We are starting to sound like Texas fans.......
We are starting to sound like Texas fans.......
Not coincidental that the Big 12's highest paid coaches and their staffs are OU and Texas and our fans are less than happy with mid tier bowls (and losing them) and lack of competition in the big 12/national title races.
Shouldn't fans expect some ROI?
Definitely the most disappointing year under Stoops. Felt like we had taken a time machine back to 1995. Except this time I was the one who smelledofbourbon
The enduring image of Oklahoma was that ridiculous double–middle finger of a game-icing kick. It was probably an accident, which somehow made it more, not less, insulting. It was as though Stoops had partied so hard on the corpse of the SEC that he woke up with an unplanned tattoo.
If I were to boil down the problems last year to two things they would be
1. Turnovers (Specifically Generated) - 19 Gained vs 24 lost - you can win the MNC with a crappy TO ratio (in 2000 ours was 36/29), but you have to generate a lot of them. The only oddball year where we were good and had this few turnovers was 2004 (22/18). For the most part, that number is in the mid 30's.
2. QB Accuracy on 3rd Down - When you get to the point where its 3rd and 10 and you are hoping for a run, that tells you how bad this stat is.
One of the more interesting things for me during the spring game was watching Knight continue to air mail the ball with a new QB coach. It just reinforced that guys are who they are and coaching just can't change that.
We definitely were "full our ourselves" last year. So one would expect that this year we will have a better attitude after last year's humbling experience. Would have like to see a couple more defensive coaches shown the door. I think most everyone here knows who I am referring to.
Have to have better QB play, which we will get, just not sure how much better. I like the play caller much better. Should get into the 4th QTR this year with time outs remaining, which will be the first since 2010. Receivers WILL be better. Offensive line will not be as good, but can be adequate.
Defensively, will play Striker where he will help the most after the silly nickel back experiment last year. Secondary WILL be better ( I know that is not saying much) Linebackers WILL be better with Frank Shannon returning. Defensive front can be very good with Tapper, Charles Walker, Jordan Wade, Matt Dimon and Matt Romar all with experience returning.
Lots of "toss up" games next year with Tennessee, Texas, KState and OSU. Will be underdogs against TCU and Baylor. Those six games will decide the fate of the 2015 Sooners. Will end up somewhere between 7-5 and 9-3 in the regular season.
Boomer Sooner!!
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
So we are going to be better at about every position and have a worse record?Originally Posted by champions77
Did we finish better than 9-3 last year?
The schedule is not nearly as "friendly" as we had last year, so yes, we could be better but it not reflected so much in the wins and losses.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
If games like Tennessee and Texas are toss-up games, then so are our games against TCU and Baylor. No way do we end up 7-5. Absolutely no way.
I hope you are right. Most would say that TCU and Baylor are superior to the UT's. The 7-5 scenario would be if we continue to struggle at QB, coupled with some injuries... yes 7-5 could happen. I do not believe TCU and Baylor are toss up games, even though we get TCU here. Bob does seem to coach better when expectations are lowered. I think a 9-3 regular season is more likely than 7-5. There are just a lot of what I consider toss up games, do we realistically think that we will win all four?
Last edited by champions77; 5/5/2015 at 11:39 AM.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
"You are never as good as you look when you win and you are never as bad as you look when you lose". That statement is magnified to the Nth degree among fans who only have 2 views of their team -> "National Champs" and "We Suck".
Contrary to popular belief, last year's team was pretty good. I personally think they were built similarly and on par with the 2004 team. My major question before the season was this - Can Trevor Knight complete a wide open 8 yard slant for a 1st down 6 times a ball game? If he can, we are playoff bound. The first 3 games he did and we looked great. And then, as Shane Falco would say, he got stuck in quicksand. And when he went, the team's confidence went too. The defense especially folded like a cheap tent (much like 2004). Last year, we had plenty of talent on the field, we just didn't have mental toughness or the drive to make a play. That when it is 3rd down, you extend the series on offense or get off the field on defense.
Based on what I saw in the spring, there were kids that should have been on the field last fall (so yes we are better in some spots). IF we can hit a wide frickin open 3rd down slant for a 1st down 5 times a game, we'll win 10 or 11 games.
I agree with a lot of what you state. I do not feel that we were on par with the 2004 team that went 12-1 and played for a NC. Yes Trevor's play was responsible for a lot of our problems last year. But he doesn't play defense right? I will say that our much better receiving corp we had in 2013 versus 2014 contributed to that too though. What was particularly concerning last year was not only how we did not improve from game to game, but I thought we actually got worse as the season progressed. No way that the team we saw against Tennessee was the same team that got embarrassed by Baylor and lost to the pukes.
I just hope we can establish consistent QB play. If so, we could do some really nice things THIS year.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
2004's defense wasn't all that great and was pretty bad in the middle of the season. The difference was Jason White consistently converting 3rd and longs (and 3rd and miracles like the one to Mark Bradley to win the aTm game).
The reason that we fell apart was because everyone KNEW that on 3rd down Trevor was going to air mail a wide open slant. All an opponent felt they had to do was get us in 3rd and long and we were punting. In college football, that is often enough to give an offense confidence. If you've ever watched the Wisconsin Badgers that is them year in and year out - no matter how good they are, if a defense can consistently put them in 3rd and long they fall apart.
Please do not forget Trevor missed what 3-4 games last year?
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
Knight missed part of one game (Baylor) and all of three. We went 2-2 in that stretch and would/should have gone 3-1 if Stoops hadn't punted twice to Tyreek Hill.
Yes, but the BU game was already lost when TK got hurt. The other 3 teams were bottom feeders that we could win as long as Perine was healthy and the QB could hand off. We could have been 100% healthy for Clemson and the result would have been similar. We need improvement across the board.
Fully aware. Not being able to hit a slant didn't change when he went down.
But he did stop over throwing them.
Our season was done the second Shepard went down. Just like when Broyles went down. It's pretty bad when the loss of one WR can do that to you. I think we just massively upgraded our ability to develop WR's, though, so I don't expect that to be as big an issue moving forward.
As bad as our secondary was, and despite all the issues with our QB's and all of our woman troubles (Shannon and Mixon), if we replay that season with a different kicker and a healthy Sterling, I expect we would have headed into our bowl ranked top 10. We would have been 10-2 with our only losses coming from top 5 schools.
Yep. The shame of it was Shep was hurt so early against Iowa State, a school we didn't even need him for...nor Kansas, for that matter. And poor Michael Hunnicutt--head problems, I guess. If we had gotten DGB eligible, we probably could have withstood the loss of Shepherd plus opened up the offense a bit more. I'm with JKM; we really were better than we appeared, on both offense and defense, but coaching was a mess. Some of it was players, and some of it was playing pretty good teams, and the parts just never all worked together consistently.
That's all a matter of definition as coaching is as integral to a team as is the talent of the players. By that definition, the team was exactly as good (or bad) as it appeared to be. It certainly was a better team when Shepard was healthy, but all the other problems were there. The slide after Shepard went down (and then TK) was exaggerated because the team threw in the towel at that point. Fans want them to fight to the bitter end, but the fact is that all the preseason goals were gone after the 2nd loss and it showed in the effort. It takes a really inspirational coach to get a team to go 100% in that situation and Stoops isn't that type.
Posting Permissions
