Are you OK with 2 and 3 loss seasons...

[Soonerus]

11-2 or 10-3 ??? They seem to be the norm now...

[picasso]

Under Stoops we've had a shot at a national title every 4 seasons. I'm pretty cool with that.

[agoo758]

Other than the mods and a few mod suckups..... no one on this board is.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

11-2 or 10-3 ??? They seem to be the norm now...If we can beat the cows, orange aggy, and be favored against all but 7-10 folks nationally, from a state where only 5-10 top quality players come from the highschool ranks each year, then Bob is doing a good job, and I'm not perturbed. Mike Stoops is back, and let's see how he works out as DC. I think we will get better, but we have to do better in recruiting. Without a lot of home-grown talent, we have to successfully raid other states, and Lassie Aggy just made that a bit harder.

[picasso]

Take a gander at Switzer's record at OU and get back to us. I know I know, the mods and mod suck-ups were at it back then too.

[Seamus]

I am happy with any number of losses?

No.

Have I or am i likely to commit homicide or suicide over it?

No.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I am happy with any number of losses?

No.

Have I or am i likely to commit homicide or suicide over it?

No.Pretty much....If our coach can seriously contend OU for the NC, or at least the Conference Championship every year, it's hard to really complain, at least for me. Some here might think I'm imagining things that we routinely get jobbed by the refs, even in Norman, but I commend Bob Stoops for putting up with that, and not taking another coaching opportunity.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Take a gander at Switzer's record at OU and get back to us. I know I know, the mods and mod suck-ups were at it back then too.Switzer, for most of his OU coaching career, didn't have to deal with scholarship limits like Stoops does. That problem DOES make a difference in the talent level.

[ouflak]

I was a season ticket holder during the Blake years.

[sendbaht]

Under Stoops we've had a shot at a national title every 4 seasons. I'm pretty cool with that.

Me Too!

[olevetonahill]

What are our options?
I dont think a single one of us has any power to change anything

[prrriiide]

Switzer, for most of his OU coaching career, didn't have to deal with scholarship limits like Stoops does. That problem DOES make a difference in the talent level.

Which makes what Stoops is doing all the more impressive. Imagine if Stoops didn't have the scholly limits!

So let's look at contemporaries, namely, coaches that have won a BCS NC with scholly limits:

1998, Fulmer/Tennessee - Had 2 seasons out of 16 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
1999, Bowden/Florida St. - Had 9 seasons out of 34 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2000, Stoops/Oklahoma - Has 2 seasons out of 13 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2001, Coker/Miami - Had 2 seasons out of 6 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2002, Tressel/Ohio St. - had 2 seasons out of 9 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2003, Saban/LSU - had 1 season out of 5 with 1 loss, no undefeated.
2004, Carroll/USC - had 3 seasons out of 9 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2005, Brown/texass - has 4 seasons out of 14 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2006 & 2008, Meyer/Florida - had 3 seasons out of 6 with 1 loss, no undefeated.
2007, Miles/LSU - has 1 season out of 7 with 1 loss, no undefeated.
2009 & 2011, Saban/Alabama - has 2 seasons out of 5 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2010, Chizik/Newton - has 1 season out of 3 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.

Out of 121 seasons of coaching between the 12 of them, they have exactly 32 seasons with 0 or 1 loss.

The takeaway here is that what the OP suggests (season after season of 0 or 1 loss) is just not possible in this day and age of scholly limitations. Even the best coaches have struggled mightily to get to the 1-loss plateau, and thinking that Stoops or OU are immune to this truth is arrogant poppycock. Put another way, Bud Wilkinson and Bear Bryant would not have been anywhere near as successful under scholly limitations.

So yeah. I'm fine with what Stoops is doing. Do I wish it were better? Of course. But unlike some folks, I took my reality pill this morning.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

I think Stoops has been off just a bit of late, but bringing back Mike Stoops is one step closer to getting back to the very top. Oklahoma hasn't had any national defensive award winners like the Butkus or Thorpe since Mike Stoops left and since Brent Venables was allegedly such a great linebackers coach, shouldn't he of had a Butkus award winner at some point during his 8 seasons as "the man"?

And next season, we will know if Heupel/Norvell or Landry Jones was the problem in terms of offensive erraticness the past few seasons. I already have my answer on that.

[swardboy]

A win against Oklahoma is a mountain-top experience for ANY Division I school. It's equal to a bowl win for them.

When a Big 12 team can go 8-4 after losing it's starting QB the first game of the season, it's extraordinary.

When a Division I team can go with a receiver at QB after dismissing it's starting QB before the season starts, and reach a BCS bowl, it's remarkable (Paul worked at WR the spring before).

I'd say Stoops gets the most out of what he works with. My only hope is that Mike gets a "rougher" brand of defense. And I think he's done very well this year with what he has to work with.

[picasso]

Switzer, for most of his OU coaching career, didn't have to deal with scholarship limits like Stoops does. That problem DOES make a difference in the talent level.
I've often pointed that out here. I was getting at the fact that Switz rarely had an undefeated season and even sometimes, gulp, he lost to an inferior team.

Kansas/cough!

[picasso]

Me Too!
In Thailand? Are we talking sports here or flying projectiles at the strip joint.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

I think Stoops has been off just a bit of late, but bringing back Mike Stoops is one step closer to getting back to the very top. Oklahoma hasn't had any national defensive award winners like the Butkus or Thorpe since Mike Stoops left and since Brent Venables was allegedly such a great linebackers coach, shouldn't he of had a Butkus award winner at some point during his 8 seasons as "the man"?

And next season, we will know if Heupel/Norvell or Landry Jones was the problem in terms of offensive erraticness the past few seasons. I already have my answer on that.

So this problem with offense, I will postulate that our o line has been decimated over the years and haven't been as solid as needed for these perfect seasons that are demanded. The running game is not up to par. With the attrition issues that we have had I am amazed that our offense is as good as it is. Feel free to blame Landry though.

[5thYearSooner]

As much as our offense entertains us by demolishing some rivals (63-21), I think its time for us to be a run oriented offense and mean mother f***ing defense

[MojoRisen]

Our attrition rate has been way to high, you need upper class players... We have turned over lots of players injury, leaving program or suspended etc.

We should take a long look at why we are loosing linemen to attrition every year.

[Boomer_Sooner_sax]

Ok, before you go and fire Stoops, remember the drunk and Blake when you go and fire a coach winning games. That being said, I am fine with that for a couple of years if we make runs every few years. You are not going to win every year. It just isn't going to happen, but a few of those with a chance at the MNC is the most you could ever ask for. We are only 3 years removed from a BCS Championship game. It is ok, I promise.

[sooneron]

2004, Carroll/USC - had 3 seasons out of 9 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.


*cough...


Enlightening post, tho...:biggrin:

[SoonerorLater]

Switzer, for most of his OU coaching career, didn't have to deal with scholarship limits like Stoops does. That problem DOES make a difference in the talent level.

But fans aren't going to look at it like that. Most likely response is that Switzer and Wilkinson succeeeded at a higher rate. Switzer and Wilkinson did play under different rules but so did their contemporaries. Like it or not Stoops is going to be judged against Switzer and Wilkinson's records. Fans just aren't going to take a measured academic approach when they evaluate Stoops. It's just not what fans do. That said I think Stoops has done a good job.

[sooneron]

I'm ok with it when I know its a young team or one that is rebuilding or suffering from injuries. This year's team has been remarkably helter skelter. We aren't very good in a lot of aspects. There are times when we tackle well, there are times when we suck at it. There are series where the O looks unstoppable and there are series where they don't get plays in or we shoot ourselves in the foot. This all happens over the course of a single football game. This year, pretty much all but two of them.

[Tear Down This Wall]

If loss #2 is in a bowl game, then yes two losses is fine. If the other loss is to a Top Ten program, fine...and, I mean Top Ten at the end of the season, not at the beginning. The poll idiots had West Virginia in the Top Ten to start this season for crying out loud, and strained to keep Texas out of it - they both suck.

A three loss season, with the talent we bring in, what we pay the coaches, and the inability of practically anyone in the conference to play consistent defensively, is not acceptable.

If we're happy with three loss seasons - a loss here to Baylor, a loss there to Texas Tech - then we have problems with the leadership understanding the competitive food chain of FBS football.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

The good news is the defense and special teams are drastically improved over prior years. And the defense has a chance to be great again if Mike Stoops can recruit well going down the road. Offensively, well, we'll know next season if the problem of the inconsistent offense is Heupel or Landry.

[FirstandGoal]

Under Stoops we've had a shot at a national title every 4 seasons. I'm pretty cool with that.

Agree.


I am happy with any number of losses?

No.

Have I or am i likely to commit homicide or suicide over it?

No.

Good point. While nobody in their right mind should ever be happy that their team loses, realistically you can't win every game all of the time.
Before this season started, I predicted us for 3 losses and I still stand behind that. There's another one looming out there and when it comes, I'm not going to get all crazy about it and want to fire everyone we have on staff.
Personally I think that with what we had when this season started, going 9-3 will have been a great season and a helluva job by all involved. Going 10-2 means that everybody will have exceeded my expectations. It doesn't make me happy, but I'm a realist.
Also, you have to consider who we've lost to so far this year. We've lost to two top 5 undefeated teams and both losses were very, very close. We were in both games right up until the end. Did we have a clunker of a game Saturday? Yeah, but so do all teams who have 1 or 0 loss seasons. Look at our own 2000 undefeated team to see a couple of very unimpressive wins against inferior teams.


Switzer, for most of his OU coaching career, didn't have to deal with scholarship limits like Stoops does. That problem DOES make a difference in the talent level.

This is so often overlooked.

[C&CDean]

Other than the mods and a few mod suckups..... no one on this board is.

Blow me chump. I ain't happy with any losses aggy.

[FirstandGoal]

If loss #2 is in a bowl game, then yes two losses is fine. If the other loss is to a Top Ten program, fine...and, I mean Top Ten at the end of the season, not at the beginning. The poll idiots had West Virginia in the Top Ten to start this season for crying out loud, and strained to keep Texas out of it - they both suck.

A three loss season, with the talent we bring in, what we pay the coaches, and the inability of practically anyone in the conference to play consistent defensively, is not acceptable.

If we're happy with three loss seasons - a loss here to Baylor, a loss there to Texas Tech - then we have problems with the leadership understanding the competitive food chain of FBS football.

Okay, so here is a serious question.

So far, we've lost to the #1 and #3 teams in the country. Both were close games.
Let's say we win out from here, go to a BCS bowl and lose to another top 5 team. Does this make us better than last year and can you live with that?

[Seamus]

Blow me chump.

LMFAO

It would make me look like a total suck-up, but I'm tempted to make that part of my signature.

[SoonerinLA]

There is a huge differnce between 2 and 3 losses. Here's what makes me happy.

1) Play for the Natty every now and then. Let's say every 5-6 years
2) Win more B12 Championships by far than any other B12 program
3) Be relevant as a Nationally recognized power

If we lose 2 games in other seasons (and 3 every now and then) I am happy.

Stoops has accomplished the above.

[SoonerorLater]

While Stoops has put us in position 4 times for a championship bottom line we have walked away with just one. A bigger issue is that since our beatdown against USC in 2004 we have only been in that position once. From the 2005 season through this year OU has been a good college football team. Not a great team. Not a dominant team. We've had a top ten finish only 3 times with the best being number 5 in 2008. If we were a team like Texas Tech then this would be great but it's pretty lackluster for a school with the tradition of OU. Even comparing Stoops against himself, he finished in the top ten 5 out of his first 6 seasons as head coach.

So no I'm not happy with the 2-3 loss season's but I'm more concerned with the trajectory of the OU program. This year I have become a little more optimistic about the direction we are heading if not about every game.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

OU has had some really crap luck. Every team has injuries, but I would venture to guess OU has had more "key" injuries on a year by year basis. Whether it be losing a starting QB (Sam Bradford) or the school's all-time leading scorer (Demarco Murray) or losing 30% of the offensive line just as the season is getting ready to start. Losing a starter isn't a key injury, losing one of your very best starters is. OU has been in the latter category way too often. Another example is Paul Thompson was completely lost without having Malcolm Kelly in the lineup against Boise St.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

What are our options?
I dont think a single one of us has any power to change anythingHire Chip Kelley as OC. He'll come to OU cheap.

[goingoneight]

Steve Davis said it best... the "old timers" need to get used to the Kansas States and Baylors of the college football world no longer being pushovers. Should OU win? Maybe, yeah. Most of the time, yeah... but college football isn't just a small club of traditional powers anymore and hasn't been for a long time. You have to stretch what talent you have a lot harder to produce the kind of success an traditional powerhouse wants to see.

[goingoneight]

FTR, Steve called us "old timers." :D

[SoonerLaw09]

We lost to 2 teams who are better than we are. I have no problem with that, per se. What I do have a problem with is that we seem to **** our pants against said teams. Wild snaps, stupid turnovers, bonehead plays, etc.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

While Stoops has put us in position 4 times for a championship bottom line we have walked away with just one. A bigger issue is that since our beatdown against USC in 2004 we have only been in that position once. From the 2005 season through this year OU has been a good college football team. Not a great team. Not a dominant team. We've had a top ten finish only 3 times with the best being number 5 in 2008. If we were a team like Texas Tech then this would be great but it's pretty lackluster for a school with the tradition of OU. Even comparing Stoops against himself, he finished in the top ten 5 out of his first 6 seasons as head coach.

So no I'm not happy with the 2-3 loss season's but I'm more concerned with the trajectory of the OU program. This year I have become a little more optimistic about the direction we are heading if not about every game.The 3 games where the team seemed to lie down have been very hard on our recruiting. Unfortunately, the last of those 3 was last yr's lOSUr Burger King head ewe/ram-mounting oraange aggy game.

[BoulderSooner79]

Other teams are good too. They plan to beat us, some even lift weights.

My issue with the last several seasons is the lack of resilience/heart or whatever you want to call it to perform in tight situations. The get that critical stop or execute that critical drive with time running out. I see other teams do this all the time. Bama may be shocked at losing last week, but they went down the field in no time to beat LSU at the end. They went down the field twice at the end to get it down to 1 critical 4th down play against A&M. That's the kind of never-say-die effort I'd like to see in our teams and I don't understand why we don't see it.

I thought we finally were going to show that fight against ND when we pinned them inside the 10, forced a 3-and-out, drive 50yds for the tying score which included a critical 4th down conversion. That's what I'm talking about. Then we give up a 50yd pass and a relatively easy counter score and we never threaten again. sigh.

[agoo758]

Other teams are good too. They plan to beat us, some even lift weights.

My issue with the last several seasons is the lack of resilience/heart or whatever you want to call it to perform in tight situations. The get that critical stop or execute that critical drive with time running out. I see other teams do this all the time. Bama may be shocked at losing last week, but they went down the field in no time to beat LSU at the end. They went down the field twice at the end to get it down to 1 critical 4th down play against A&M. That's the kind of never-say-die effort I'd like to see in our teams and I don't understand why we don't see it.

I thought we finally were going to show that fight against ND when we pinned them inside the 10, forced a 3-and-out, drive 50yds for the tying score which included a critical 4th down conversion. That's what I'm talking about. Then we give up a 50yd pass and a relatively easy counter score and we never threaten again. sigh.

This has unfortunately been our team in a nutshell since 2004.

[Soonerjeepman]

guess, I LOVE OU sports...all of them. I USED to live and die on games...

Didn't go to OU but grew up on OU Football from my aunts/uncles BUT it's entertainment to me.

Hate to lose, but considering the landscape now of college football I'm good with being in the top 15, top 10, top 5 and an NC every now and then. What REALLY is the big deal if for a yr or 2 ksu is "better"...in the end it really doesn't matter.

I've got more to worry about, food, taxes, retirement, kids, etc. Life is too short to not just enjoy the ride.

[goingoneight]

We lost to 2 teams who are better than we are. I have no problem with that, per se. What I do have a problem with is that we seem to **** our pants against said teams. Wild snaps, stupid turnovers, bonehead plays, etc.

Very true... I don't know what it is about a tight ball game that makes OU **** themselves. Even in OUr lone championship game win of the Stoops era, we snapped the ball over the punter's head to erase a perfect game (shut out).

[OkieThunderLion]

11-2 or 10-3 ??? They seem to be the norm now...
It's not a finite situation.

2 or 3 may "be the norm", but it also puts you in striking range for 0 or 5.

Just keep fighting!

[OkieThunderLion]

Very true... I don't know what it is about a tight ball game that makes OU **** themselves. Even in OUr lone championship game win of the Stoops era, we snapped the ball over the punter's head to erase a perfect game (shut out).
They even missed a FG that game! What gives?

Obviously the Univ of Oklahoma is genetically unable to handle pressure. :rolleyes

[StoopTroup]

I'm never OK with a year we have even one loss but I think we just have to realize just how special it is to win a MNC. If we had won all four we played in in the last decade....I think things here would be much different but I have instead found winning the Big XII Conference and stacking up all of those trophies has been a nice thing considering we have had losses.

It's been expensive to go to as many games as I have but it has been pretty enjoyable as long as I don't pay much attention to the Doom and Gloom Fans. Oklahoma has played Football quite a few years and has a great image still and has 7 National Championships. Not as many as we all thought we would have after 2000 but that Game and all the games I went to that year has been a really great Memory that has allowed me and my Family to continuing hanging our hat on since we won.

I'm sure it's really tough for the Fans who maybe started going to lots of Home and Away Games that got hooked into it all after the 2000 Game passed them by.

I do realize that not everyone gets to go to MNC Games but when you do and we have won....it's one heck of a great feeling.

[BoulderSooner79]

I'll be thrilled if we end THIS season with 2 losses.

;)

[8timechamps]

Other than the mods and a few mod suckups..... no one on this board is.

That makes no ****ing sense.

As for the question, my answer is "No", I'm not happy about this year's two losses, but I am realistic every year and realize that going undefeated yearly isn't going to happen. It's one thing to expect to be in the national title hunt each year, it's another thing to understand that's not always going to be the case....no matter what team you are a fan of.

[ouflak]

Ok I think it is pretty obvious, after reading the posts on this thread, what needs to happen. There are just too many posters here who have not gone to the Sports Book (http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?24-The-Sports-Book) forum and bet on the games, in particular the OU game (noticing a lot of '500' vCash amounts). If you guys want to have champions here at OU, you've got to BET LIKE CHAMPIONS.

Now go.

GO NOW. (http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?24-The-Sports-Book)

[FtwTxSooner]

2000, Stoops/Oklahoma - Has 2 seasons out of 13 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.
2005, Brown/texass - has 4 seasons out of 14 with 0 or 1 loss, 1 undefeated.



This was rather suprising, didn't realise brown had that many 0 or 1 loss seasons. I guess our **** poor bowl performances scew the results.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

Need to start cheating like everyone else.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'll be thrilled if we end THIS season with 2 losses.

;)of course. esp to beat OA

[rainiersooner]

OU has had some really crap luck. Every team has injuries, but I would venture to guess OU has had more "key" injuries on a year by year basis. Whether it be losing a starting QB (Sam Bradford) or the school's all-time leading scorer (Demarco Murray) or losing 30% of the offensive line just as the season is getting ready to start. Losing a starter isn't a key injury, losing one of your very best starters is. OU has been in the latter category way too often. Another example is Paul Thompson was completely lost without having Malcolm Kelly in the lineup against Boise St.

Fire Schmitty!!!

[StoopTroup]

That makes no ****ing sense.

As for the question, my answer is "No", I'm not happy about this year's two losses, but I am realistic every year and realize that going undefeated yearly isn't going to happen. It's one thing to expect to be in the national title hunt each year, it's another thing to understand that's not always going to be the case....no matter what team you are a fan of.

And....like the Crusader is trying to imply that we have these injuries but I counter that with all Teams have injuries. But when you are a Team like OU that is usually a Top Ten Team every Year and if folks want to argue that...then we will just say Top 25 to get them to STFU. Anyway...we are always in the hunt and Bob's Theory of Win them all and let it play itself out really is the best way to deal with it all. Lose one...you might still be in the hunt. Lose two...you might be very lucky to win your Conference and like they said when I grew up..."It's not about Winning and Losing....it's how you play the Game".

The way I see it....we play the Game pretty darn good.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

And....like the Crusader is trying to imply that we have these injuries but I counter that with all Teams have injuries. But when you are a Team like OU that is usually a Top Ten Team every Year and if folks want to argue that...then we will just say Top 25 to get them to STFU. Anyway...we are always in the hunt and Bob's Theory of Win them all and let it play itself out really is the best way to deal with it all. Lose one...you might still be in the hunt. Lose two...you might be very lucky to win your Conference and like they said when I grew up..."It's not about Winning and Losing....it's how you play the Game".

The way I see it....we play the Game pretty darn good.

So Matt Mauck had a broken hand on his throwing arm? So Boise St. was without their leading rusher and receiver? Florida was without Brandon Spykes and Percy Harvin? All teams don't have the injures that Oklahoma has had when it comes to key game changing players. Alabama's biggest injury this season was to their 3rd freaking leadnig receive in a run orientated offense. Such bad luck for them!

[aero]

Like most, I hate it when we lose any game. I start every year off thinking we have a good shot at winning it all. That first loss is a stinger and a real let down. It makes me wonder how we could have let that one slip away. But I've still got hope we work our way back into the title picture. The second loss is a kick in the gut. There goes most of any hope of a title that year. Now its just to keep winning and finish respectable for next year. I won't talk about the seasons with more than 2 losses. Actually, I was just thinking today that I was glad we have Bob Stoops as our coach. I get mad at losses and, like others, want to blame someone or throw something or move to Montana and live in the wilderness. Stoops is an easy target and being the HC and making the money he makes certainly qualifies him to be. But the reality is he is a pretty damn good coach. A respectable man. Hard to complain about too many things regarding him. And he's respected among his peers and nationally. Likewise, he has kept OU respected nationally. That's because he puts out a good team almost every year, some years really good teams. It's not easy to win NC's. For any team. I like to think Oklahoma produces great football talent and an argument could be made that we do. But probably not enough to yearly fill out our roster. So we need out of state talent. Now being an Okie, I know how great our state is. But I also know that maybe some 18 year old recruits would rather be by the ocean, or where the night life is bouncier, or where the lights shine a little brighter. OU has a great football tradition that is only comparable to a few other schools. That's probably the biggest draw for a recruit. That and the coaching staff and the alumni that may have gone on to play pro ball. That's probably all we have to lure talent. But it's enough that Stoops has been able to get talent to put out the teams he has. Yes, it's easy to dog the coaches and question their calls and schemes and some of it is most likely deserved. But for the most part, it's been pretty good since Stoops has been here. A few bowl games I'd like to forget but... I think next year we may have a shot at winning it all....

[MyT Oklahoma]

The answer is "No.". However, neither Bob, Joe C., Boren or the OU Regents ever ask me for my opinion on the subject so life goes on.

Meanwhile The History of Oklahoma Football Part III is coming out next week and I already ordered two copies. Now I can relive the glory days of the '70's (The Decade of the Sooners) when I sit and watch meltdowns on this board. Is this a great country or what?

[picasso]

The answer is "No.". However, neither Bob, Joe C., Boren or the OU Regents ever ask me for my opinion on the subject so life goes on.

Meanwhile The History of Oklahoma Football Part III is coming out next week and I already ordered two copies. Now I can relive the glory days of the '70's (The Decade of the Sooners) when I sit and watch meltdowns on this board. Is this a great country or what?
The 70's were good times but it's just hard to believe we sometimes lost to teams that we were superior to. Is it too late to fire Switzer?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Best decade-50's. Second best-70's, Then 80's and 2000's, then 60's and lastly the 90's, IMHO. Anything before the 50's is off my radar.

[C&CDean]

It's not even fair to compare current teams with teams from the 50's through 80's. And I'm not talking scholly limits.

What I'm talking is loyalty to the school. A sense of dedication to one's team. A fanbase that was constantly stoked and supportive.

IMO, what's ****ed it all up is the "ME ME ME!!" generation and the media/innerwebs. Today's kids want flashy new Duck/Aggie unis. They want a body all inked up and are only playing cause they think they're gonna go to the NFL. They couldn't give a **** about their school or their fans. At OU, I think Bosworth started the "ME ME ME!!" trend. He was way ahead of his time, cause nowadays, his schtick would be tame.

The whole "I love my good old alma mater" deal is dead. And that's sad.

[BoulderSooner79]

Best decade-50's. Second best-70's, Then 80's and 2000's, then 60's and lastly the 90's, IMHO. Anything before the 50's is off my radar.

The 80's had some good teams, but the SI cover picture of Charles Thompson in an orange jumpsuit was a huge black mark on the program. I'll take Stoops' handling of off field issues over a few wins any day.

[BoulderSooner79]

It's not even fair to compare current teams with teams from the 50's through 80's. And I'm not talking scholly limits.

What I'm talking is loyalty to the school. A sense of dedication to one's team. A fanbase that was constantly stoked and supportive.

IMO, what's ****ed it all up is the "ME ME ME!!" generation and the media/innerwebs. Today's kids want flashy new Duck/Aggie unis. They want a body all inked up and are only playing cause they think they're gonna go to the NFL. They couldn't give a **** about their school or their fans. At OU, I think Bosworth started the "ME ME ME!!" trend. He was way ahead of his time, cause nowadays, his schtick would be tame.

The whole "I love my good old alma mater" deal is dead. And that's sad.

I'm with you, Dean. Bosworth was a cyborg on the field, but his self promotion didn't do the program any good. And people that worship him forget he was dismissed from the team.

[Soonerus]

To some degree, TV has messed up college football for the fans who attend the games... back in the day everything was geared to the 1:30 kickoff time...

[picasso]

And people that worship him forget he was dismissed from the team.
One could say the same about Switzer.

[StoopTroup]

The whole "I love my good old alma mater" deal is dead. And that's sad.

I tend to agree with you about that but maybe the "Good Old Alma Mater" could lighten the hell up.

[StoopTroup]

To some degree, TV has messed up college football for the fans who attend the games... back in the day everything was geared to the 1:30 kickoff time...

Is it TV or the "Good Ole Alma Mater" working to get every damn dime they can from TV? Maybe they ought to tell the TV Folks what time the Game was scheduled for and if they can't cover it....let someone else do it.

[Johnny Utah]

I'm answering the question before this thread gets too off topic. No loss is really OK but they're gonna happen. For me it comes down to how or where OU lost, and how bad the loss was. Obviously losses on the national stage in primetime or BCS Bowls are not good for the perception or reputation of the program.

[SoonerNomad]

Going back to the original question, if it is a simple "are you ok" with with 2 to 3 losses each year, the answer is obviously no. I am actually sad when they lose (and as a 50+ year old that reaction bothers me immensely).

However, if the question is being asked to find out if I (or the other responders) am happy with Coach Stoops and the state of the program, then my answer is a resounding yes.

Here's what I think. Coach Stoops isn't satisfied with 2 to 3 losses each year. Coach Stoops is continuously working on changing things and making adjustments to win conference and national titles.

I am very satisfied with a program that has conference and national titles as their ultimate goal. Even more important, those goals are realistic under the current regime as it has shown in the past. This is not a program on the way down. This is a program that will need to continue to make adjustments (I liked the one above that referred to kick *** defense) and continue to recruit at a high level and continue to stay clean off the field, and will continue to begin each season with a chance to play for conference and national titles.

The losses this year have been tough. I thought both games would be extremely hard and they were. I thought home field would be the difference and it didn't work out. Those two teams have not lossed to anyone else either so they aren't shabby. I was bothered by the lack of physical and mental toughness in those games as evidenced by stupid turnovers and the repeated inability to get the other team off the field on third downs.

These losses, while bad, were much more explainable than the Baylor and Tech losses in 2011. These losses will lead to changes by Coach Stoops that I believe will lead to a better team in the future. One that might lose every once in a while, but will have a chance to compete for national and conference titles.

[C&CDean]

I tend to agree with you about that but maybe the "Good Old Alma Mater" could lighten the hell up.

Missed the point. Remember when lettermen wore letter jackets? Girls wore the sweaters? Pep rallies? Packing a bus and heading to Dallas for the big game? Nowadays? Not so much. It's pure commercial horse****.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The 80's had some good teams, but the SI cover picture of Charles Thompson in an orange jumpsuit was a huge black mark on the program. I'll take Stoops' handling of off field issues over a few wins any day.Good point! I was referring just to football success, and I think the 80's and 2000's are pretty comparable in regard to feetballs only.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm answering the question before this thread gets too off topic. No loss is really OK but they're gonna happen. For me it comes down to how or where OU lost, and how bad the loss was. Obviously losses on the national stage in primetime or BCS Bowls are not good for the perception or reputation of the program.Losing to domer(again) makes my eyes squint!

[8timechamps]

I'm a hell of a lot more "ok" with the losses this year than last year. There's no shame in losing to the #1 and #3 team in the county (in close, hard fought games). It happens to everyone. There is shame in losing to an un-ranked team, at home, that was expected to lose by double digits.

[C&CDean]

I'm a hell of a lot more "ok" with the losses this year than last year. There's no shame in losing to the #1 and #3 team in the county (in close, hard fought games). It happens to everyone. There is shame in losing to an un-ranked team, at home, that was expected to lose by double digits.

Then following it up by allowing orange aggy to bend us over and anally plunge us like we were a bunch of hot ewes.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Then following it up by allowing orange aggy to bend us over and anally plunge us like we were a bunch of hot ewes.They got our Holograms-not the real players. (they had already folded their tents)

[BlownGP]

I'm a hell of a lot more "ok" with the losses this year than last year. There's no shame in losing to the #1 and #3 team in the county (in close, hard fought games). It happens to everyone. There is shame in losing to an un-ranked team, at home, that was expected to lose by double digits.


Then following it up by allowing orange aggy to bend us over and anally plunge us like we were a bunch of hot ewes.


/THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[C&CDean]

/THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fire!!! who?

Well by gawd it has to be somebody...

[Indy Sooner]

So no I'm not happy with the 2-3 loss season's but I'm more concerned with the trajectory of the OU program. This year I have become a little more optimistic about the direction we are heading if not about every game.

Yep.

[Soonerus]

Is there such a thing as a neutral trajectory ???

[SanJoaquinSooner]

big difference between 2 and 3.