Defense could be better in 2014 from espn

[Mazeppa]

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/77560/walker-moore-impress-on-ous-scout-team

[ObiKaTony]

No brainer there: ou's d has gotten better daily, monthly, and yearly under Mike...

[swardboy]

Carp...espin is saying it. Can't be true.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

No brainer there: ou's d has gotten better daily, monthly, and yearly under Mike...I hope he sticks around this time, and is OK with the paltry sum he receives as DC.

[ObiKaTony]

I hope he sticks around this time, and is OK with the paltry sum he receives as DC.

Some guys like to be coordinator (dick lebeuo) come to mind. Mike is awesome, and I want to thank and congratulate all those that knew this would happen, including myself. I recall calling the sports animal (my first mistake) and telling Traber that we are underachieving under V and of course I got hung up on. I recall reading Here I wasnt a fan, and that I needed to calm down blah blah blah...Well, we are looking pretty damn smart now.

Mike will stay for quite awhile...

[SoonerInFortSmith]

I hope he sticks around this time, and is OK with the paltry sum he receives as DC.

Some guys like to be coordinator (dick lebeuo) come to mind. Mike is awesome, and I want to thank and congratulate all those that knew this would happen, including myself. I recall calling the sports animal (my first mistake) and telling Traber that we are underachieving under V and of course I got hung up on. I recall reading Here I wasnt a fan, and that I needed to calm down blah blah blah...Well, we are looking pretty damn smart now.

Mike will stay for quite awhile...

Don't blow out your shoulder there.

[ObiKaTony]

Don't blow out your shoulder there.

But I have 2...

[SoonerInFortSmith]

But I have 2...

Well at least make sure its not your throwing shoulder.

[ObiKaTony]

Well at least make sure its not your throwing shoulder.

If I were to blow it out, I heard Bradford has a good recomendation...

[SoonerInFortSmith]

If I were to blow it out, I heard Bradford has a good recomendation...

Guess it doesn't really matter if we run the zone read.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

I can get on board here. I like V. I think he is a hell of a coach. I think Mike is more aggressive and he brings an edge to the defense that V didn't. It's fun seeing the shifting and constant stunts that Mike calls. Now if we only had some linebackers...

[Breadburner]

The shoulder exchange made me chuckle......

[ObiKaTony]

Guess it doesn't really matter if we run the zone read.

Shovel pass?

[BoomerJack]

Mike will stay for quite awhile...

Do you think he'll stay after Bob retires or leaves? Will he be named HC?

[dennis580]

Do you think he'll stay after Bob retires or leaves? Will he be named HC?

IF he is still around yea Mike will be the next HC, but I doubt Mike stays that long unless he is named in HC in waiting. Basically he has to have assurances that he will be the next HC after Bob leaves otherwise he will probably leave before Bob retires.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

No brainer there: ou's d has gotten better daily, monthly, and yearly under Mike...

screw facts, it sounds good.

[Our D was much worse at the end of last season than at the start]

[yermom]

was it worse, or did everyone just figure out where we were weak?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

screw facts, it sounds good.

[Our D was much worse at the end of last season than at the start]It's amazing and very curious, how Mike seemed to be inept last year, and has gone back to being the talented DC that we thought he was back during his first stint at OU.

[SoonerorLater]

Are we really better on defense than under BV? Most people's gut level is that we are and we didn't have those multiple losses where we give up over 40 points which is always kind of an embarrassment.

Devil's Advocate argument for discussion. In general we have criticized the SEC because their offenses made the defenses look better. Were we worse under BV in 2011 than we are now or did we lose in decisive fashion because we had some of the best QB / offensive play in the Big 12 in the 2011 season? Is M Stoops defense really better or is it because fans enjoy an aggressive style of play and the offenses we faced this year weren't as dynamic by in large? The best offense we faced we did give up over 40 points.

My take is that we are better but not as much as the consensus around here.

[yermom]

our 2009 defense was pretty good. we really need another superstar DT.

i do like Chuka a lot though

[picasso]

Are we really better on defense than under BV? Most people's gut level is that we are and we didn't have those multiple losses where we give up over 40 points which is always kind of an embarrassment.

Devil's Advocate argument for discussioen. In general we have criticized the SEC because their offenses made the defenses look better. Were we worse under BV in 2011 than we are now or did we lose in decisive fashion because we had some of the best QB / offensive play in the Big 12 in the 2011 season? Is M Stoops defense really better or is it because fans enjoy an aggressive style of play and the offenses we faced this year weren't as dynamic by in large? The best offense we faced we did give up over 40 points.

My take is that we are better but not as much as the consensus around here.
You're as good as your last game. We held poke to 24, at home.

[SoonerForLife92]

was it worse, or did everyone just figure out where we were weak?

This. I feel like Mike does more with less, at least talent wise this year. Hopefully it's not just because of the lack of really quality big 12 qbs like we have seen in the past.

[yermom]

You're as good as your last game. We held poke to 24, at home.

that last 7 was a little too easy though!

i still can't believe we won that game.

[Salt City Sooner]

Some guys like to be coordinator (dick lebeuo) come to mind. Mike is awesome, and I want to thank and congratulate all those that knew this would happen, including myself. I recall calling the sports animal (my first mistake) and telling Traber that we are underachieving under V and of course I got hung up on. I recall reading Here I wasnt a fan, and that I needed to calm down blah blah blah...Well, we are looking pretty damn smart now.

Mike will stay for quite awhile...
I strongly suspect that the reason LeBeau likes being a coordinator is that he was an abject failure as a head coach. He actually had a worse winning percentage than David Shula & trust me, as a 30+ year Bengal fan, that's saying something. DLB has found his niche, has stuck to it, & is headed for Canton because of it. Good for him (even if it was predominantly for Pittsburgh :mad: )

[ObiKaTony]

Fact- we are ranked number one in the big 12 year 2 of mike ...

Fact- we were ranked towards the bottom for several years under V in the big 12

Fact- mike has improved the D, the numbers are staggering...

[ObiKaTony]

screw facts, it sounds good.

[Our D was much worse at the end of last season than at the start]


Are you void of all facts, or can you not deduce them...?


The d has gotten better through recruiting, numbers, and fundemntals after mike took over crap...seriously?!

[CatfishSooner]

That goal line stand vs oswho was awesome!!!

D is gettin pretty salty....next year should be even better

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Fact

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

3 lowest years in Total Defense

9th - 1999
4th - 2010
4th - 2012

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=1514232

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Are you void of all facts, or can you not deduce them...?


The d has gotten better through recruiting, numbers, and fundemntals after mike took over crap...seriously?!

We had exactly 2 starters on the defense that have been recruited since Mike got here. I guess I can give you the point since Sanchez is phenomenal but don't make it out like this isn't predominantly BV's personnel.

[ObiKaTony]

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

3 lowest years in Total Defense

9th - 1999
4th - 2010
4th - 2012

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=1514232

Do you know what irony is? Here is an example. You telling me I don't know how to apply facts, and you negotiate with yourself your own set of facts that aren't really facts...
http://m.soonersports.com/mobile/ViewArticle.dbml?atclid=208803400&DB_MENU_ID=&SPSID=&SPID=&DB_OEM_ID=31000

The 2003 Sooners' defense under Stoops ranked No. 3 nationally in total defense, No. 2 in pass defense, No. 5 in scoring defense, No. 5 in turnover margin and No. 20 in rushing defense.

In 2002, OU was No. 6 nationally in scoring defense, No. 9 in pass efficiency defense, No. 10 in total defense, No. 14 in rushing defense and No. 25 in passing defense.

In 2001, OU ranked No. 4 nationally in scoring and total defense, No. 5 in pass efficiency defense, No. 10 in takeaways, No. 7 in rushing defense and No. 11 in passing defense.

The 2000 Oklahoma defense was No. 2 in pass efficiency defense, No. 5 in turnovers gained, No. 7 in scoring defense, No. 8 in total defense, No. 9 in passing defense and No. 23 in rushing defense.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Fact- we are ranked number one in the big 12 year 2 of mike ...

Fact- we were ranked towards the bottom for several years under V in the big 12

Fact- mike has improved the D, the numbers are staggering...

Please note "we were ranked towards the bottom for several years under V in the big 12".

I then pointed out that you were incorrect to which you then replied with this:


Do you know what irony is? Here is an example. You telling me I don't know how to apply facts, and you negotiate with yourself your own set of facts that aren't really facts...
http://m.soonersports.com/mobile/ViewArticle.dbml?atclid=208803400&DB_MENU_ID=&SPSID=&SPID=&DB_OEM_ID=31000

The 2003 Sooners' defense under Stoops ranked No. 3 nationally in total defense, No. 2 in pass defense, No. 5 in scoring defense, No. 5 in turnover margin and No. 20 in rushing defense.

In 2002, OU was No. 6 nationally in scoring defense, No. 9 in pass efficiency defense, No. 10 in total defense, No. 14 in rushing defense and No. 25 in passing defense.

In 2001, OU ranked No. 4 nationally in scoring and total defense, No. 5 in pass efficiency defense, No. 10 in takeaways, No. 7 in rushing defense and No. 11 in passing defense.

The 2000 Oklahoma defense was No. 2 in pass efficiency defense, No. 5 in turnovers gained, No. 7 in scoring defense, No. 8 in total defense, No. 9 in passing defense and No. 23 in rushing defense.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with your "facts".

The defense has improved (mainly in rush defense which was absolutely atrocious this year it is just bad) but we are not going to be a top tier team until we start generating more turnovers (we are currently #61 in takeaways)

[ObiKaTony]

What the hell are you talking about?

Under V we were ranked in the 60's in total d several times...

[ObiKaTony]

Your facts are wrong dude...

You said, '3 lowest years...'the facts proved otherwise. In fact, it was the exact opposite.

[ObiKaTony]

Doesn't matter, only a person completely ignorant of football or venebles mother would suggest mikes hasn't turned this thing around...

Good night sir.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

What the hell are you talking about?

Under V we were ranked in the 60's in total d several times...

So now we are moving from "Big 12" to "NCAA". Truly you have a dizzying intellect...

2012 (mike) - 64
2011 - 55
2010 - 53
2009 - 8
2008 - 63
2007 - 26

I don't have comparative stats for 2006 and 2005 but we were #1 in the big 12 in 2006 and #3 by 3 ypg in 2005 so I imagine we were in the 20's both years.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Your facts are wrong dude...

You said, '3 lowest years...'the facts proved otherwise. In fact, it was the exact opposite.

So you are saying that the big 12 conference site is wrong? That they made up the stats just to prove you wrong?

[ObiKaTony]

I really don't even know what your point is at this time...

Are you saying venebles or mike is better?

[ObiKaTony]

So you are saying that the big 12 conference site is wrong? That they made up the stats just to prove you wrong?

I'm saying you cannot relate the facts to your point, you are rambling on, and you aren't making any sense. You site something, and your statement doesn't coincide with the facts...

[JLEW1818]

What if OU doesn't drive to win the game against the Pokes? Pokes just gutted Mike's D the series before.

Yes if's and buts

[picasso]

What if OU doesn't drive to win the game against the Pokes? Pokes just gutted Mike's D the series before.

Yes if's and buts

So in that scenario you would have put that loss on the defense?
24 points? Brilliant.

[OU_Sooners75]

So now we are moving from "Big 12" to "NCAA". Truly you have a dizzying intellect...

2012 (mike) - 64
2011 - 55
2010 - 53
2009 - 8
2008 - 63
2007 - 26

I don't have comparative stats for 2006 and 2005 but we were #1 in the big 12 in 2006 and #3 by 3 ypg in 2005 so I imagine we were in the 20's both years.

Dude, to even suggest BV it's anywhere close to Mike is as ignorant as it gets!

Who gives a crap about conference rankings when it comes to stats...lol

Rankings for total defense:

2012: 43 (378.3 ypg) MS first year back.
2011: 64 (383.2 ypg)
2010: 60 (363.9 ypg)
2009: 7 (272.5 ypg)
2008: 65 (359.1 ypg)
2007: 20 (324.0 ypg)
2006: 18 (280.6 ypg)
2005: 17 (304.8 ypg)
2004: 9 (280.2 ypg) BV first year as DC
2003: 1 (255.6 ypg) MS last year as DC
2002: can't find
2001: can't find
2000: can't find
1999: 39 (344.4 ypg) MS first year at OU.

Stats from 2003-2012 are from Yahoo sports.
1999 stats from ncaa.
Ncaa database not working for years after 1999 for whatever reasons.

As one can see, BV presided over 3 of the 5 worst defensive seasons at OU under Bob Stoops.
Also as you can tell, the other two are in the shoulders of Mike Stoops. But both those years came as a first year DC at OU.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I really don't even know what your point is at this time...

Are you saying venebles or mike is better?

That depends on talent composition - if we have great players Mike is better because he can use the Jedi Mind Trick. I have never seen a coordinator who can consistently get the other team to bash themselves silly against our play makers like he can. His system is also very inexperienced player friendly as evidenced by the sheer number of players with zero game experience that have done well in his systems.

Venables D was predicated on overall talent level and experience especially at safety. This is why it was so up and down from year to year - it took 1 year in the system making mistakes before you got good in it. It was also absolutely killed by early entrants (see 2008 where we had 2).

One final note about both of them -> neither one of them have proven that they can recruit worth a crap into their systems. When Mike was here last time he recruited a single solitary corner in his first year and then didn't have a single corner recruit pan out after that. We ended up having WRs and RBs playing corner by the time he was done.

[OU_Sooners75]

So now we are moving from "Big 12" to "NCAA". Truly you have a dizzying intellect...

2012 (mike) - 64
2011 - 55
2010 - 53
2009 - 8
2008 - 63
2007 - 26

I don't have comparative stats for 2006 and 2005 but we were #1 in the big 12 in 2006 and #3 by 3 ypg in 2005 so I imagine we were in the 20's both years.

Where are you getting these numbers?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Dude, to even suggest BV it's anywhere close to Mike is as ignorant as it gets!

Who gives a crap about conference rankings when it comes to stats...lol

Rankings for total defense:

2012: 43 (378.3 ypg) MS first year back.
2011: 64 (383.2 ypg)
2010: 60 (363.9 ypg)
2009: 7 (272.5 ypg)
2008: 65 (359.1 ypg)
2007: 20 (324.0 ypg)
2006: 18 (280.6 ypg)
2005: 17 (304.8 ypg)
2004: 9 (280.2 ypg) BV first year as DC
2003: 1 (255.6 ypg) MS last year as DC
2002: can't find
2001: can't find
2000: can't find
1999: 39 (344.4 ypg) MS first year at OU.

Stats from 2003-2012 are from Yahoo sports.
1999 stats from ncaa.
Ncaa database not working for years after 1999 for whatever reasons.

As one can see, BV presided over 3 of the 5 worst defensive seasons at OU under Bob Stoops.
Also as you can tell, the other two are in the shoulders of Mike Stoops. But both those years came as a first year DC at OU.

http://web1.ncaa.org/football/exec/rankingSummary?org=522&year=2011&week=20

I don't think Yahoo is counting the bowl games

[OU_Sooners75]

That depends on talent composition - if we have great players Mike is better because he can use the Jedi Mind Trick. I have never seen a coordinator who can consistently get the other team to bash themselves silly against our play makers like he can. His system is also very inexperienced player friendly as evidenced by the sheer number of players with zero game experience that have done well in his systems.

Venables D was predicated on overall talent level and experience especially at safety. This is why it was so up and down from year to year - it took 1 year in the system making mistakes before you got good in it. It was also absolutely killed by early entrants (see 2008 where we had 2).

One final note about both of them -> neither one of them have proven that they can recruit worth a crap into their systems. When Mike was here last time he recruited a single solitary corner in his first year and then didn't have a single corner recruit pan out after that. We ended up having WRs and RBs playing corner by the time he was done.

This is the biggest line of bull sh*t you have ever written, and that it's saying a lot.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Who gives a crap about conference rankings when it comes to stats...lol


ObikaTony apparently. I was just correcting his argument that we were in the lower 1/2 of the big 12 some years. I wasn't arguing which one was better.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

This is the biggest line of bull sh*t you have ever written, and that it's saying a lot.

Which part? Your stats show how up and down we were based on experience in the system. I never said that it was a smart system, I said that given X these guys would produce Y. I personally think that BV would have done better last year with our D than Mike did. However, now that we have a few playmakers at linebacker and corner Mike is going to be better.

[OU_Sooners75]

Which part? Your stats show how up and down we were based on experience in the system. I never said that it was a smart system, I said that given X these guys would produce Y. I personally think that BV would have done better last year with our D than Mike did. However, now that we have a few playmakers at linebacker and corner Mike is going to be better.

Yes experience, but BV system was hardly hinged on the play of the safety. There were ab couple times under BV that OU had experience all over the defense, yet the numbers were worse or did not improve.

[ObiKaTony]

Dude, to even suggest BV it's anywhere close to Mike is as ignorant as it gets!

Who gives a crap about conference rankings when it comes to stats...lol

Rankings for total defense:

2012: 43 (378.3 ypg) MS first year back.
2011: 64 (383.2 ypg)
2010: 60 (363.9 ypg)
2009: 7 (272.5 ypg)
2008: 65 (359.1 ypg)
2007: 20 (324.0 ypg)
2006: 18 (280.6 ypg)
2005: 17 (304.8 ypg)
2004: 9 (280.2 ypg) BV first year as DC
2003: 1 (255.6 ypg) MS last year as DC
2002: can't find
2001: can't find
2000: can't find
1999: 39 (344.4 ypg) MS first year at OU.

Stats from 2003-2012 are from Yahoo sports.
1999 stats from ncaa.
Ncaa database not working for years after 1999 for whatever reasons.

As one can see, BV presided over 3 of the 5 worst defensive seasons at OU under Bob Stoops.
Also as you can tell, the other two are in the shoulders of Mike Stoops. But both those years came as a first year DC at OU.

Believe it or not some morons actually believe it's debatable...they nuance themselves into total ignorance...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Yes experience, but BV system was hardly hinged on the play of the safety. There were ab couple times under BV that OU had experience all over the defense, yet the numbers were worse or did not improve.

I assume that you are talking about from 2005-2007 since that was basically the only time we had that. In 2008 we turned over near the entire defense including 2 early entrants (loftin/smith). After that year, he and Shipp basically cashed it in recruiting-wise and our talent level went downhill in a hurry. So looking at these years, there are several things that jump out at you (and if you remember we complained about at the time).

So lets see who we had in 2005

DT - Dvoracek, Ayodele (Seniors) DE - AhYou, Thibs (JRs) LB Ingram (SR), Latimer, Rufus (JRs) CB - Bassey (SR) Williams/Wolfe (SO) (Injuries split the starts) S - Carter (JR) Smith/Harris (FR)

This D was reminiscent of 2003-2005 - consistent on the road and at home

2006 we graduate our interior DTs, 1 linebacker, 1 cornerback

Now, the issue that would plague BV til he left crops up. We are much much worse on the road than at home against the pass.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/oklahoma/2006/splits/

235 home - 326 neutral/away (now most of these away/neutral games are against ranked teams but oh well)

2007 - we lose rufus and latimer, both DEs and Carter

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/oklahoma/2007/splits/
284 home/380 road/400 neutral (all neutral teams ranked, road teams not)

Now, your choices as for why this happens are: Mental Toughness, Experience, or the DC can't make the correct calls on the road.

If we go with mental toughness then that is primarily on the carousel of position coaches we paraded through here. This can't possibly be it according to this board.
If we go with experience then the number kind of fit as they get worse when we lose certain seniors
If we go with the DC calls then we have to ignore things like penalties and first downs going up on the road and turnovers going down

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

And for giggles, here are Mike Stoops cornerback recruits while he was here

Derrick Strait Recruit Cornerback 1998
Michael Freeman Recruit Cornerback 1999
Brandon Shelby Recruit Cornerback 1999
Jowahn Poteat Recruit Cornerback 2000
Eric Bassey Recruit Cornerback 2000
Mark Bradley Recruit Cornerback 2000
Justin Williams Recruit Cornerback 2000
Aaron Miller Recruit Cornerback 2001
Jason Carter Recruit Cornerback 2001
Micheal Hawkins Recruit Cornerback 2001
Darien Williams Recruit Cornerback 2002
Chijioke Onyenegecha Recruit Cornerback 2002
Ramarcus Brown Recruit Cornerback 2003
Marcus Walker Recruit Cornerback 2003

[EatLeadCommie]

Wasn't it Hawkins who was in the car wreck? That kid was gonna be a stud.

[EatLeadCommie]

I seem to recall Walker showed some promise too, but can't remember what happened to him. Disciplinary problems? Injuries?

[picasso]

Believe it or not some morons actually believe it's debatable...they nuance themselves into total ignorance...

Oh yes, name calling makes you the winner!

[8timechamps]

Are you void of all facts, or can you not deduce them...?


The d has gotten better through recruiting, numbers, and fundemntals after mike took over crap...seriously?!

Slow down.

Has the defense improved? Absolutely. However, there is also another factor at play you're not including (that may have more affect than everything you did mention), that's the drop-off in Big XII offense (due to the lack of experienced QBs).

I agree that Mike has done a great job, but there's a little more to it than that.

Also, just for the record, nobody cares who "called" it, or if you "knew all along". We are all Sooner fans, and we all want to see our team be successful. YOU didn't do anything, unless you are secretly on staff at OU. So, enough with the "I want to congratulate myself".

[thecrimsoncrusader]

If Brent Vulnerables was still around, OU would still be losing to Texas Tech. No thanks.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

If Brent Vulnerables was still around, OU would still be losing to Texas Tech. No thanks.

And in Mike's first tenure we kept losing to pokey state. If we lose to Texas next year, all the shine will be off of Mikey.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Wasn't it Hawkins who was in the car wreck? That kid was gonna be a stud.

Hawkins quit 6 games into his freshman year and went to play arena football. I think he was eventually drafted by the Packers.

Michael Thompson was in the car wreck but he was recruited as a safety.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I seem to recall Walker showed some promise too, but can't remember what happened to him. Disciplinary problems? Injuries?

Walker came out of RS as a true freshman for DJ Wolfe at corner against aTm to win that game. He hurt his shoulder against USC and it became a recurring injury which limited his growth.

[yermom]

And in Mike's first tenure we kept losing to pokey state. If we lose to Texas next year, all the shine will be off of Mikey.

i don't think you can really blame Mike for 2001

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

i don't think you can really blame Mike for 2001

There are only 2 things that I blame coaches for

1. Poor Evaluation
2. Poor Player Improvement

Assuming they can do those 2 things we tend to be a really good football team.

However, that isn't the soonerfans narrative. That narrative is "If I hate you, you get blamed for everything" conversely "If I love you, its never your fault until I hate you"

[ObiKaTony]

Slow down.

Has the defense improved? Absolutely. However, there is also another factor at play you're not including (that may have more affect than everything you did mention), that's the drop-off in Big XII offense (due to the lack of experienced QBs).

I agree that Mike has done a great job, but there's a little more to it than that.

Also, just for the record, nobody cares who "called" it, or if you "knew all along". We are all Sooner fans, and we all want to see our team be successful. YOU didn't do anything, unless you are secretly on staff at OU. So, enough with the "I want to congratulate myself".

Lol! Yep it's the drop off...

I recall countless arguments in regards to this topic and you would ridicule and dismiss the fact that mike would have dramatic effects. I will congratulate my opinion as it was emphatically right...

My family donates to the universities dental school and some of that money goes to the staff indirectly...

[ObiKaTony]

And in Mike's first tenure we kept losing to pokey state. If we lose to Texas next year, all the shine will be off of Mikey.


One more time...who is better mike or V?

[ObiKaTony]

8time

Who is better mike or Venebels?

[8timechamps]

Lol! Yep it's the drop off...

I recall countless arguments in regards to this topic and you would ridicule and dismiss the fact that mike would have dramatic effects. I will congratulate my opinion as it was emphatically right...

My family donates to the universities dental school and some of that money goes to the staff indirectly...


"Dramatic effects"? Did you see any of last year? Again, there's no question that Mike has things heading in the right direction, but you act like we just won a national title in Mike's first year back as DC. Please. You recall wrong. Feel free to search the database and find your posts (and mine). Quit acting like it was "you against the world". Mike is a good DC, do you think you're the only person that realizes that?

Haha, you keep "congratulating" yourself. Here, also have a cookie.

If you think the drop off in the Big XII offenses hasn't had an affect on the performance of this defense, then you're a moron. I guess Mike/Bob both forgot to consult with you prior to making similar comments to that effect.


My family donates to the universities dental school and some of that money goes to the staff indirectly...

Oh, I didn't realize (of couse I did, you've mentioned it several times on these boards). Since your family donates to the school, you are, in fact, secretly on the staff. I didn't know that's how it works. In that case, I'm the co-Head Coach of the Sooners! Woo Hoo.

[8timechamps]

8time

Who is better mike or Venebels?

Mike. I've never argued otherwise.

Here's the deal though, you act like BV was nothing. I don't think Mike is a better DC by far, better? Yes.

BV is a good DC, but like every other coordinator that's been at OU, there are plenty of fans that think he was terrible.

[BoulderSooner79]

8time

Who is better mike or Venebels?


Mike. I've never argued otherwise.



Thank-you. OkiKatony has no purpose in life until somebody said that.


Here's the deal though, you act like BV was nothing.

Oh, crap. Now you've ruined it…

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Outside of the name calling, I'm with ObiKa on this one. Now that Mike's back I think we're on our way back to having consistantly very good to dominant defenses. The one year we had a top D under BV was when we had GK McCoy blowing up the middle of this LOS.

Yeah, last year's D wasn't good but it's typical you see the results of a change in the second year and that's what we saw. You'll get no argument that the offenses overall we faced this year weren't as quality as last year, but we still faced some good offenses and performed well against them. We held osu to less than 30 on their home field. Yes, they plowed through us on that last drive, but in today's game good offense is going to beat good defense more than not. The D absolutely did what it had to do to give us a chance to win. I also thought we played well at Baylor. The O gave the D no support and Baylor scored 2 TDs on short fields or we probably hold them less to 30 on their home field as well. Our worst game on D was the texass game and that was our first game without Nelson and Phillips so they ran the ball right at us.

[Soonerwake]

I agree that the defense we saw at the end of the season was getting better. We all have to remember that there are alot of young guys out there playing key positions. I was impressed with the growth and seasoning that happened this year, and it sets us up for a very good 2014 season.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

And in Mike's first tenure we kept losing to pokey state. If we lose to Texas next year, all the shine will be off of Mikey.

Nice job of mentioning the complete lack of points by the Sooner offense in the 2001 and 2002 OU/OSU games (13 points in the 2001 game and the 2002 game was over at half-time when the Sooner offense only had 6 points against the nation's 103rd ranked pass defense. OU came back in that game in the 2nd half due to OSU going into prevent (as they always do)).

You lost all credibility when I said Jordan Phillips would shine before this season ever started and you said he was too tall and big and wouldn't be able to get below pad level and be effective. And then when he proved to be effective, you then played it off by saying his performance was due to the improved play of the defense-ends. It doesn't work that way and you're a joke. You're a waste of my time. Go back to pen & paper RPGs. Bye.

[8timechamps]

Outside of the name calling, I'm with ObiKa on this one. Now that Mike's back I think we're on our way back to having consistantly very good to dominant defenses. The one year we had a top D under BV was when we had GK McCoy blowing up the middle of this LOS.

Yeah, last year's D wasn't good but it's typical you see the results of a change in the second year and that's what we saw. You'll get no argument that the offenses overall we faced this year weren't as quality as last year, but we still faced some good offenses and performed well against them. We held osu to less than 30 on their home field. Yes, they plowed through us on that last drive, but in today's game good offense is going to beat good defense more than not. The D absolutely did what it had to do to give us a chance to win. I also thought we played well at Baylor. The O gave the D no support and Baylor scored 2 TDs on short fields or we probably hold them less to 30 on their home field as well. Our worst game on D was the texass game and that was our first game without Nelson and Phillips so they ran the ball right at us.

I can't argue with that. I also agree that some of the Big XII offenses were still pretty good this year, but my argument with ObiKa was that he didn't account for the drop-off in overall conference offense. No question the defense played much better though.

Texas beat our ***. We were without Phillips and Nelson for the first time, and they did take full advantage of that. I also think we went into the game with a little bit of a "we got this" attitude. Baylor also beat our ***, but I think the interception just prior to the half changed the entire game. Up to that point, it was a 10-5 game, and our defense was playing really well. In the end, they just wore us out, and we had no answer on offense.

[ObiKaTony]

I can't argue with that. I also agree that some of the Big XII offenses were still pretty good this year, but my argument with ObiKa was that he didn't account for the drop-off in overall conference offense. No question the defense played much better though.

Texas beat our ***. We were without Phillips and Nelson for the first time, and they did take full advantage of that. I also think we went into the game with a little bit of a "we got this" attitude. Baylor also beat our ***, but I think the interception just prior to the half changed the entire game. Up to that point, it was a 10-5 game, and our defense was playing really well. In the end, they just wore us out, and we had no answer on offense.

I'm not denying there wasn't a drop off, but I believe our execution and play was at a much higher level superseding the drop off...

[soonertravis]

The problem with this point is that it also proves that the big 12 has seen a huge change in offensive philosophy since Mike was here the first time. Tell me which teams in 2003 were prolific offenses, what style they ran, and what our results were. Then tell me the same for 2010 and 2011. Offense in the Big 12 went crazy in that time frame. Compare that to the SEC who has claimed dominant defense based upon total defense stats. Yet this year when the offenses got more prolific the defenses seemed to be weaker. That is why comparing accross regions in a sport where there is not enough interaction between teams or consistency across regions is a fallacy. And it is why comparing conference numbers show how we ranked in terms of defense played against the same level of competition. It is not perfect either, but it shows that reality and perception are two different things. We were never as bad as people thought when Brent was here. We haven't corrected the issues as well as some suggest now that Mike is back. We need to keep improving.


Dude, to even suggest BV it's anywhere close to Mike is as ignorant as it gets!

Who gives a crap about conference rankings when it comes to stats...lol

Rankings for total defense:

2012: 43 (378.3 ypg) MS first year back.
2011: 64 (383.2 ypg)
2010: 60 (363.9 ypg)
2009: 7 (272.5 ypg)
2008: 65 (359.1 ypg)
2007: 20 (324.0 ypg)
2006: 18 (280.6 ypg)
2005: 17 (304.8 ypg)
2004: 9 (280.2 ypg) BV first year as DC
2003: 1 (255.6 ypg) MS last year as DC
2002: can't find
2001: can't find
2000: can't find
1999: 39 (344.4 ypg) MS first year at OU.

Stats from 2003-2012 are from Yahoo sports.
1999 stats from ncaa.
Ncaa database not working for years after 1999 for whatever reasons.

As one can see, BV presided over 3 of the 5 worst defensive seasons at OU under Bob Stoops.
Also as you can tell, the other two are in the shoulders of Mike Stoops. But both those years came as a first year DC at OU.

[ObiKaTony]

The problem with this point is that it also proves that the big 12 has seen a huge change in offensive philosophy since Mike was here the first time. Tell me which teams in 2003 were prolific offenses, what style they ran, and what our results were. Then tell me the same for 2010 and 2011. Offense in the Big 12 went crazy in that time frame. Compare that to the SEC who has claimed dominant defense based upon total defense stats. Yet this year when the offenses got more prolific the defenses seemed to be weaker. That is why comparing accross regions in a sport where there is not enough interaction between teams or consistency across regions is a fallacy. And it is why comparing conference numbers show how we ranked in terms of defense played against the same level of competition. It is not perfect either, but it shows that reality and perception are two different things. We were never as bad as people thought when Brent was here. We haven't corrected the issues as well as some suggest now that Mike is back. We need to keep improving.

Simply ridiculous, we were clearly worse off under venebles which is why he left latterly, and some would say downward (Clemson d cord)

The early 2000's mikes d ranked in the top 5 btw , look back at the thread it's in there somewhere. Looking at conference play relative to your team has much more validity. 'Sec defenses are good, well there offenses suck so that has to be considered. Same with the big 12 which is more apt for offense. Of course, overall d is going to be lower than the sec, but what do the numbers say in conference. Under v we were middle of the pack and sometimes rock bottom. We had the good year with the top 5 draft d lineman, then we went back to sucking...

Do people not watch these games!? Or do they forget? We got murdered on defense venebles's last year, and our d was average to suck at best most of his tenure...

This is mind boggling, and I'm glad we got rid of his ***...

[soonertravis]

I agree that conference numbers give more accuracy, but not the total picture. I didn't look up the numbers but I recall someone whowed you the lowest we finished under BV was 4th, not the bottom tier.

My perception is that we are improving on defense. I think Mike is better. I don't think BV was that bad and gets blamed here for our perceived failures. Football was played differently in this league and everywhere else in 2003 and before. The prolification of the offense we have seen over the last 5 years didn't start in this league until 2007ish. Before that, only a few were running the no huddle, etc. I say this only as a warning to fans that we will not return to the same level of statistical rankings as Mike's first tenure if the offenses in this league remain as wide open as they have been the last 5-6 years.

Consider: Pre-2003 only Tech was running that style offense. Now we face Baylor, Tech, OSU, WVU, etc. We faced Mizzou running a wide open offense under BV as well. You cannot compare accross generations unless you give it context.



Simply ridiculous, we were clearly worse off under venebles which is why he left latterly, and some would say downward (Clemson d cord)

The early 2000's mikes d ranked in the top 5 btw , look back at the thread it's in there somewhere. Looking at conference play relative to your team has much more validity. 'Sec defenses are good, well there offenses suck so that has to be considered. Same with the big 12 which is more apt for offense. Of course, overall d is going to be lower than the sec, but what do the numbers say in conference. Under v we were middle of the pack and sometimes rock bottom. We had the good year with the top 5 draft d lineman, then we went back to sucking...

Do people not watch these games!? Or do they forget? We got murdered on d v's last year, and our d was average to suck at best most of his tenure...

This is mind boggling, and I'm glad we got rid of his ***...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Same with the big 12 which is more apt for offense. Of course, overall d is going to be lower than the sec, but what do the numbers say in conference. Under v we were middle of the pack and sometimes rock bottom. We had the good year with the top 5 draft d lineman, then we went back to sucking...

This is the part that we are arguing about, our defense under BV never finished below 4th in the conference. Saying that we did doesn't make it right.

1. In 2008, we actually went through every defensive series of one game with screenshots to see if it was BV or execution. We were in the right defense for the play called over 95% of the time. However, that call was almost always LATE coming in. Call it micromanagement, call it trying to overcome the inexperience of the players, call it being an idiot whatever you will. The result that then transpired was just a comedy of errors on the field ranging from taking the play off to lining up wrong.

2. Teams beat us by exploiting the weaknesses of the Tampa 2. From wikipedia -> "When executed properly, the Tampa 2 defense is difficult to beat, which speaks for its longevity that it has fundamentally not changed since first introduced in 1996. Teams that have been successful against this defense have managed to run the ball up the middle past the defensive tackles, or throw passes in the seams between the outside linebackers and the cornerbacks (often the most effective receiver against a Tampa 2 defense is a tight end, since they often line up against this seam)." I don't know if you've taken a look around the NFL lately, but there are a LOT of big 12 tight ends starting in the NFL (Bennett, Finley, etc). There were 2 off that Florida team in the national title game.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

The inability for some to be able to have someone disagree with their post and not resort to name calling and..

Look, it's OK for someone to disagree with you..It's OK..It's not indicative on the type of person you are or even how smart you are...Good God people.. Some one is not wrong just because they don't agree with you.

And the problem with the stats based arguments is I can take a group of numbers and make it say whatever I want my point to be, especially considering the amount of years included.

I think they both are good at what they do, but I think they are both better with each other on the same sideline.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

One more time...who is better mike or V?

That depends, are we getting beat by a personnel matchup or a structural defense matchup.

BV is quick to pull players if they aren't playing well. Mike will ride a bad matchup down in flames.

BV will not change up his defense if the other team is exploiting its defense (see last post). Mike will draw crap on the dirt to figure out how to stop it.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

The inability for some to be able to have someone disagree with their post and not resort to name calling and..

Look, it's OK for someone to disagree with you..It's OK..It's not indicative on the type of person you are or even how smart you are...Good God people.. Some one is not wrong just because they don't agree with you.

And the problem with the stats based arguments is I can take a group of numbers and make it say whatever I want my point to be, especially considering the amount of years included.

I think they both are good at what they do, but I think they are both better with each other on the same sideline.

Yes, they complimented each other's weaknesses fairly well EXCEPT at their own positions. Remember that when we got torched in the early 2000s it was almost always because we had a secondary player not playing well.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

The inability for some to be able to have someone disagree with their post and not resort to name calling and..

Look, it's OK for someone to disagree with you..It's OK..It's not indicative on the type of person you are or even how smart you are...Good God people.. Some one is not wrong just because they don't agree with you.

And the problem with the stats based arguments is I can take a group of numbers and make it say whatever I want my point to be, especially considering the amount of years included.

I think they both are good at what they do, but I think they are both better with each other on the same sideline.

As for the name calling and not being able to see anything but their own argument, I just figured they'd been on the politics board ;)

[ObiKaTony]

That depends, are we getting beat by a personnel matchup or a structural defense matchup.

BV is quick to pull players if they aren't playing well. Mike will ride a bad matchup down in flames.

BV will not change up his defense if the other team is exploiting its defense (see last post). Mike will draw crap on the dirt to figure out how to stop it.

Wow...

[ObiKaTony]

That depends, are we getting beat by a personnel matchup or a structural defense matchup.

BV is quick to pull players if they aren't playing well. Mike will ride a bad matchup down in flames.

BV will not change up his defense if the other team is exploiting its defense (see last post). Mike will draw crap on the dirt to figure out how to stop it.

So the non answer is the answer you would have agreed with bob stoops and got rid of venebles...it's ok to have an opinion that matters, no one will think less of you, quite the opposite if you keep this up...

[Temujin]

There are a few reasons why I like the way Mike coaches defense versus V.

Man vs. Zone - We play a lot more aggressive man/man and man/zone than we used to. While we do see Sanchez get burned on a double-move on occasion, that change seems to have limited the broken coverage that we used to see so frequently under V. Mike still uses zone, of course, but I think he uses it more for confusion than as a base defense. Because of that I think it allows guys like Sanchez and Colvin to shine their coverage talents, and frees the coverage from being required to make too many reads.

When we heard all those comments in the offseason about how Mike was simplifying the defense, I believe this is what the players were talking about. It's not about making the defense simple, it's about freeing the players from trying to read too many things, allowing them to be more decisive.

Adjustments - I really can only speak to this season, because last season was kind of a disaster toward the end, but I've noticed this year that we adjust to problems quicker. The biggest issue I had with V was that he was really inflexible when the game plan wasn't working. It's like there was no "contingency plan" if things didn't work out as originally planned. Then when we'd get punched in the mouth, we'd just stand there and take it until we finally get knocked out.

The worst example of that, to me, was the 2008 RRS. When we lost Ryan Reynolds late in the first half, the game was over. McCoy just exploited the middle over and over and over and over until they eventually won. There was no adjustment. When Corey Nelson was lost this year, we had that one drive against TCU toward the end that made the game close...but overall you couldn't say that the defense was exploited in any one area consistently. Even against UT the following week without Philips and Nelson, the defense had trouble with the running game, but I don't think you can say that the defense was completely at fault for that loss. Even against ND, we allowed over 200 yards on the ground, but it didn't kill us.

Honestly, I just like what I've seen from this defense overall. I don't have a crapload of statistics at my fingertips to say one is better than the other. V had his great moments too, of course. The RRS in 2004 and 2009 particularly come to mind. But, it just appears that, this year of course, we're more consistent on defense. And I think we always had great talent under V on defense. To me, that was his biggest asset, that he could identify great players and bring them to OU. I hope that Mike can do the same thing, but that remains to be seen. I like what I see out of guys like Tapper and Sanchez so far.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

So the non answer is the answer you would have agreed with bob stoops and got rid of venebles...it's ok to have an opinion that matters, no one will think less of you, quite the opposite if you keep this up...

I agreed with the decision but not based on how good of a DC he was. Everyone piles on the coordinators, but I think that is overblown. OU has always been about the Johnnies and the Joes not the Xs and the Os.

Ever since BV had been at OU he'd been an erratic recruiter. From 1999 to 2005, out of every 3 guys he recruited 2 would be whiffs and one would be a superstar. He wasn't the only one as Jackie Shipp was eerily similar. I gave both of them a pass until 2009, but they never did land another guy who was "OU calibre" so I was all about both of them being gone after 2009. At that time, everyone thought I was crazy on Shipp, but that I'd finally "saw the light" on BV.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

There are a few reasons why I like the way Mike coaches defense versus V.

Man vs. Zone - We play a lot more aggressive man/man and man/zone than we used to. While we do see Sanchez get burned on a double-move on occasion, that change seems to have limited the broken coverage that we used to see so frequently under V. Mike still uses zone, of course, but I think he uses it more for confusion than as a base defense. Because of that I think it allows guys like Sanchez and Colvin to shine their coverage talents, and frees the coverage from being required to make too many reads.

When we heard all those comments in the offseason about how Mike was simplifying the defense, I believe this is what the players were talking about. It's not about making the defense simple, it's about freeing the players from trying to read too many things, allowing them to be more decisive.

Adjustments - I really can only speak to this season, because last season was kind of a disaster toward the end, but I've noticed this year that we adjust to problems quicker. The biggest issue I had with V was that he was really inflexible when the game plan wasn't working. It's like there was no "contingency plan" if things didn't work out as originally planned. Then when we'd get punched in the mouth, we'd just stand there and take it until we finally get knocked out.

The worst example of that, to me, was the 2008 RRS. When we lost Ryan Reynolds late in the first half, the game was over. McCoy just exploited the middle over and over and over and over until they eventually won. There was no adjustment. When Corey Nelson was lost this year, we had that one drive against TCU toward the end that made the game close...but overall you couldn't say that the defense was exploited in any one area consistently. Even against UT the following week without Philips and Nelson, the defense had trouble with the running game, but I don't think you can say that the defense was completely at fault for that loss. Even against ND, we allowed over 200 yards on the ground, but it didn't kill us.

Honestly, I just like what I've seen from this defense overall. I don't have a crapload of statistics at my fingertips to say one is better than the other. V had his great moments too, of course. The RRS in 2004 and 2009 particularly come to mind. But, it just appears that, this year of course, we're more consistent on defense. And I think we always had great talent under V on defense. To me, that was his biggest asset, that he could identify great players and bring them to OU. I hope that Mike can do the same thing, but that remains to be seen. I like what I see out of guys like Tapper and Sanchez so far.

That is what I was saying, BV couldn't adjust to flaws in the structure of the defense (like the 2008 RRS which was TE in the seam which is a structural weakness of the Tampa 2).

Mike's problem is with subbing out starters. Like for instance -> Rashaun Woods/Sproles running by Everage, Tavon Austin running by Jefferson last year. He expects guys to play better to overcome it instead of trying someone else out there.

That being said, I'm still not entirely convinced we can make it through the big 12 undefeated with a man to man defense. Those Baylor pick plays are going to be more prevalent next year.

[ObiKaTony]

There are a few reasons why I like the way Mike coaches defense versus V.

Man vs. Zone - We play a lot more aggressive man/man and man/zone than we used to. While we do see Sanchez get burned on a double-move on occasion, that change seems to have limited the broken coverage that we used to see so frequently under V. Mike still uses zone, of course, but I think he uses it more for confusion than as a base defense. Because of that I think it allows guys like Sanchez and Colvin to shine their coverage talents, and frees the coverage from being required to make too many reads.

When we heard all those comments in the offseason about how Mike was simplifying the defense, I believe this is what the players were talking about. It's not about making the defense simple, it's about freeing the players from trying to read too many things, allowing them to be more decisive.

Adjustments - I really can only speak to this season, because last season was kind of a disaster toward the end, but I've noticed this year that we adjust to problems quicker. The biggest issue I had with V was that he was really inflexible when the game plan wasn't working. It's like there was no "contingency plan" if things didn't work out as originally planned. Then when we'd get punched in the mouth, we'd just stand there and take it until we finally get knocked out.

The worst example of that, to me, was the 2008 RRS. When we lost Ryan Reynolds late in the first half, the game was over. McCoy just exploited the middle over and over and over and over until they eventually won. There was no adjustment. When Corey Nelson was lost this year, we had that one drive against TCU toward the end that made the game close...but overall you couldn't say that the defense was exploited in any one area consistently. Even against UT the following week without Philips and Nelson, the defense had trouble with the running game, but I don't think you can say that the defense was completely at fault for that loss. Even against ND, we allowed over 200 yards on the ground, but it didn't kill us.

Honestly, I just like what I've seen from this defense overall. I don't have a crapload of statistics at my fingertips to say one is better than the other. V had his great moments too, of course. The RRS in 2004 and 2009 particularly come to mind. But, it just appears that, this year of course, we're more consistent on defense. And I think we always had great talent under V on defense. To me, that was his biggest asset, that he could identify great players and bring them to OU. I hope that Mike can do the same thing, but that remains to be seen. I like what I see out of guys like Tapper and Sanchez so far.

Great post dude...

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Nice job of mentioning the complete lack of points by the Sooner offense in the 2001 and 2002 OU/OSU games (13 points in the 2001 game and the 2002 game was over at half-time when the Sooner offense only had 6 points against the nation's 103rd ranked pass defense. OU came back in that game in the 2nd half due to OSU going into prevent (as they always do)).

You lost all credibility when I said Jordan Phillips would shine before this season ever started and you said he was too tall and big and wouldn't be able to get below pad level and be effective. And then when he proved to be effective, you then played it off by saying his performance was due to the improved play of the defense-ends. It doesn't work that way and you're a joke. You're a waste of my time. Go back to pen & paper RPGs. Bye.

It is just amazing to me how much people defend their pets.
Mike
2001 Okie State -> We were up by a TD in 2001 with 8:48 left -> Offenses fault
2002 Okie State-> We gave up 28 points and 200 yards receiving in the 1st half -> Offenses fault

BV
2004 USC -> Our offense turned the ball over 4 times (including 3 on our side of the field) -> BV's fault

[picasso]

Wow...

This true. He admitted as much after the '02 poke game.
I'm marvelling at the wood some of you guys have for jkm.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

This true. He admitted as much after the '02 poke game.
I'm marvelling at the wood some of you guys have for jkm.

Yeah, you'd think I was a painter or sumpin

[picasso]

Yeah, you'd think I was a painter or sumpin

Oh I'd rue the day I had to answer to the art critics on this fine board.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Oh I'd rue the day I had to answer to the art critics on this fine board.

Who talks like that?

[picasso]

Who talks like that?

Val Kilmer, Real Genius.

[8timechamps]

The inability for some to be able to have someone disagree with their post and not resort to name calling and..

Look, it's OK for someone to disagree with you..It's OK..It's not indicative on the type of person you are or even how smart you are...Good God people.. Some one is not wrong just because they don't agree with you.

And the problem with the stats based arguments is I can take a group of numbers and make it say whatever I want my point to be, especially considering the amount of years included.

I think they both are good at what they do, but I think they are both better with each other on the same sideline.

Absolutely.

Too bad we couldn't have them both together. I think BV's coaching strength was pretty clearly with the linebackers, but Mike is one of the best with the DBs. Since I really think Montgomery is very, very good with the line, we could have seen some special units. Nonetheless, I think both guys have pretty damn good defensive minds.

[8timechamps]

There are a few reasons why I like the way Mike coaches defense versus V.

Man vs. Zone - We play a lot more aggressive man/man and man/zone than we used to. While we do see Sanchez get burned on a double-move on occasion, that change seems to have limited the broken coverage that we used to see so frequently under V. Mike still uses zone, of course, but I think he uses it more for confusion than as a base defense. Because of that I think it allows guys like Sanchez and Colvin to shine their coverage talents, and frees the coverage from being required to make too many reads.

When we heard all those comments in the offseason about how Mike was simplifying the defense, I believe this is what the players were talking about. It's not about making the defense simple, it's about freeing the players from trying to read too many things, allowing them to be more decisive.

Adjustments - I really can only speak to this season, because last season was kind of a disaster toward the end, but I've noticed this year that we adjust to problems quicker. The biggest issue I had with V was that he was really inflexible when the game plan wasn't working. It's like there was no "contingency plan" if things didn't work out as originally planned. Then when we'd get punched in the mouth, we'd just stand there and take it until we finally get knocked out.

The worst example of that, to me, was the 2008 RRS. When we lost Ryan Reynolds late in the first half, the game was over. McCoy just exploited the middle over and over and over and over until they eventually won. There was no adjustment. When Corey Nelson was lost this year, we had that one drive against TCU toward the end that made the game close...but overall you couldn't say that the defense was exploited in any one area consistently. Even against UT the following week without Philips and Nelson, the defense had trouble with the running game, but I don't think you can say that the defense was completely at fault for that loss. Even against ND, we allowed over 200 yards on the ground, but it didn't kill us.

Honestly, I just like what I've seen from this defense overall. I don't have a crapload of statistics at my fingertips to say one is better than the other. V had his great moments too, of course. The RRS in 2004 and 2009 particularly come to mind. But, it just appears that, this year of course, we're more consistent on defense. And I think we always had great talent under V on defense. To me, that was his biggest asset, that he could identify great players and bring them to OU. I hope that Mike can do the same thing, but that remains to be seen. I like what I see out of guys like Tapper and Sanchez so far.

Venebales works a very aggressive defensive philosophy. The problem is, it's high risk/high reward. I watched as many Clemson games as I could this year, and he seems to be running very similar schemes...and I don't think he has the athletes to pull it off yet. There would be series where they looked dominate, then the very next series get torched for a long play. The difference was usually when/where the pressure was coming. Mike is just as aggressive, however, he seems to have more patients. If a guy misses a fit or drops a route, he will rip his head off, but send him back out the next series. Kass Everett is a perfect example. I love the kid (because he's a Sooner), but there were several times he just broke coverage, and Mike would light him up, but the next time the nickle was out there, he was on the field. That's the kind of patients BV doesn't have.

BV is an awesome recruiter, but I think Mike has stepped up his game too. Really, I like both of the guys, and like you said, it's hard to really compare the two.

[ObiKaTony]

Venebales works a very aggressive defensive philosophy. The problem is, it's high risk/high reward. I watched as many Clemson games as I could this year, and he seems to be running very similar schemes...and I don't think he has the athletes to pull it off yet. There would be series where they looked dominate, then the very next series get torched for a long play. The difference was usually when/where the pressure was coming. Mike is just as aggressive, however, he seems to have more patients. If a guy misses a fit or drops a route, he will rip his head off, but send him back out the next series. Kass Everett is a perfect example. I love the kid (because he's a Sooner), but there were several times he just broke coverage, and Mike would light him up, but the next time the nickle was out there, he was on the field. That's the kind of patients BV doesn't have.

BV is an awesome recruiter, but I think Mike has stepped up his game too. Really, I like both of the guys, and like you said, it's hard to really compare the two.

It's hard to compare? The stats are undeniable, the shift in defense mentality and fundamentals 2 years removed from BV is undeniable, the players themselves have said as much 'defense is easier to understand'/ it shows...

This is madness/political correctness/ignorance at its highest level.

Lets take out the crimson and cream, Brent was fired (in a nice Mack brown kind of way) and moved downward to Clemson. Apparently no one and I mean no one saw enough upside to give this guy a shot...

[BoulderSooner79]

It's hard to compare? The stats are undeniable, the shift in defense mentality and fundamentals 2 years removed from BV is undeniable, the players themselves have said as much 'defense is easier to understand'/ it shows...

This is madness/political correctness/ignorance at its highest level.

Lets take out the crimson and cream, Brent was fired (in a nice Mack brown kind of way) and moved downward to Clemson. Apparently no one and I mean no one saw enough upside to give this guy a shot...

Wrong.

[ObiKaTony]

Mike hasn't stepped up his game, he is getting back to where we were pre Venebels (that would be mike stoops defense)

[ObiKaTony]

Wrong.


Wrong:

Bob stoops agrees with me, otherwise I would still be bitching about Venebels, and you would be holding his water...(nice try)

[BoulderSooner79]

Wrong:

Bob stoops agrees with me, otherwise I would still be bitching about Venebels, and you would be holding his water...(nice try)

Still wrong and I've never held anyones water (whatever that means).

[ObiKaTony]

Where reality and ones perception meet...

People with venebles have to nuance and twist numbers, and it still doesn't change the reality: bob stoops let V go, and hired Mike back...deal with it, I know our team is dealing with it quite well...

[ObiKaTony]

Still wrong and I've never held anyones water (whatever that means).

Still wrong,

holding water: sticking with/being with/agreeing with a person, in your case no matter the facts...

Still still still wrong...

Hey, take your case to Bob. Just walk up and say wrong!

[BoulderSooner79]

Bob defended BV from critics for years, but he had to make a choice if he wanted Mike back.

The '09 defense did exist, not just folklore. BV + lots of talent. If the offense had been just average, but consistent, a title run was possible.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

The one thing that most people forget is that BV was a big proponent of trading yards for turnovers. His goal was to get teams into 3rd and long and then pick them off. And he did it with quite a bit of success (as we never had a year under him with less than 27 turnovers forced). It isn't a bad strategy as other teams played the exact same D and made it successful (what? surely not).

The problem for those teams (as well as us) is that you are going against the grain in college football. Teams execute better at home, in some cases a LOT better (see aTm). So if you stroll in with a defense that depends on disrupting execution you are going to have some trouble.

Notice the defensive split for total yards from home to road (then notice the turnovers, 3.0/game is the critical number for a great defense)

http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/miami-fl/2001/splits/
http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/oklahoma/2006/splits/