The First Decade of the Big 12

[HoustonPowercat]

I took a look at how the teams of the Big 12 have done over the first 10 years...

The First Decade of the Big 12 (http://ksucollegefootball.blogspot.com/2006/05/first-decade-of-big-12.html)

Let me know what you think...

[JaminT]

Texas Sucks

[FlatheadSooner]

Nice summary. Thanks.

Note: OU's playing in 3 MNC games might vault them over SAXET as this gives more weight to those Big12 championships and to the quality of wins during those seasons. :cool:

Hook 'em Hook 'em Hook 'em

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

yes, but we have blake

[Octavian]

good job...looking at the numbers its really visible how the power center of the Big XII has shifted from the North to Oklahoma/Texas.

Given how bad OU was in the 90s, this is a credit to the Sooners under Stoops:


Another indicator of success is Championships. OU leads the league with 1 National title and 3 Big 12 Championships.

Also, if you're gonna add individual achievements like All-American recipients, you should include national award winners. I think OU would lead that category w/ the 2003 team alone.

Good site though, thanks.

[JPNSKER]

1. OU
2. UT
3. NU

I think OU should hold the #1 spot. ut is just the media darling after winning the MNC. Compared to the other nine years, they have been good, but not good enough (see RRS).

[sooner518]

objectively, over the past decade, UT has been good for all 10 years. OU was horrible for 3 years and better than UT in 5 of the 7 after that. I'd say that UT could be the best of the past decade just because of the Blake years.

[Brophog]

objectively, over the past decade, UT has been good for all 10 years. OU was horrible for 3 years and better than UT in 5 of the 7 after that. I'd say that UT could be the best of the past decade just because of the Blake years.

Agreed. The nod, unfortunately, probably goes to Texas.

[AustinTXHorn]

objectively, over the past decade, UT has been good for all 10 years. OU was horrible for 3 years and better than UT in 5 of the 7 after that. I'd say that UT could be the best of the past decade just because of the Blake years.
You left out 1997 when we went 4-7. :O

Every other year has had 8+ wins though.

Texas has definitely been more consistent. But OU has one more conference title. Both have two BCS wins and one national title.

[Octavian]

The fall of Nebraska is arguably a bigger story than the rise of either Oklahoma or Texas.

The mainstay of consistency in college football for almost 4 decades...three NCs in four years in the mid-90s...now thrilled w/ an 8-4 year and an Alamo Bowl victory

[King Crimson]

Both have two BCS wins and one national title.

this is true, but a bit of an equivocation.

in the time period, OU has played in twice as many BCS games as UT, and played for the MNC 3 times to UT's 1.

[Flagstaffsooner]

You left out 1997 when we went 4-7. :O

Every other year has had 8+ wins though

Texas has definitely been more consistent. But OU has one more conference title. Both have two BCS wins and one national title.

You didnt have one of these ball and chains....
http://amarillo.com/images/headlines/072498/blake.jpg

[NormanPride]

MY EYES!!!

[SicEmBaylor]

Wasn't Sep an All-American?

[melbitoast]

Only for now is UT ahead. After 2006, everything will change.