back and rewatch those ESPNU videos and see Martinez with the DBs. He might as well have been the peanuts teacher out there squawking wonk wonk wonk wonk. The problem is that 1/2 the people on this board can see the logic in what he was saying but the DBs didn't get it. I've never coached football in my life but I instantly recognized where he was at -> trying to teach the unteachable.

My argument is this:

We need to shake up our coaching staff. A vast majority of fans agree, and most likely stoops agrees too (see his face when our defense was getting destroyed)

One has to look at the implications of a coach Stoops stating this was is MOST ATHLETIC TEAM. First, he has never said that about any previous team. Also, we saw a clear drop off from last years team. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to evaluate that the team has been below average on defense for many years. Stats clearly indicate this.

I would also argue that a change in coaching could not make out team any worse, so why on earth wouldn't we? Regardless, Stoops is going to make changes, not because he wants to, because he has to.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

My argument is this:

We need to shake up our coaching staff. A vast majority of fans agree, and most likely stoops agrees too (see his face when our defense was getting destroyed)

What we need to do is get better at evaluating talent. I'm just not sure that "shaking up" our staff is the best way to do that. The problem is that "shaking up" tends to give you short term results at a cost of long term results. So while we may bring in someone who makes our current crop of linebackers play better, he may recruit WORSE talent at the position and leave us in an unfixable hole in 4 years. If you don't believe me look at Texas down south. They've had a revolving door at DC and have had much better talent than we have but aren't all that much better than us.


One has to look at the implications of a coach Stoops stating this was is MOST ATHLETIC TEAM. First, he has never said that about any previous team. Also, we saw a clear drop off from last years team. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to evaluate that the team has been below average on defense for many years. Stats clearly indicate this.

Stoops always makes general comments like this. For example, the 2000 team was his "toughest" team, etc. The problem is that athleticism in the sport of football has a bunch of secondary qualities that have to be present (like tough, disciplined, play hard every down, executes, competes) or its value quickly diminishes. The problem is that our current players resemble the Texas 2000 prima donnas more than our 2000 OU lunch pail boys. Coaching can't fix this. If it could then Texas's Roy Williams and Malcolm Kelly would have changed once they got to the pros. That hasn't happened.


I would also argue that a change in coaching could not make out team any worse, so why on earth wouldn't we? Regardless, Stoops is going to make changes, not because he wants to, because he has to.

You could argue this, but there is so much evidence that it COULD get worse that it would overwhelm you. From Gibbs to Schnelly from Schnelly to Boo, from Solich to Calahan, from Holtz to Bob Davie from Davie to Willingham (well technically they had the same record) from Willingham to Weiss, from Mangino to Gill etc.

On this team...
Our OL/RB/WR situation isn't much better right now than it was when Stoops took over

[LostCreekSooner]

The problem is that 1/2 the people on this board can see the logic in what he was saying but the DBs didn't get it. I've never coached football in my life but I instantly recognized where he was at -> trying to teach the unteachable.

El wrongo. Being a good teacher or coach is having the ability to make people 'learn'... and everyone learns differently. IMHO, this current staff is far below the staffs of the early 2000s. We used to beat teams because they were out of position, now we have players out of position all the time. I blame it on the coaches when a player busts in coverage. I blame it in the player when they are in the right place but drop the pass or miss the tackle.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

El wrongo. Being a good teacher or coach is having the ability to make people 'learn'... and everyone learns differently. IMHO, this current staff is far below the staffs of the early 2000s. We used to beat teams because they were out of position, now we have players out of position all the time. I blame it on the coaches when a player busts in coverage. I blame it in the player when they are in the right place but drop the pass or miss the tackle.

Its so easy to make these generalizations, but the real world tends to be slightly different. You see, according to your arguments, a "good" teacher could go over to the politics board and make either political side agree to reasonable points brought up by dems or republicans. Not going to happen because they know they are right.

Now I personally think Martinez needs to go, but I also understand that he didn't recruit any of the current starters that are consistently busting. HIS recruits are Jefferson and Colvin. The rest of the guys are BJW's. Its kind of this weird situation like 1999 with Peewee Woods. Mike didn't recruit the guy but he was the best we had. Given that, I'm okay with him being given a chance to fill the secondary with HIS guys.

So here is my question: Whose fault is it if the player chicken fights with a blocker? jogs? tries to jump a route for the pick? takes the play off? Because those are our root problems on defense.

[LostCreekSooner]

So here is my question: Whose fault is it if the player chicken fights with a blocker? jogs? tries to jump a route for the pick? takes the play off? Because those are our root problems on defense.

Answer: players fault.

(sounds like you would be hesitant to have players on the field making the mistakes you said above? If so, isn't it the coaches responsibility to make changes? Don't get me wrong, I'm not sticking up completely for the players, it just seems we are not very sound or disciplined... which nip think falls heavily on the coaches)

[ObiKaTony]

[QUOTE=jkm, the stolen pifwafwi;3430095]What we need to do is get better at evaluating talent. I'm just not sure that "shaking up" our staff is the best way to do that. The problem is that "shaking up" tends to give you short term results at a cost of long term results. So while we may bring in someone who makes our current crop of linebackers play better, he may recruit WORSE talent at the position and leave us in an unfixable hole in 4 years. If you don't believe me look at Texas down south. They've had a revolving door at DC and have had much better talent than we have but aren't all that much better than us.



Stoops always makes general comments like this. For example, the 2000 team was his "toughest" team, etc. The problem is that athleticism in the sport of football has a bunch of secondary qualities that have to be present (like tough, disciplined, play hard every down, executes, competes) or its value quickly diminishes. The problem is that our current players resemble the Texas 2000 prima donnas more than our 2000 OU lunch pail boys. Coaching can't fix this. If it could then Texas's Roy Williams and Malcolm Kelly would have changed once they got to the pros. That hasn't happened.





You could argue this, but there is so much evidence that it COULD get worse that it would overwhelm you. From Gibbs to Schnelly from Schnelly to Boo, from Solich to Calahan, from Holtz to Bob Davie from Davie to Willingham (well technically they had the same record) from Willingham to Weiss, from Mangino to Gill etc.

On this team...
Our OL/RB/WR situation isn't much better right n


JKM, One thing is for certain. You are a master at saying everything while saying nothing...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Answer: players fault.

(sounds like you would be hesitant to have players on the field making the mistakes you said above? If so, isn't it the coaches responsibility to make changes? Don't get me wrong, I'm not sticking up completely for the players, it just seems we are not very sound or disciplined... which nip think falls heavily on the coaches)

It is 100% on the coaches. What I'm trying to get you to see is that they sometimes have no choice.

We have 85 scholarships to cover 22 positions + specialties (kicker/deep snapper/punter/whatever). This means that each position on the field generally has a starter and 3 backups. I say generally because typically at OU we've had 5-6 at one position and 2-3 at others.

So typical situation:

Starter/Backup/Backup/Backup - now typically you want one of these backups to redshirt so that leaves us with 3 -> Starter/Backup/Backup. Now we can't get around these numbers nor can anyone else in college football. So this leads us to how bad the starter has to play to be replaced by the backup or the 3rd stringer. Under Stoops 45% of our recruits have eventually been starters. Which means that the chance of the backup being the next starter is fairly slim and why I keep going back to evaluation.

[picasso]

[QUOTE=jkm, the stolen pifwafwi;3430095]What we need to do is get better at evaluating talent. I'm just not sure that "shaking up" our staff is the best way to do that. The problem is that "shaking up" tends to give you short term results at a cost of long term results. So while we may bring in someone who makes our current crop of linebackers play better, he may recruit WORSE talent at the position and leave us in an unfixable hole in 4 years. If you don't believe me look at Texas down south. They've had a revolving door at DC and have had much better talent than we have but aren't all that much better than us.



Stoops always makes general comments like this. For example, the 2000 team was his "toughest" team, etc. The problem is that athleticism in the sport of football has a bunch of secondary qualities that have to be present (like tough, disciplined, play hard every down, executes, competes) or its value quickly diminishes. The problem is that our current players resemble the Texas 2000 prima donnas more than our 2000 OU lunch pail boys. Coaching can't fix this. If it could then Texas's Roy Williams and Malcolm Kelly would have changed once they got to the pros. That hasn't happened.





You could argue this, but there is so much evidence that it COULD get worse that it would overwhelm you. From Gibbs to Schnelly from Schnelly to Boo, from Solich to Calahan, from Holtz to Bob Davie from Davie to Willingham (well technically they had the same record) from Willingham to Weiss, from Mangino to Gill etc.

On this team...
Our OL/RB/WR situation isn't much better right n


JKM, One thing is for certain. You are a master at saying everything while saying nothing...
And you suck at quoting.

[Salt City Sooner]

What we need to do is get better at evaluating talent. I'm just not sure that "shaking up" our staff is the best way to do that. The problem is that "shaking up" tends to give you short term results at a cost of long term results. So while we may bring in someone who makes our current crop of linebackers play better, he may recruit WORSE talent at the position and leave us in an unfixable hole in 4 years. If you don't believe me look at Texas down south. They've had a revolving door at DC and have had much better talent than we have but aren't all that much better than us.



Stoops always makes general comments like this. For example, the 2000 team was his "toughest" team, etc. The problem is that athleticism in the sport of football has a bunch of secondary qualities that have to be present (like tough, disciplined, play hard every down, executes, competes) or its value quickly diminishes. The problem is that our current players resemble the Texas 2000 prima donnas more than our 2000 OU lunch pail boys. Coaching can't fix this. If it could then Texas's Roy Williams and Malcolm Kelly would have changed once they got to the pros. That hasn't happened.



You could argue this, but there is so much evidence that it COULD get worse that it would overwhelm you. From Gibbs to Schnelly from Schnelly to Boo, from Solich to Calahan, from Holtz to Bob Davie from Davie to Willingham (well technically they had the same record) from Willingham to Weiss, from Mangino to Gill etc.

On this team...
Our OL/RB/WR situation isn't much better right now than it was when Stoops took over
I could NOT agree more with this. To transcend levels, I'm a die hard Bengal fan & if you want to talk about pure athleticism, Jerome Simpson is the most athletic player on that team (youtube his TD from Saturday if you want to see what I'm talking about) & it's not all that close, IMO. Now, ask me who my first pick from that team would be from that team would be at WR if I were starting my own; Jerome, or A.J. Green.