What Randy Hughes, Tony Casillas and Spencer Tillman say about Stoops, OU today

[badger]

Interesting read. (http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=708&articleid=20130126_29_B1_WINNIN61022)

Excerpts:


"Last year, last 5-6 games, they were getting run all over by everybody. It was off to the races on every play. Off to the races. It was horrifying."


To me, it looked like they let too many offenses dictate to them what they want to do. Defense, when you're facing a lot of issues with matchups, you've got to force the issue."


"It's not even nepotism. It's just a matter of understanding that you have to have the ability to hold everybody accountable, and there has to be serious consequences if you don't meet that objective,"

[70sooner]

read that yesterday and Tillman cracked me up with this remark.....


Many ex-players express disappointment that Stoops has grown content with sharing the Big 12 title (despite losing to the other co-champs) and just beating Texas.

"Yeah, there's nothing wrong with that," Tillman said. "But who are you getting it against? You're getting it against a Texas team right now that has stage 4 cancer and doesn't realize it.

[Curly Bill]

It'll be interesting to see what the sunshine pumpers have to say about this. Will they come up with that these past players are disillusioned, or is that they are out of touch with the current program?

[badger]

the sunshine pumpers
I'm kinda sunshinish, and when I mentioned this article to NP yesterday, we pretty much agreed on a few things:
1- The OU admin, ath dept and boosters let Stoops do whatever he wants (as far as assistants hiring, recruiting, etc).
2- Stoops is statisfied beating Texas, OSU and winning the Big 12 title (or sharing it) each season.

They are not bad things by themselves. I'd love a national title, but the BCS has gotten too media-driven... and we just aren't winning all the regular season games like we used to.

[8timechamps]

Is this the Hoover article? If so, that's my answer to Curly Bill's question.

To add, things in Norman aren't perfect, but other than Tuscaloosa, are they anywhere? Hoover asks three guys that haven't played in 25+ years what they thought...that's equivalent to asking people here their opinion.

Hoover is a d-bag.

[Curly Bill]

Is this the Hoover article? If so, that's my answer to Curly Bill's question.

To add, things in Norman aren't perfect, but other than Tuscaloosa, are they anywhere? Hoover asks three guys that haven't played in 25+ years what they thought...that's equivalent to asking people here their opinion.

Hoover is a d-bag.

Dang it! I didn't think of your angle! ;)

[8timechamps]

Dang it! I didn't think of your angle! ;)

I'm very original!*








*or not.

[8timechamps]

Pubs need to focus on the economy, and the ol limited government thing.

I'm not getting anywhere btw, I've believed this for a long time now.

Now you're just trying to confuse me! Or, you posted in the wrong thread. Because I can't think of a comeback, that relates to football, that I can use.

[Curly Bill]

Now you're just trying to confuse me! Or, you posted in the wrong thread. Because I can't think of a comeback, that relates to football, that I can use.

Wrong thread and I couldn't delete it fast enough! I don't even know how that post got in this thread? Board gremlins?

[8timechamps]

I don't even know how that post got in this thread? Board gremlins?


Hoover did it!

[Mjcpr]

I'd love a national title, but the BCS has gotten too media-driven...

What does that mean? It's too "media driven" so you'd just prefer not to win one? Or what? :confused:

[tulsaoilerfan]

Is this the Hoover article? If so, that's my answer to Curly Bill's question.

To add, things in Norman aren't perfect, but other than Tuscaloosa, are they anywhere? Hoover asks three guys that haven't played in 25+ years what they thought...that's equivalent to asking people here their opinion.

Hoover is a d-bag.

So i take it you think that 3 guys that played in the NFL have no clue how to evaluate a program?

[8timechamps]

So i take it you think that 3 guys that played in the NFL have no clue how to evaluate a program?

You're putting words into my mouth. I said they are 25+ years removed since they played at OU. I'd take their "evaluation" the same as I would yours.

[agoo758]

This is like the third article in the last several months about former players criticizing the current state of the program, and the third times the mods dismiss them, at the rate this is going they are going to think every former OU player and coach is an idiot by this time next year.

[tulsaoilerfan]

You're putting words into my mouth. I said they are 25+ years removed since they played at OU. I'd take their "evaluation" the same as I would yours.

Honestly that's insulting to them; i have no clue how to evaluate what goes on in the game of football but i bet they have some idea of what is going wrong; give them a little credit

[tulsaoilerfan]

Is this the Hoover article? If so, that's my answer to Curly Bill's question.

To add, things in Norman aren't perfect, but other than Tuscaloosa, are they anywhere? Hoover asks three guys that haven't played in 25+ years what they thought...that's equivalent to asking people here their opinion.

Hoover is a d-bag.

Why is hoover a d-bag? Because he dares to write critical articles about Stoops and the football program? How dare he!!

[8timechamps]

Honestly that's insulting to them; i have no clue how to evaluate what goes on in the game of football but i bet they have some idea of what is going wrong; give them a little credit

Whatever. If you choose to put that much faith into what they say, go for it. I don't.

[8timechamps]

Why is hoover a d-bag? Because he dares to write critical articles about Stoops and the football program? How dare he!!

Hoover is a baby that fells personally insulted at Stoops' snubs. He uses the only "weapon" he has, the newspaper, in a poor attempt to "report". He tries to use his platform to stir the pot. Maybe it works (on people like you?)...to me, it's hack journalism.

Funny, because most of the Sooner info sources I know about (and trust) have never put too much into what former players say/said. Hoover devotes his article to that subject matter.

Here's an idea, interview Mike Stoops and ask what happened this year with the defense...that would be an actual report. But, nah, it's easier to stir up ****. Because Stoops is a big meanie!

[tulsaoilerfan]

Hoover is a baby that fells personally insulted at Stoops' snubs. He uses the only "weapon" he has, the newspaper, in a poor attempt to "report". He tries to use his platform to stir the pot. Maybe it works (on people like you?)...to me, it's hack journalism.

Funny, because most of the Sooner info sources I know about (and trust) have never put too much into what former players say/said. Hoover devotes his article to that subject matter.

Here's an idea, interview Mike Stoops and ask what happened this year with the defense...that would be an actual report. But, nah, it's easier to stir up ****. Because Stoops is a big meanie!

8time its fine if you don't agree with them i just don't understand why you are so quick to dismiss their opinions and lump them in with fans like me and others that post here; it's not just the Switzer guys that have been critical but a few of the Stoops players have had some critical opinions of what is going on in Norman; do you just dismiss what they say also?

[tulsaoilerfan]

Whatever. If you choose to put that much faith into what they say, go for it. I don't.

I put more faith into what they say than what most of the internet fan base has to say; at least they have played the game at its highest level

[Texas Golfer]

The problem with them publicly criticizing Stoops and the program, they are not doing OU any favors. It hurts the program by giving recruits pause for thought.

[SoonerStormchaser]

The problem with them publicly criticizing Stoops and the program, they are not doing OU any favors. It hurts the program by giving recruits pause for thought.

Personally, I have no problem with that. They need to stop and think about a. where can they get a great education and b. where do they have the best chance to succeed. If that's not OU, then so be it...best of luck to you!

[picasso]

It's not like these quotes are enlightening or some kind of revelation from a former football playing oracle.

Anybody could see our defense collapsed.

[badger]

This is like the third article in the last several months about former players criticizing the current state of the program, and the third times the mods dismiss them, at the rate this is going they are going to think every former OU player and coach is an idiot by this time next year.

Don't confuse me for a mod --- I just update vBookie, that's all.


What does that mean? It's too "media driven" so you'd just prefer not to win one? Or what?

I mean that unless we win them all like we used to, I would not expect the media to vote us (or lobby, or whatever the hell they do every year to get the SEC on top) into the BCS-driven national title game. Ever. At all. Hell, this new playoff format is probably just an excuse to get a 4-team SEC playoff to determine the SEC championship... or national title. I forget which is which anymore. **** :mad:

[FaninAma]

The problem with them publicly criticizing Stoops and the program, they are not doing OU any favors. It hurts the program by giving recruits pause for thought.

Not as much as giving up a gazillion yards on defense and being embarrassed in the Cotton Bowl.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Some guys(spencer tillman) I have high regard for their opinion..Some guys(damien mackey) i do not..

[OUNASH]

Wasnt it former players who complained in the early 80's about Switzer and see how that turned out. It actually lit a fire under Switzer and his staff and they went on to win the National Title in 1985.

[cleller]

OU still fields a good team, but we all got a fast taste of dominance in 2000, that doesn't come along too often. Then the plunder of the coaching staff started in.

[SoonerorLater]

Is this the Hoover article? If so, that's my answer to Curly Bill's question.

To add, things in Norman aren't perfect, but other than Tuscaloosa, are they anywhere? Hoover asks three guys that haven't played in 25+ years what they thought...that's equivalent to asking people here their opinion.

Hoover is a d-bag.

If this were just an isolated case of three malcontents then I would agree. It isn't. The list of former OU players that have been critical of the Stoops regime is getting longer all the time.

You are correct things are going pretty darn good in Tuscaloosa. A decade ago we beat Alabama back to back. Now we don't belong on the same field as those guys. They would absolutely crush OU. What's happened that Alabama would come so far and we would fall so far? There is no comparison between the talent level of these two teams. Obviously OU is doing something wrong or this wouldn't be happening.

Give Alabama credit they were not going to accept mediocrity. They refused to accept anything less than a national championship contender and it paid off.

[Fraggle145]

If this were just an isolated case of three malcontents then I would agree. It isn't. The list of former OU players that have been critical of the Stoops regime is getting longer all the time.

You are correct things are going pretty darn good in Tuscaloosa. A decade ago we beat Alabama back to back. Now we don't belong on the same field as those guys. They would absolutely crush OU. What's happened that Alabama would come so far and we would fall so far? There is no comparison between the talent level of these two teams. Obviously OU is doing something wrong or this wouldn't be happening.

Give Alabama credit they were not going to accept mediocrity. They refused to accept anything less than a national championship contender and it paid off.

Agree that Hoover is a Poke shill. And a d-bag. But he can't put words in these guys mouths. These guys are basically just giving a mouthpiece to the fans. Coming from someone out of the program that is respected like Tillman it gives the words more meaning than us just whining to each other on a message board.

[Midtowner]

I'm not willing to judge Stoops until the new staff has had a chance to really get things going re personnel.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

"It's not even nepotism. It's just a matter of understanding that you have to have the ability to hold everybody accountable, and there has to be serious consequences if you don't meet that objective,"

This has been my issue as well..

[badger]

Agree that Hoover is a Poke shill. And a d-bag. But he can't put words in these guys mouths. These guys are basically just giving a mouthpiece to the fans. Coming from someone out of the program that is respected like Tillman it gives the words more meaning than us just whining to each other on a message board.

I know that Hoover and Stoops may have some differences (I think it was OU-Texas postgame that Stoops called one of Hoover's questions or points "stupid" into the microphone for everyone to see/hear) but I agree that this is our former players talking here, not Hoover. If you didn't check out the link, all three were in Tulsa because TPS just started a hall of fame and all three are from Tulsa Public Schools. So, it's not like he ran down a big list of ex-players to see who he could get to say something bad.

I hate to admit this, but personally, until I have more invested personally in this program than the place that my degree came from and the team I watch on TV every Saturday in the fall, I'm satisfied with Big 12 titles and beating our in-state and Red River rivals each year. I'd love more, but I'm not going to lose sleep if we don't get there.

[OkieThunderLion]

Counter-productive. Unless you are trying to get rid of the coach.

[SoonerorLater]

Counter-productive. Unless you are trying to get rid of the coach.

Bingo

[King Crimson]

football is exactly the same today as when we ran the Okie 5-2 and ran the wishbone. maybe we should hire a former OU player from the 80's to coach OU. worked out pretty well last time with John Blake.


Colorado did it with Jon Embree. he won 3 game in 2 seasons. the 70's and 80's are gone. time of possession, scoring, it's all different now.

the switzer d's were giving up 9-15 points a game on D because there are fewer possessions, clock doesn't stop on run plays...etc. it's foolish to hold today's game against the past. game is much longer these days. more downs to play.

i love tony c, spencer, etc....but c'mon.

about 95% of NCAA teams would love to have Bob Stoops. and yes, we should be and are that 5%. that's who we are.....Spencer played on an 8 win and 9 win Switzer team his FR and SO. maybe we should have fired Barry? year before that he only won 7.

[Texas Golfer]

If averaging 10.4 wins a year and winning the conference title 2/3 if the time is mediocre, I'll take mediocrity every year.

[8timechamps]

8time its fine if you don't agree with them i just don't understand why you are so quick to dismiss their opinions and lump them in with fans like me and others that post here; it's not just the Switzer guys that have been critical but a few of the Stoops players have had some critical opinions of what is going on in Norman; do you just dismiss what they say also?

I pretty much dimiss them. Maybe that's not the right word, but I just can't imagine a guy that hasn't been in the program for that long his anymore insight than most of the fans. Now, if a recent player were to come out and address specific areas, I would certainly not dismiss that.

Here's the thing, I am not pretending that things are perfect, everyone saw the defense last year, there's no way to say it didn't happen. What I am saying is that just because these guys once played at OU (a long time ago) doesn't mean they're right.

[8timechamps]

This is like the third article in the last several months about former players criticizing the current state of the program, and the third times the mods dismiss them, at the rate this is going they are going to think every former OU player and coach is an idiot by this time next year.

This is the dumbest post you've made in a while. So, we can't have opinions because we are mods? Or maybe there's a big mod conspiracy to brainwash the fans...yeah, that's it!

[8timechamps]

If this were just an isolated case of three malcontents then I would agree. It isn't. The list of former OU players that have been critical of the Stoops regime is getting longer all the time.

You are correct things are going pretty darn good in Tuscaloosa. A decade ago we beat Alabama back to back. Now we don't belong on the same field as those guys. They would absolutely crush OU. What's happened that Alabama would come so far and we would fall so far? There is no comparison between the talent level of these two teams. Obviously OU is doing something wrong or this wouldn't be happening.

Give Alabama credit they were not going to accept mediocrity. They refused to accept anything less than a national championship contender and it paid off.

Fair enough, but I don't think Alabama's rise has anything to do with OU. It has to do with getting rid of a horrible string of horrible coaches. I have faith that OU will return to the national title soon, it's only been 4 years since OU last played for it all. It's not like tons of teams can say that on a regular basis.

[8timechamps]

This has been my issue as well..

I will admit that I don't dismiss Spencer's opinion, but that's because he is still active in college football. However, I can't help but think "what does that even mean?", what are the consequences if they don't meet their objective? Don't you think Stoops is doing everything possible to get back to the top?

[King Crimson]

as far as that Bama series....as comparison...we needed a trick play fake punt Micheal Thompson run and Jason White deep ball to Clayton to beat those guys in Tuscaloosa. and we need Renaldo Works miracle run and Eric Bassey fumble return.

not like we were killing those guys anyway back in the day.

[Johnny Utah]

Fair enough, but I don't think Alabama's rise has anything to do with OU. It has to do with getting rid of a horrible string of horrible coaches. I have faith that OU will return to the national title soon, it's only been 4 years since OU last played for it all. It's not like tons of teams can say that on a regular basis.


as far as that Bama series....as comparison...we needed a trick play fake punt Micheal Thompson run and Jason White deep ball to Clayton to beat those guys in Tuscaloosa. and we need Renaldo Works miracle run and Eric Bassey fumble return.

not like we were killing those guys anyway back in the day.

... and that was also during Bama's "horrible string of horrible coaches" :friendly_wink:

[Curly Bill]

I will admit that I don't dismiss Spencer's opinion, but that's because he is still active in college football. However, I can't help but think "what does that even mean?", what are the consequences if they don't meet their objective? Don't you think Stoops is doing everything possible to get back to the top?


Kinda questionable actually. I think he's more interested in surrounding himself with people he likes, and once surrounded by em, hanging onto em regardless of results.

[Curly Bill]

It's still shocking actually that BV is gone! Of course Bob didn't actually run him off, but brought his brother back, causing BV to understandably bolt for somewhere else.

[jkjsooner]

as far as that Bama series....as comparison...we needed a trick play fake punt Micheal Thompson run and Jason White deep ball to Clayton to beat those guys in Tuscaloosa. and we need Renaldo Works miracle run and Eric Bassey fumble return.

not like we were killing those guys anyway back in the day.

Your descriptions of those games is misleading at best.

In 2002 we lost our future Heisman winning QB early in the game. Even with White out we had a huge lead at half. There's no doubt in my mind that had White stayed healthy we would have won that game easily.

And in 2003 we were completely shutting Bama down and we had the lead when we faked the punt. Saying we needed the fake field goal is terribly misleading. In fact, Stoops felt like he could take that risk because 1) Bama was retreating and 2) our defense was dominating them.

It's possible that Bama could have won had we punted away to them but considering how the game played out and how great our defense played all night I just don't think that would have been the case.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I will admit that I don't dismiss Spencer's opinion, but that's because he is still active in college football. However, I can't help but think "what does that even mean?", what are the consequences if they don't meet their objective? Don't you think Stoops is doing everything possible to get back to the top?

The consequences at other places is losing your job...Now my question is this..He hired basically a staff of child hood buddies/relatives..Do you think he would fire any of them? Or do you think he would ever feel it is necessary?...I've heard him say numerous times they've been outcoached..What would it take for him say enough is enough? I'm not saying he needs to fire anyone, but what would it take? He is a very confident person, I can see him saying year after year, "The players need to execute better and we'll try again next year."

I always lean more to the execution side than the coaching side..And I've heard him say and lots of fans(including myself) we don't have the same talent that we used to...But does this mean for us to win against good teams, we have to have more talent than the other side because we are not going to outcoach them?

Anyway back to the topic at hand, the reason I was against the kish/mike hiring was because it puts him and OU in a bad position if things don't work..

[8timechamps]

... and that was also during Bama's "horrible string of horrible coaches" :friendly_wink:

Are you arguing that Bama had a great coach in that period?

[8timechamps]

The consequences at other places is losing your job...Now my question is this..He hired basically a staff of child hood buddies/relatives..Do you think he would fire any of them? Or do you think he would ever feel it is necessary?...I've heard him say numerous times they've been outcoached..What would it take for him say enough is enough? I'm not saying he needs to fire anyone, but what would it take? He is a very confident person, I can see him saying year after year, "The players need to execute better and we'll try again next year."

I always lean more to the execution side than the coaching side..And I've heard him say and lots of fans(including myself) we don't have the same talent that we used to...But does this mean for us to win against good teams, we have to have more talent than the other side because we are not going to outcoach them?

Anyway back to the topic at hand, the reason I was against the kish/mike hiring was because if it puts him and OU in a bad position if things don't work..

As for those consequences, coaches have been fired. I guess that leaves only one consequence...

Which leads into me next response, I didn't think of it that way (when Mike/Kish) were hired, but it does put Stoops in a corner if OU doesn't get back to the title game soon. At some point, Stoops could say enough is enough, or "I don't need this" (pressure) and call it quits. Anything's possible.

[LakeRat]

If averaging 10.4 wins a year and winning the conference title 2/3 if the time is mediocre, I'll take mediocrity every year.

10 wins isn't the same as what it was when you only played 10-11 games a year. Bob won 76.9 % of his games this year and a Co-championship. That is mediocre for us and great if your an aggy. I am not an aggy and not ok with mediocre.

8time, why does it matter who quoted the sources? Are you saying that he misled misprinted or misquoted? If they said it, and others have said similar stuff, we need to take a look. We aren't two years away from a nc run, we aren't 3 years, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. I am a sooner, b/c in the 70's my dad fell in love with the attitude of The King. "People don't know what it means to be a champion, Oklahoma invented it." My dad instilled into me that attitude.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. We don't have the "no excuses, win the big XII" attitude anymore. My reasoning is that where did Stoops come out and say he is upset with the results of last year? Maybe I missed that.

[jkjsooner]

The consequences at other places is losing your job...Now my question is this..He hired basically a staff of child hood buddies/relatives..Do you think he would fire any of them? Or do you think he would ever feel it is necessary?...I've heard him say numerous times they've been outcoached..What would it take for him say enough is enough?

Stoops says he's been outcoached because he believes in taking responsibility for losses. Don't read more into those statements than that.

And as far as being outcoached, I'd dare say that in every game one coach has a better game plan than the other. That doesn't always mean that coach won the game nor does it mean that the other coach came in unprepared. In some cases it just means that one team had some unexpected wrinkles that the other team didn't expect or they were able to gameplan to take advantage of some of the opposition's weaknesses.

You can't expect Stoops to win the coaching battle every single week can you? Switzer didn't. Saban doesn't.

[Johnny Utah]

Are you arguing that Bama had a great coach in that period?

Not in the least (plenty else we could argue about) ... I bolded your post for emphasis.

[8timechamps]

Not in the least (plenty else we could argue about) ... I bolded your post for emphasis.

I realized what your point was, I was just giving you ****. It's an easy argument to say "well, if Bama had a string of bad coaches, and OU escaped with a win, what does that say?"....kind of a softball, I don't blame you for hitting it out of the park :)

[SoonerorLater]

10 wins isn't the same as what it was when you only played 10-11 games a year. Bob won 76.9 % of his games this year and a Co-championship. That is mediocre for us and great if your an aggy. I am not an aggy and not ok with mediocre.

8time, why does it matter who quoted the sources? Are you saying that he misled misprinted or misquoted? If they said it, and others have said similar stuff, we need to take a look. We aren't two years away from a nc run, we aren't 3 years, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. I am a sooner, b/c in the 70's my dad fell in love with the attitude of The King. "People don't know what it means to be a champion, Oklahoma invented it." My dad instilled into me that attitude.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. We don't have the "no excuses, win the big XII" attitude anymore. My reasoning is that where did Stoops come out and say he is upset with the results of last year? Maybe I missed that.

I agree. If we aren't mediocre we sure are trending that way. Since the 2005 season we are winning at about a 76-77% clip. This year was very representative of that number. I use 2005 because to me that marked a turning point in the program after the USC loss. I hear about the 10 win seasons when people talk about Stoops record. What I don't hear is about the 3+ loss seasons we have been having. Since 2005 we haven't ran the table. We haven't even had a one loss season in 8 years. Only twice have we had as few as 2 losses.

The part that is the most troubling is when I listen to Bob Stoops there just just doesn't seem to be a fire or a sense of great urgency in his tone. Let me ask anybody who fully supports Bob Stoops this, At this point is Bob Stoops coaching tenure looking more like Nick Saban or more like Mack Brown?

[8timechamps]

8time, why does it matter who quoted the sources? Are you saying that he misled misprinted or misquoted? If they said it, and others have said similar stuff, we need to take a look. We aren't two years away from a nc run, we aren't 3 years, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. I am a sooner, b/c in the 70's my dad fell in love with the attitude of The King. "People don't know what it means to be a champion, Oklahoma invented it." My dad instilled into me that attitude.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. We don't have the "no excuses, win the big XII" attitude anymore. My reasoning is that where did Stoops come out and say he is upset with the results of last year? Maybe I missed that.

No, I'm not saying that Hoover misprinted/misquoted, what I am saying is that Hoover does whatever he can to stir things up. If you haven't followed Hoover's writing, you should go back and read some of his stuff. I'm not sure what happened between Hoover and Stoops, but it's no secret that Stoops can't stand Hoover (and I'm assuming from his writing, Hoover isn't fond of Stoops). Anyway, that's kind of a sidenote to what I'm saying;

There are issues in the program, anyone with eyeballs that tuned in to the last 3 or 4 games knows that. What's the point of quoting what former players think? I mean really, what is the point? To stir the pot. Whether you put a lot of faith into what the former players have to say, or none at all, what does it have to do with the defensive let down the past two years? Not much in my opinion.

As I said in an earlier post, since it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see what's not working, why wouldn't Hoover sit down with Mike Stoops or even Kish and address specifics? I think that would actually be reporting something.

I'll add that I think we are closer to a title run than you believe.

[SoonerorLater]

No, I'm not saying that Hoover misprinted/misquoted, what I am saying is that Hoover does whatever he can to stir things up. If you haven't followed Hoover's writing, you should go back and read some of his stuff. I'm not sure what happened between Hoover and Stoops, but it's no secret that Stoops can't stand Hoover (and I'm assuming from his writing, Hoover isn't fond of Stoops). Anyway, that's kind of a sidenote to what I'm saying;

There are issues in the program, anyone with eyeballs that tuned in to the last 3 or 4 games knows that. What's the point of quoting what former players think? I mean really, what is the point? To stir the pot. Whether you put a lot of faith into what the former players have to say, or none at all, what does it have to do with the defensive let down the past two years? Not much in my opinion.

As I said in an earlier post, since it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see what's not working, why wouldn't Hoover sit down with Mike Stoops or even Kish and address specifics? I think that would actually be reporting something.

I'll add that I think we are closer to a title run than you believe.

I'm not trying to defend John Hoover but I think maybe you are looking at this in the wrong way. You are looking at it from the perspective of an OU Fan and how Hoover could handle it in a constructive way for the OU Football Program.

From Hoover's perspective Hughes, Casillas and Tillman speaking out IS the story. As a reporter Hoover's job isn't supposed to be about helping OU. Stirring the pot is what the press is supposed to do. He will probably take a swipe at Stoops whenever he can. I'm sure we will be hearing a lot more of this kind of stuff until Stoops rights the ship. Winning championships muzzles critics.

[LakeRat]

No, I'm not saying that Hoover misprinted/misquoted, what I am saying is that Hoover does whatever he can to stir things up. If you haven't followed Hoover's writing, you should go back and read some of his stuff. I'm not sure what happened between Hoover and Stoops, but it's no secret that Stoops can't stand Hoover (and I'm assuming from his writing, Hoover isn't fond of Stoops). Anyway, that's kind of a sidenote to what I'm saying;

There are issues in the program, anyone with eyeballs that tuned in to the last 3 or 4 games knows that. What's the point of quoting what former players think? I mean really, what is the point? To stir the pot. Whether you put a lot of faith into what the former players have to say, or none at all, what does it have to do with the defensive let down the past two years? Not much in my opinion.

As I said in an earlier post, since it doesn't take a brain surgeon to see what's not working, why wouldn't Hoover sit down with Mike Stoops or even Kish and address specifics? I think that would actually be reporting something.

I'll add that I think we are closer to a title run than you believe.

If Stoops doesn't like him, why would he, have or let, any of his assistants sit down and do an interview. Why not do a cup cake inteview and talk about winning 10 wins and co championships?

That is the pattern that I am seeing. I am not an expert. I don't believe that Stoops should be fired. I do believe the program is not as strong as it was 10 years ago. That is my concern.

[8timechamps]

I'm not trying to defend John Hoover but I think maybe you are looking at this in the wrong way. You are looking at it from the perspective of an OU Fan and how Hoover could handle it in a constructive way for the OU Football Program.

From Hoover's perspective Hughes, Casillas and Tillman speaking out IS the story. As a reporter Hoover's job isn't supposed to be about helping OU. Stirring the pot is what the press is supposed to do. He will probably take a swipe at Stoops whenever he can. I'm sure we will be hearing a lot more of this kind of stuff until Stoops rights the ship. Winning championships muzzles critics.

Yeah, that's probably the case. I know I'm looking at it from an unbiased perspective, so I probably am harder on Hoover than a non-OU would be. I can't help it, I've got the sickness.

[8timechamps]

If Stoops doesn't like him, why would he, have or let, any of his assistants sit down and do an interview. Why not do a cup cake inteview and talk about winning 10 wins and co championships?

That is the pattern that I am seeing. I am not an expert. I don't believe that Stoops should be fired. I do believe the program is not as strong as it was 10 years ago. That is my concern.

At this point, I agree that Stoops wouldn't let Hoover near his coaches. In fact, Stoops recently had a media luncheon, which he does every post season, and Hoover didn't get an invite (wonder why?).

Other than being embarrassed by A&M, this season went about the way I expected it would. I wasn't expecting a national championship run, and I was expecting some losses. So, things seem where they should be, however, I do expect a better year next year than most, so my opinions could change if next year is worse than I expect.

[King Crimson]

Your descriptions of those games is misleading at best.

In 2002 we lost our future Heisman winning QB early in the game. Even with White out we had a huge lead at half. There's no doubt in my mind that had White stayed healthy we would have won that game easily.

And in 2003 we were completely shutting Bama down and we had the lead when we faked the punt. Saying we needed the fake field goal is terribly misleading. In fact, Stoops felt like he could take that risk because 1) Bama was retreating and 2) our defense was dominating them.

It's possible that Bama could have won had we punted away to them but considering how the game played out and how great our defense played all night I just don't think that would have been the case.

i believe it was 7-7 or 14-7 when we faked the punt. White throws a deep ball to Clayton on the next play. not sure which fake FG you are talking about. we win in Tuscaloosa by 7 i'd say that was a legit game changing score for us in a tight game. if you want to press the semantics of "need"...so be it. if you are going to tell me i'm wrong about something, at least get your own stuff straight.

Jason gets hurt again in the game against Bama in Norman....sure.

[tulsaoilerfan]

Yeah, that's probably the case. I know I'm looking at it from an unbiased perspective, so I probably am harder on Hoover than a non-OU would be. I can't help it, I've got the sickness.

Hoover probably does go overboard at times, but he seems to be the only local media guy that doesn't kiss Bob's ***; most of the media around here seem way too afraid to say anything critical about OU or Bob

[Sabanball]

Spencer, as usual, nails it.

[Wishboned]

i believe it was 7-7 or 14-7 when we faked the punt. White throws a deep ball to Clayton on the next play. not sure which fake FG you are talking about. we win in Tuscaloosa by 7 i'd say that was a legit game changing score for us in a tight game. if you want to press the semantics of "need"...so be it. if you are going to tell me i'm wrong about something, at least get your own stuff straight.

Jason gets hurt again in the game against Bama in Norman....sure.

It was 13-10 at the time. Final score was 20-13


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuePqhjmpNA

[King Crimson]

td pass to brandon jones.

[jkjsooner]

i believe it was 7-7 or 14-7 when we faked the punt. White throws a deep ball to Clayton on the next play. not sure which fake FG you are talking about. .... if you are going to tell me i'm wrong about something, at least get your own stuff straight.

Being an *** doesn't make your point any more valid. I mistakenly typed "field goal" in one place. Big f'ing deal. I clearly knew what I was talking about.

The fact is we had a 13-10 lead when we faked the punt and we ended up winning by 7. I'd dare say with the way that game was going we win it 8 of 10 times even if we punt away.

We didn't fake the punt out of desperation. Stoops said their defense was not playing a potential fake and decided to make them pay.

Sorry. I don't take too kindly when a fellow Sooner acts as if we were lucky to win a game we dominated from start to finish.

[aurorasooner]

Spencer, as usual, nails it.Seems to me that Bob's got a pretty plush job (and compensation) now, and he obviously deserves it*the way he resurrected our program back in the early 2000s and the way he has represented OU in a quality manner by not only immediately cutting problem players loose for dumb-azz cheet, (ie Bomar) or putting them on probation for the whole year but also by always representing OU and his bosses quite well (except at some of his post-game pressers with the press, certainly not nearly as good as Barry here, imo).
I've often thought that he was rather lucky especially winning a NC so early in his head coaching career and also having quality assistant coaches who were excellent on-the-field coaches, who were also top-notch recruiters and who were more than willing to put in the hours both on and off the field and come in and coach under him from a program that was so close to Norman. Now I think he's positioned himself between a rock and a hard spot by hiring some assistants who feel ""entitled to earn quality money with huge perks even though they are not producing at a high level on the field with their in-game adjustments or off the field with their recruiting efforts and game planning preparation. (Last season could easily have been 7-5 or 8-4 instead of 10-2 except for some huge luck [and LJ] imo).
I just don't think he's got the stones to lay down the law to some of his assistants who are pulling in between 200 thou and 1.5 mil a year (with plenty of perks) that aren't getting the whole job done as say a Saban or Meyer would. We'll see, but on this present doom and gloom course (as some of our former players and some of our posters seem to feel it is), things may get rather ""sticky for him if that on-the-field luck somehow changes (such as on the field total embarrassements by the whorns and Stool State in the same year similar to what we received in the Cotton Bowl from the Gomers, along with 3 or 4 other losses) and he actually wants to stick with coaching instead of retiring at such an early age and living life on the beach or the golf course, or going to another program and trying to rebuild it w/o the help of youth and without any of those original quality assistant coaches.
The next couple of years will be interesting for Sooner football, imo, especially with all the University has invested in their Network and also with Fox.

(*that is if any football coach derserves to compensated at 3,4 or 5 mil a year plus perks, and some assistants being compensated at 1 mil or more/yr, but that appears to be what they are getting paid, and some produce less than average results from year to year.)

[Texas Golfer]

Those who feel that 10.4 wins a year and a conference championship are not satisfying, are doomed to be unhappy. I find satisfaction in those numbers and they leave room for improvement which would elate me and I like to be elated. But, if I need elation numbers to merely be satisfied, I'm doomed for disappointment. I, personally, choose not to intentionally set myself up for disappointment and unhappiness.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So i take it you think that 3 guys that played in the NFL have no clue how to evaluate a program?or, that they aren't loyal Sooner fans? I'm as wary of Hoover's motivations as anybody, but one has to wonder about our progress as a team, especially on defense.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

OU still fields a good team, but we all got a fast taste of dominance in 2000, that doesn't come along too often. Then the plunder of the coaching staff started in.If there's a problem that Bob hasn't addressed too well, seems to me he could be shoring up the coaching staff better than he has. Recruiting is always an important consideration, as well.

[StoopTroup]

It's still shocking actually that BV is gone! Of course Bob didn't actually run him off, but brought his brother back, causing BV to understandably bolt for somewhere else.

The beauty of the entire move is that Bob doubled what he was paying Mike. I'm betting that didn't set to well with Brent. One more year of Defense like we had this year and Bob might be offering Brent Two Million to come back.

[Socrefbek]

You're putting words into my mouth. I said they are 25+ years removed since they played at OU. I'd take their "evaluation" the same as I would yours.

Just a hunch, but I think they might be a bit more qualified to comment than anyone that posts on this board

[Socrefbek]

Those who feel that 10.4 wins a year and a conference championship are not satisfying, are doomed to be unhappy. I find satisfaction in those numbers and they leave room for improvement which would elate me and I like to be elated. But, if I need elation numbers to merely be satisfied, I'm doomed for disappointment. I, personally, choose not to intentionally set myself up for disappointment and unhappiness.

The Big XII is weak sauce right now. I don't think 10 wins and tying for the title is all that impressive

[Johnny Utah]

I realized what your point was, I was just giving you ****. It's an easy argument to say "well, if Bama had a string of bad coaches, and OU escaped with a win, what does that say?"....kind of a softball, I don't blame you for hitting it out of the park :)

Thanks ... probably more like a ground rule double :smile:

[One4OU]

Those who feel that 10.4 wins a year and a conference championship are not satisfying, are doomed to be unhappy. I find satisfaction in those numbers and they leave room for improvement which would elate me and I like to be elated. But, if I need elation numbers to merely be satisfied, I'm doomed for disappointment. I, personally, choose not to intentionally set myself up for disappointment and unhappiness.

The Big XII is weak sauce right now. I don't think 10 wins and tying for the title is all that impressive

^^^^^This^^^^

Conference is a weak as ever...and we are right in the middle. KState, OState, Baylor, an you can pick at least one road game and its a coin flip if we win. Each year we are slipping a little bit more.

[hvhurricane]

If anybody thinks Stoops is going to let one of his assistants do an interview and get into the X's and O's, as well as getting into why the team failed in certain areas, they are fooling themselves. That will never happen. It will always be about "execution" and patting himself on the back for a great season.

[SoonerorLater]

Those who feel that 10.4 wins a year and a conference championship are not satisfying, are doomed to be unhappy. I find satisfaction in those numbers and they leave room for improvement which would elate me and I like to be elated. But, if I need elation numbers to merely be satisfied, I'm doomed for disappointment. I, personally, choose not to intentionally set myself up for disappointment and unhappiness.



Averaging 10 wins a year would be great if we were playing 11-12 games a year. Playing 13-14 not so great. Since the downturn began (2005) we average 10.25 wins and 3.125 losses per year - a .766 winning percentage. If you're Clemson or Va Tech pretty good. For OU not so good. If you only win 3/4 of your games in college football you are not considered dominant. Good, yes. Dominant, no. I want for OU to be dominant. Unquestionably dominant.

I guess for some people 10 wins is good enough. I am not one of them.

[badger]

Texas seemed to hang their oversized cowboy hat on the fact that they had a 10-win season streak going for a long time. Then 5-7 happened.

So, I like that there are those that are fired up over 10 wins not being good enough. I'm just not that emotionally (or any means) invested in the football program anymore. I'd be more upset if the team had growing off-field issues than on-field ones. Just me, more power to you that feel differently.

[TFSooner]

Isn't Hoover the reporter that questioned this team's toughness early in the year and got Stoops' dander up? And after the Texas game, didn't Stoops come right out and state why would anyone question his team's toughness after that great win?

In retrospect, I think Hoover's opinion of this team's toughness was more accurate than Stoops'. Beating Texas this year and claiming to be tough as a result is not all that impressive. And this team's talent level too.

[Curly Bill]

Seems this Hoover guy has a pulpit from which to say the same things many fans have been saying, but because he has that pulpit what he says gets more attention than what one of us posters might say, and thus he's got ol Bob all riled-up. That sound about right?

[badger]

Bob has been an equal opportunity question hater though --- he was just as upset with Hoover's questions as the call-in show's questions (until they ended taking call-in questions, heh)

[8timechamps]

If anybody thinks Stoops is going to let one of his assistants do an interview and get into the X's and O's, as well as getting into why the team failed in certain areas, they are fooling themselves. That will never happen. It will always be about "execution" and patting himself on the back for a great season.

Does the coordinator's doing an interview after every game, and once a week count? Consider me foolish.

[8timechamps]

Just a hunch, but I think they might be a bit more qualified to comment than anyone that posts on this board

How do you figure? As I mentioned in a previous post, I put more faith into Spencer's analysis, because he's actively involved with college football, but the other two, what makes them more qualified to address the current state of the program?

[One4OU]

Why are we debating who is qualified and who isnt to draw a conclusion as what the missing link is with this team?

Its obvious that there are things that are just not right with this team. Anyone who has watched OU football for the last 30 years can tell.

Things that seems to be of concern for the longtime fan:

Defense is being gashed almost every game, lack of pressure upfront, lack of turnovers, and lack of physicalilty.

Offense has some great players but something is a miss and Heupel does not seem to adjust to the game or know how to exploit or find the mismatch. We keep hearing how good Millard is or a TE is but we fail to utilize them even after coaches bring up the subject that they plan to do so.

Recruiting has fallen off from years past, stars or no stars we have an issue in finding linebackers and linemen. Attrition rate is awful, we have issues evaluating character and keeping players on the team and it very well might be a development issue. How many kickers were on scholly at one time? 4?

We cant make halftime or game adjustments while we watch the other team do it to us.

Players and and coaches dont seem to have the enthusiastic fire that other teams have.

We have consistently collapsed in bowl games.

Stoops possibly has a loyalty issues with making coaching changes that are needed to improve a weakness.

While these maybe true or untrue this is the perceived perception by many of us. It doesnt take an expert to draw simplistic comparisons from watching 30 or more years of OU football to make comparisons.

Heck I think I saw more progress made by the 1999 team than I have by any team in the last three years. As the season goes on I expect to see improvement but the last couple of years I dont really see that much improvement as a team.

[picasso]

Yeah, it's a frickin' joke someone implied that Hoover's opinion of the team was better than Stoops. You goobers actually think Stoops wasn't trying to get them to play harder? If he called the team out then some of you whinebags would say he was throwing them under the bus. I honestly think hv wants a politician rather than a football coach.

I've heard Hoover on the radio and he has a certain tone when he discusses the Sooners.

[Texas Golfer]

The Big XII is weak sauce right now. I don't think 10 wins and tying for the title is all that impressive

By most counts, the Bi XII was the second best conference behind the SEC and the best conference top to bottom.

[Texas Golfer]

Averaging 10 wins a year would be great if we were playing 11-12 games a year. Playing 13-14 not so great. Since the downturn began (2005) we average 10.25 wins and 3.125 losses per year - a .766 winning percentage. If you're Clemson or Va Tech pretty good. For OU not so good. If you only win 3/4 of your games in college football you are not considered dominant. Good, yes. Dominant, no. I want for OU to be dominant. Unquestionably dominant.

I guess for some people 10 wins is good enough. I am not one of them.

Since Stoops arrived, no team has won more games than OU. So, perhaps it's not the lack of wins that bothers some fans but the lack of national championships.

[Harry Beanbag]

Averaging 10 wins a year would be great if we were playing 11-12 games a year. Playing 13-14 not so great. Since the downturn began (2005) we average 10.25 wins and 3.125 losses per year - a .766 winning percentage. If you're Clemson or Va Tech pretty good. For OU not so good. If you only win 3/4 of your games in college football you are not considered dominant. Good, yes. Dominant, no. I want for OU to be dominant. Unquestionably dominant.

I guess for some people 10 wins is good enough. I am not one of them.


Wow, I'm usually as critical of the program in its current state as anyone, but perhaps you just expect too much. OU's all-time winning percentage of .718 says "Hi!".

Virginia Tech .609
Clemson .594

[PrideMom]

I think one of the problems is that OU keeps losing its assistant coaches and has to constantly replace them. In 2000, all of the coaches were new and hungry.......

[cleller]

By most counts, the Bi XII was the second best conference behind the SEC and the best conference top to bottom.

There were discussing this on the Sports Animal recently. Al Jerkens pointed out that lots of people are overlooking Ohio State's unbeaten season for the Big 10, and that the Big 12 only has two teams that are big time programs year in and out.
Also, Florida, Bama, LSU, and A&M could probably beat every team in the Big 12 right now. Ole Miss is even on the comeback trail.

Once the chains are off Urban Meyer, the Big 10 is going to get much more attention.

[Mjcpr]

There were discussing this on the Sports Animal recently. Al Jerkens pointed out that lots of people are overlooking Ohio State's unbeaten season for the Big 10, and that the Big 12 only has two teams that are big time programs year in and out.
Also, Florida, Bama, LSU, and A&M could probably beat every team in the Big 12 right now. Ole Miss is even on the comeback trail.

Once the chains are off Urban Meyer, the Big 10 is going to get much more attention.

I agree. And the two "big time" programs are not exactly giant killers these days either.

[One4OU]

Averaging 10 wins a year would be great if we were playing 11-12 games a year. Playing 13-14 not so great. Since the downturn began (2005) we average 10.25 wins and 3.125 losses per year - a .766 winning percentage. If you're Clemson or Va Tech pretty good. For OU not so good. If you only win 3/4 of your games in college football you are not considered dominant. Good, yes. Dominant, no. I want for OU to be dominant. Unquestionably dominant.

I guess for some people 10 wins is good enough. I am not one of them.

Since Stoops arrived, no team has won more games than OU. So, perhaps it's not the lack of wins that bothers some fans but the lack of national championships.


I think it is a lack of quality wins lately and how we are performing overall as a team. If beating osu and texas is the measuring stick, then right now that is lowering our standards. We have gone from dominating osu to wondering if we can win in stoolwater. Not good.

I dont have a problem with losing but when you are losing because you are playing like crap that is much different than losing and knowing you played a great game.

[SoonerorLater]

Wow, I'm usually as critical of the program in its current state as anyone, but perhaps you just expect too much. OU's all-time winning percentage of .718 says "Hi!".

Virginia Tech .609
Clemson .594

In this case I'm talking about since 2005 because that is IMO when things started to slide. Yes OU win % is .718 but that includes the pre WWII days all the way back to the leather helmets when Teddy Roosevelt was president. Better example is since WWII. Since 1946 OU's win % is .76285. In other words Bob Stoops over the last 8 years is almost a mirror image of the "average" OU team. Yes it includes Bud and Barry but it also includes Blake, Howard and Gomer Jones.

A comparison

Bud's last 8 years -- .74096
Barry's last 8 years -- .78125
Bob's 8 years -- .76636

So when the two most successful coaches in OU history had a record like Bob has now they were gone. That is why these 10-3 type seasons just don't cut it. even legendary coaches like Bud and Barry with six national championships between them couldn't survive average or ordinary very long at OU.

[One4OU]

Wow, I'm usually as critical of the program in its current state as anyone, but perhaps you just expect too much. OU's all-time winning percentage of .718 says "Hi!".

Virginia Tech .609
Clemson .594

In this case I'm talking about since 2005 because that is IMO when things started to slide. Yes OU win % is .718 but that includes the pre WWII days all the way back to the leather helmets when Teddy Roosevelt was president. Better example is since WWII. Since 1946 OU's win % is .76285. In other words Bob Stoops over the last 8 years is almost a mirror image of the "average" OU team. Yes it includes Bud and Barry but it also includes Blake, Howard and Gomer Jones.

A comparison

Bud's last 8 years -- .74096
Barry's last 8 years -- .78125
Bob's 8 years -- .76636

So when the two most successful coaches in OU history had a record like Bob has now they were gone. That is why these 10-3 type seasons just don't cut it. even legendary coaches like Bud and Barry with six national championships between them couldn't survive average or ordinary very long at OU.


The number of games per season should also be a factor when looking at these %'s.

A 76% win percentage playing 13 or 14 games a year vs 78% playing 10 or 11.

[usmc-sooner]

In this case I'm talking about since 2005 because that is IMO when things started to slide. Yes OU win % is .718 but that includes the pre WWII days all the way back to the leather helmets when Teddy Roosevelt was president. Better example is since WWII. Since 1946 OU's win % is .76285. In other words Bob Stoops over the last 8 years is almost a mirror image of the "average" OU team. Yes it includes Bud and Barry but it also includes Blake, Howard and Gomer Jones.

A comparison

Bud's last 8 years -- .74096
Barry's last 8 years -- .78125
Bob's 8 years -- .76636

So when the two most successful coaches in OU history had a record like Bob has now they were gone. That is why these 10-3 type seasons just don't cut it. even legendary coaches like Bud and Barry with six national championships between them couldn't survive average or ordinary very long at OU.

Switzer's winning % had nothing to do with why he was let go.

[One4OU]

Switzer's winning % had nothing to do with why he was let go.[/QUOTE]


I would agree but an average season and the heat was on from fans, public, and admin unlike Stoops.

[SoonerorLater]

Switzer's winning % had nothing to do with why he was let go.

If Barry was say 11-1 with a good bowl win in 1988 He would have been there the next year even with the off field problems. He was on the hot seat in the early 80's.

[Harry Beanbag]

If Barry was say 11-1 with a good bowl win in 1988 He would have been there the next year even with the off field problems. He was on the hot seat in the early 80's.

Not sure if serious.

[Harry Beanbag]

In this case I'm talking about since 2005 because that is IMO when things started to slide. Yes OU win % is .718 but that includes the pre WWII days all the way back to the leather helmets when Teddy Roosevelt was president. Better example is since WWII. Since 1946 OU's win % is .76285. In other words Bob Stoops over the last 8 years is almost a mirror image of the "average" OU team. Yes it includes Bud and Barry but it also includes Blake, Howard and Gomer Jones.

A comparison

Bud's last 8 years -- .74096
Barry's last 8 years -- .78125
Bob's 8 years -- .76636

So when the two most successful coaches in OU history had a record like Bob has now they were gone. That is why these 10-3 type seasons just don't cut it. even legendary coaches like Bud and Barry with six national championships between them couldn't survive average or ordinary very long at OU.


WTF are you talking about? Like I said before, you are expecting way too much from your comfy BarcaLounger.

[SoonerorLater]

WTF are you talking about? Like I said before, you are expecting way too much from your comfy BarcaLounger.

I'll tell you "WTF" I'm talking about. You may think I'm expecting too much. You may not expect as much. So be it if that's the way you think. I don't. As for my comfy Barcalounger. Not sure what your point is. I expect a great meal from my comfy seat at the restuarant too, even though I have no part in preparing the meal. Same with my house, car, job and everything else in life. So if your pleased or at least tolerant of what you see on the field these days that's great. If you think going 10-3 and playing WAC style football circa 1990's is satisfactory, good. I don't, never will and as I read it, there are a lot of long time fans, ticket holders and former players that agree.

[jkjsooner]

If Barry was say 11-1 with a good bowl win in 1988 He would have been there the next year even with the off field problems. He was on the hot seat in the early 80's.

Whether or not our mediocre season in '88 had any role in Switzer's dismissal is debatable. I doubt it did because we were expected to be down that year. In either case had that been the only issue there isn't a chance in heck Switzer would have been let go. Since as of right now we only have on the field issues your point is moot.

How about this. If our QB sells coke to the Feds, we go on probation, have a gang rape involving three players, and have one player shoot another I'll start taking your criticism of Stoops seriously.

[Harry Beanbag]

I'll tell you "WTF" I'm talking about. You may think I'm expecting too much. You may not expect as much. So be it if that's the way you think. I don't. As for my comfy Barcalounger. Not sure what your point is. I expect a great meal from my comfy seat at the restuarant too, even though I have no part in preparing the meal. Same with my house, car, job and everything else in life. So if your pleased or at least tolerant of what you see on the field these days that's great. If you think going 10-3 and playing WAC style football circa 1990's is satisfactory, good. I don't, never will and as I read it, there are a lot of long time fans, ticket holders and former players that agree.


I never said I was satisfied with the program right now, far from it. Our offensive scheme sucks, our defensive scheme is a disaster, and our talent level is definitely not up to OU standards. I'm upset about OU basically having no chance to win against really good teams and at best a 50-50 shot against equally talented teams not named Texas. If all you care about is records, 10-3 this season was awesome. OU was fortunate to not have 2 or 3 more losses.

Back to your weird rant about Stoops only being average over the last cherry picked 8 seasons. Look at your math again:

OU all-time win %: .718
Stoops last 8 years: .766 82-25 record

If Stoops was merely OU average: .718 77-30 (and I rounded up)

-Barry was forced to resign, maybe you aren't old enough to remember what was going on then.
-Bud had a 3-6 and 5-5 season in there and left to go into politics. I have no idea if there was heat on him or not.

Bob Stoops can go 10-3 every year until he retires. In the process he will continue to raise OU's all time winning percentage every single year. You do know that 10-3 equates to .769, right? That is higher than Michigan and Notre Dame's all time % by a wide margin.

Do I want championships? Of course I do. But for every undefeated season there are 4 or 5 loss seasons, that's how you get your all time percentage. It's an average you know, which Stoops is well above.

[jkjsooner]

I'll tell you "WTF" I'm talking about. You may think I'm expecting too much. You may not expect as much. So be it if that's the way you think. I don't. As for my comfy Barcalounger. Not sure what your point is. I expect a great meal from my comfy seat at the restuarant too, even though I have no part in preparing the meal. Same with my house, car, job and everything else in life. So if your pleased or at least tolerant of what you see on the field these days that's great. If you think going 10-3 and playing WAC style football circa 1990's is satisfactory, good. I don't, never will and as I read it, there are a lot of long time fans, ticket holders and former players that agree.

It's okay to want better but you have to really think about whether your expectations are realistic. It's not realistic to think that we're not going to have 3 loss seasons or we're going to win national titles every 5 years. It's not realistic for us and it's not realistic for Bama.

But even more than that, I don't want people like you bringing down our program. I don't want to run off a good coach because I've seen plenty of teams make that mistake thinking that they'll get the next Lombardi and pay the price.

[Harry Beanbag]

Jesus, some of you guys are ****ing spoiled rotten. Switzer was 9-3 his last season. 9-3, with all 3 losses to top 10 teams. Championship season? No, but they all can't be.

He lost to Nebraska 7-3 in horrendous conditions where his coke-selling QB broke his leg. He lost the bowl game 13-6 with a legendary QB that could barely walk. That season's results had less than zero to do with being forced to resign.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'll tell you "WTF" I'm talking about. You may think I'm expecting too much. You may not expect as much. So be it if that's the way you think. I don't. As for my comfy Barcalounger. Not sure what your point is. I expect a great meal from my comfy seat at the restuarant too, even though I have no part in preparing the meal. Same with my house, car, job and everything else in life. So if your pleased or at least tolerant of what you see on the field these days that's great. If you think going 10-3 and playing WAC style football circa 1990's is satisfactory, good. I don't, never will and as I read it, there are a lot of long time fans, ticket holders and former players that agree.Yeah, we get it. I go back to first hand enjoyment of Bud's teams...but, so what. not much we can do except not show up for games, like what happened with Blake, and prolly Gibbs.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

"-Barry was forced to resign, maybe you aren't old enough to remember what was going on then.
-Bud had a 3-6 and 5-5 season in there and left to go into politics. I have no idea if there was heat on him or not." -Harrybeanbag

It seemed to me Bud wasn't being pressured, at least not much. i have read that he just got tired of recruiting, and that spells disaster. Darrel Royal had built a juggernaught at the cows, and, as we know, he was a good coach, as well as recruiter.

It at least appeared that Bud wanted politics, instead of coaching. The fans, as I remember, were really disappointed with Bud's apparent giving up on coaching, and didn't GAS if he was a senator or not. So, he lost to some democrat. Later, he went into tv college football announcing, and I thought he did well in tv.(his OU coach' show had been a big hit in OK)

[SoonerorLater]

I never said I was satisfied with the program right now, far from it. Our offensive scheme sucks, our defensive scheme is a disaster, and our talent level is definitely not up to OU standards. I'm upset about OU basically having no chance to win against really good teams and at best a 50-50 shot against equally talented teams not named Texas. If all you care about is records, 10-3 this season was awesome. OU was fortunate to not have 2 or 3 more losses.

Back to your weird rant about Stoops only being average over the last cherry picked 8 seasons. Look at your math again:

OU all-time win %: .718
Stoops last 8 years: .766 82-25 record

If Stoops was merely OU average: .718 77-30 (and I rounded up)

-Barry was forced to resign, maybe you aren't old enough to remember what was going on then.
-Bud had a 3-6 and 5-5 season in there and left to go into politics. I have no idea if there was heat on him or not.

Bob Stoops can go 10-3 every year until he retires. In the process he will continue to raise OU's all time winning percentage every single year. You do know that 10-3 equates to .769, right? That is higher than Michigan and Notre Dame's all time % by a wide margin.

Do I want championships? Of course I do. But for every undefeated season there are 4 or 5 loss seasons, that's how you get your all time percentage. It's an average you know, which Stoops is well above.

Harry your dancing around and not correlating the numbers I gave to the reason I gave. The point in all of this is that our two best coaches in history had their best days in the front of their tenure at OU. Bud did have those seasons you said but his last years were 8-3 and 8-2 certainly higher than that .718 winning % that you seems to think is pretty good. Very few fans at the time really thought those two years were anything special. It was clear for whatever reason Bud wasn't as focused as he once was and the results reflected that. Barry, same thing to a lesser extent. His dominant teams were at the front end even though he found a second wind. The 1988 program was beset by off field problems and they limped through a bowl game with Clemson. Yes they did lose to three ranked teams that year the only ranked teams they played with exception of maybe OSU. This clearly wasn't like the 1970's OU teams. With the NCAA hanging over his head coupled with the off field issues that was it for Barry even with 3 national championships. Though like Bud after 16 years things pile up and Barry just wasn't on the top of his game any longer.

A HC can only last so long at a high level. It's important to start the replacement process before the decline is too great or complacency set in. I don't know if Stoops is at that point. My feeling is he probably is.

[SoonerorLater]

"-Barry was forced to resign, maybe you aren't old enough to remember what was going on then.
-Bud had a 3-6 and 5-5 season in there and left to go into politics. I have no idea if there was heat on him or not." -Harrybeanbag

It seemed to me Bud wasn't being pressured, at least not much. i have read that he just got tired of recruiting, and that spells disaster. Darrel Royal had built a juggernaught at the cows, and, as we know, he was a good coach, as well as recruiter.

It at least appeared that Bud wanted politics, instead of coaching. The fans, as I remember, were really disappointed with Bud's apparent giving up on coaching, and didn't GAS if he was a senator or not. So, he lost to some democrat. Later, he went into tv college football announcing, and I thought he did well in tv.(his OU coach' show had been a big hit in OK)

Yes Bud just sort of lost the fire. It's just almost impossible to keep it going for a long period of time. It was quite a surprise when he lost the Senate race to Fred Harris in 1964.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Yes Bud just sort of lost the fire. It's just almost impossible to keep it going for a long period of time. It was quite a surprise when he lost the Senate race to Fred Harris in 1964.Seemed to me the people of OK were basically punishing Bud for letting OU football slide.

[jkjsooner]

Barry, same thing to a lesser extent. His dominant teams were at the front end even though he found a second wind. The 1988 program was beset by off field problems and they limped through a bowl game with Clemson. Yes they did lose to three ranked teams that year the only ranked teams they played with exception of maybe OSU. This clearly wasn't like the 1970's OU teams.

If you're holding Barry to the standard set in the '70s then you expect way too much.

Switzer was 33-3 in '85-'87 and their only losses were to outsanding Miami teams. (Miami of '85 wasn't as good as the others. We knew about Testeverde but the team was unranked and sort of surprised us.) We graduated a bunch of guys and our team was expected to struggle in '88.

Had it not been for the probation and coaching change, I think OU would have kept rolling in the early '90s. There's nothing to suggest otherwise. The cupboard wasn't bare when Gibbs took over (before the probation effects and negative recruiting affects took over).

If you think Barry's tenure didn't finish strong (on the field) then I don't know what to say. I'm sorry we didn't beat Miami but I don't think any team of today except maybe Bama could beat them.

[jkjsooner]

Seemed to me the people of OK were basically punishing Bud for letting OU football slide.

Wasn't around so I don't know but it always astonishes me when guys are held accountable to the standard that they (and only they) created. It's not like we were winning national championships before Bud took over.

I understand the criticism of Switzer and Stoops. They didn't create the monster.

[hvhurricane]

As usual, Spencer hits the nail on the head. He is the very best communicator ever from an ex player standpoint. He is extremely intelligent and has a great understanding of college football. Nobody I have seen has ever done a better job of explaining the role of the head coach at OU. He needs to run it as a CEO would at any publicly traded company and, right now, Bob is not a very good CEO.

TC did a very good job of explaining the defensive problems at OU. When you don't have the talen to dominate the other team then you have to take chances. You don't go into a 4-0-7 shell and pee all over yourself. You take chances to dictate the game.

[aurorasooner]

As usual, Spencer hits the nail on the head. He is the very best communicator ever from an ex player standpoint. He is extrem When you don't have the talen to dominate the other team then you have to take chances. You don't go into a 4-0-7 shell and pee all over yourself. You take chances to dictate the game. I thought the D took the chances with the 4-0-7. Mike didn't know that WVU offense was going make our D look pathetic on national TV, but at least he took a chance with it. (even though it sucked).
We knew our O was going to have to score a lot of points to win the last 4 games, as our D was obviously below average. The O did it against WVU, OSU, and TCU against a very good D, and we got very lucky in all 3 games. I don't know what our offense and our offensive coaches were smoking at halftime of the Cotton Bowl game to have all those 3 and outs and score zero points in the 2nd half, but it must have been some good cheet. Seems to me that our D at least tried something different. I just didn't see our offense do anything different except, as you say, pee all over themselves, in the 2nd half against aTm, which obviously put our below average D in a ridiculous position. It was just pitiful.

[StoopTroup]

I like all 3 of the players Hoover spoke with. I think they made many of the same scenarios I've heard from posters here and on other boards as well as in the media. For me....there is little to see here. Tony, Spencer and Randy are all still relevant because of the successes they had as players and what they have done beyond playing. None have had to fill Bob's shoes though.

Everything they said Bob needed to do has been done at one time or another. He got Coaches HC Jobs, Players drafted in the NFL which will do more for recruiting than anything else. He has nearly doubled the number of Heisman Trophy Winners and was in complete control of the Big XII until other Universities began to bail do to his monopoly of the Conference. Even K-State brought back Snyder to try and get their School back in the hunt. Not one in our Conference can hold a candle to what Bob has done while at OU.

Bob definitely needs to somehow find a way to make every good change on Offense, Defense, Special Teams and The Coaching Staff all come together at the same time...however, that's as easy as being undefeated then keeping your entire Conference HAPPY that it's okay if Saban/Alabama continues to rule the SEC for 5 or 6 years straight. Just wait....if Saban keeps this up....The SEC will have the same problems The Big XII has had and Bama will see their fans and Ex-players all scratching their Skulls for answers just like Hoover and his Trio.

[hvhurricane]

I thought the D took the chances with the 4-0-7. Mike didn't know that WVU offense was going make our D look pathetic on national TV, but at least he took a chance with it. (even though it sucked).
We knew our O was going to have to score a lot of points to win the last 4 games, as our D was obviously below average. The O did it against WVU, OSU, and TCU against a very good D, and we got very lucky in all 3 games. I don't know what our offense and our offensive coaches were smoking at halftime of the Cotton Bowl game to have all those 3 and outs and score zero points in the 2nd half, but it must have been some good cheet. Seems to me that our D at least tried something different. I just didn't see our offense do anything different except, as you say, pee all over themselves, in the 2nd half against aTm, which obviously put our below average D in a ridiculous position. It was just pitiful.


By taking chances on defense, as TC stated, you need to put more people in the box and sell out a little more. I don't think putting 7 DB's in the game is taking chances. They were trying to keep everything in front of them and they failed. Of course, we have run the same blitz schemes for about 10 years now, so I think the other teams have figured those out by now.

[cvsooner]

Yes Bud just sort of lost the fire. It's just almost impossible to keep it going for a long period of time. It was quite a surprise when he lost the Senate race to Fred Harris in 1964.

It wasn't that much of a surprise, really. At the time of the election it could have gone either way. A valid statement could be made that the surprise was that Wilkinson did as well as he did, being a Republican and all. Oklahoma was classic Southern Democrat in those heady days of the '60s, don't forget, as in Dixiecrats.

[MyT Oklahoma]

Jesus, some of you guys are ****ing spoiled rotten. Switzer was 9-3 his last season. 9-3, with all 3 losses to top 10 teams. Championship season? No, but they all can't be.

He lost to Nebraska 7-3 in horrendous conditions where his coke-selling QB broke his leg. He lost the bowl game 13-6 with a legendary QB that could barely walk. That season's results had less than zero to do with being forced to resign.

Hey we should have still won that Bugeater game and also beaten Clemson in our bowl game. However, I still love The King. He was and still is one of a kind.

[MyT Oklahoma]

It wasn't that much of a surprise, really. At the time of the election it could have gone either way. A valid statement could be made that the surprise was that Wilkinson did as well as he did, being a Republican and all. Oklahoma was classic Southern Democrat in those heady days of the '60s, don't forget, as in Dixiecrats.

Hey 1964 was a democrat tidal wave election starting with LBJ over Goldwater. And 1964 was also one of only two times straight lace GOP Kansas went democrat in a Presidential election. Bud should have run as a democrat that year. LOL

Besides Oklahoma is hardly much of a democrat state today as it once was in 1964.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

It wasn't that much of a surprise, really. At the time of the election it could have gone either way. A valid statement could be made that the surprise was that Wilkinson did as well as he did, being a Republican and all. Oklahoma was classic Southern Democrat in those heady days of the '60s, don't forget, as in Dixiecrats.a goodly number of the voters were orange aggy and Tulsa fans, too. Probably their most ardent fans wouldn't have cared that Wilkinson wasn't a statist.

[tulsaoilerfan]

Pretty sure Bud also changed his political party if im not mistaken

[texaspokieokie]

Pretty sure Bud also changed his political party if im not mistaken

This is true. I think that hurt him.

[badger]

good offseason discussion everyone :)

I also wonder what the future of the sec holds with bammer and saban in what seems like complete (deer antler spray-assisted) control.

This is the only conference where teams chant the conference name instead of its own, so will the other 13 (yes, thirteen) teams be happy chanting sec forever if its only bammer winning football championships after awhile?

I know that lsu, aubie and gata have all tasted crystal (meth) football lately, but fans tend to have short memories and impatiience.