so why is ou so bad?

[IMetTrentGreen]

its because they fired scotty bowman

no, just kidding

and yeah, they're bad. not just reloading, not a young team finding itself, they are a 100% suck ass football team. aside from stopping the run, there is nothing thye do well

so, why? they've been to 3 ouf of the last 5 chamionship games, and run roughshod over the big 12 since then. what the f happened?

i have my theories, and after thinking about it, im convinced the main reason is very simple. it's mack brown.

ok, follow me here, im not as crazy as i sound, hopefully

see, even though ou has pwnd everybody in the big 12, mack as held on and recruited the very best players in texas. he left ou a few headcases like marcus walker and that big dt from last year, and ou has won a few outright like bomar and peterson, but overall, mack has been getting whoever he wants. you can see it now, the texas team is fucking stacked from top to bottom, despite their national rep of being soft and under coached (which used to be true, but thankfully, now it's not)

so what does that mean for ou? well naturally, everybody just assumes they can get whoever they want, but its not true. they fought for tier ii players with a&m and tech and lsu and whoever else, because all the best are gone. rivals naturally overrated their recruits because hey, if ou wants them, they must be good (to be fair, they do this to most good teams). nevermind that their first and second choices are off the board

ou now has a bunch of guys like travis wilson and lewis baker. stoops isn't stupid, and he realizes he just can't compete down here, so he goes national. now unlike a&m and other programs down here, he has the option to do this because of his success so far. the second problem is, though, that he's a lazy scouter

so mack has pushed him out of texas, which is problem #1. so he stoops is now looking at rivals 100 and just mailing out scholarships. now this is where vegas vic posts an article about how successful stoops has been at this, like when he posted an article about going deep more and moving away from the short passing game (i'll get to that). but its important to know how to recruit nation-wide. stoops hasn't got it down yet. when you cover such a large area, you cant put as many resources into each kid, you can learn about them, and really watch them play. all you get is tape, which can be deceptive

so ou has a bunch of highly ranked players, but not necessarily good ones. jujuan rankins (sp?), mo dampeer, chijoke imgonnagetcha, and so on, from lousy players to outright headcases. good athletes, but guys who won't work (dampeer), or just suck (pick one)

all because of mack. all because mack pushed them out of texas, away from their base, and out into the big frightening world where so far they have not been able to hack it. seriously, name the really good players on the team:

peterson (tx)
roided up dvorecek (tx)
alexander (la)

and thats it. all from mack's backyard. now i' ma bit biased, because when ou started going national i was the one saying it wouldn't work out. i want that to be true, and even though it looks like it has been, i could just be partisaned here. who knows

there are other problems. the offensive system is beyond retarded. you can have a shotgun 3-4 wr offense if you dont make short passes your base (sorry vic, i told you), the coaches are pricks who run off too many players, and can't get the prima donnas to work for them. but mostly its personnel, an ol that can't block and a defense that can't cover. what you're seeing is what happens when yo udont have 8 seconds to throw to wide open nfl recievers

so my hypothesis is, mack weathered the storm, and the longterm health of his program will last (if we can find a qb after vince), while ou's will suffer. discuss

[IMetTrentGreen]

and sorry for the length, i kept this as short as possible. i could have made this a 40,000 word essay

[Joe]

they'll still beat texas

[Cuckoo]

I'd say if you really want an answer to the question in your thread title, take a look around at some of the college football threads. There have been some nice discussions about OU's problems this year, 99% percent of which are more insightful than what you wrote.

[Noop]

I am sorry but that is some bs if I ever saw.

[MikeVick7]

I'd say if you really want an answer to the question in your thread title, take a look around at some of the college football threads. There have been some nice discussions about OU's problems this year, 99% percent of which are more insightful than what you wrote.
Basically what Cuckoo is saying is that you are Cuckoo.

[cartman]

they'll still beat texas

That sounds amazingingly like your comment that Texas would overlook Rice.

[Airhog]

I'd say if you really want an answer to the question in your thread title, take a look around at some of the college football threads. There have been some nice discussions about OU's problems this year, 99% percent of which are more insightful than what you wrote.


Look at every single post he has made regarding OU and TEXAS. None of them have ever been insightful. OU has one down year and its the end of the world for OU football.

[kcchief19]

Easy, guys ... IMTG is just woozy from last night's USC/Arkansas game.

I haven't see many of the other college football threads so I don't know the insight has been, but I don't think OU's troubles are any one thing -- and Mack Brown isn't one of them, any more than it was Bob Stoops' fault that Brown's Texas teams have one or two major letdowns every year that ruin their season.

[HomerJSimpson]

Easy, guys ... IMTG is just woozy from last night's USC/Arkansas game.

I haven't see many of the other college football threads so I don't know the insight has been, but I don't think OU's troubles are any one thing -- and Mack Brown isn't one of them, any more than it was Bob Stoops' fault that Brown's Texas teams have one or two major letdowns every year that ruin their season.


I haven't really seen a break down of why OU has dropped so quickly, either. imtg's input aside, what are the better reasons? It just seems odd that they look this bad, this fast.

[HomerJSimpson]

an dola: Was this expected by any OU faithfull?

[MJ4H]

Easy, guys ... IMTG is just woozy from last night's USC/Arkansas game.


I hate everybody.

[TroyF]

You think you would at least beat OU once before you talked about how your coach has started the demise of OU football.

OU has lost a ton of guys the last few years. Their "demise" was every bit as predictable as the demise of Miami. Until they lose next season, it's just a down year. And until your coach wins an F'n CONFERENCE championship (something he's never done), it might be a good idea to keep your mouth shut about your "stacked" team.

I'm not saying he won't win it this year and I'm not saying OU will be dominant again next year. But this isn't insightful, it's just supposition.

[HomerJSimpson]

I hate everybody.


It could be worse. You could have lost to Vandy at home. Oh, wait.....

[Cuckoo]

an dola: Was this expected by any OU faithfull?

Yes and No. Most people that know the program pretty well knew for a fact that this year's team would be weaker. That just tends to happen when you send like 10 guys to the NFL and lose nearly all (and I actually do mean all) of your gamebreakers.

The thing was that it was just unknown. With the talent they have, a 10 win season wasn't out of the question at all. But with their inexperience, a 6 win season was likewise possible.

So far, nearly all of their question marks have been answered in the negative, and they have played mistake-filled football. That's a recipe for disaster and the reason why they're 1-2 right now.

All of that said, there still are bright spots. Bomar showed flashes against UCLA. He's a redshirt freshman so it's no surprise that he makes mistakes. But I think many people will say that the sky is the limit for him. Add Peterson to the mix along with a defense that can shut down some running games, and the team will be competitive.

At this point, though, they just aren't going to dominate anyone for a while. They really do have to rebuild, and these young guys will get better as they play. I expect they'll be significantly better at the end of the year than they are now.

The real surprise for a lot of people, I think, is how clueless they have looked at times, making big penalties, costly mistakes, and overall sloppy play. The Orange Bowl against USC aside, that's not like a Bob Stoops team. Clean that up, and there's a good chance they're 3-0 right now.

Note: This is not to take anything away from TCU or UCLA. I know very well that people can "what if" their way into any football result. Typically, it's pointless and sounds arrogant. I don't mean it that way at all. I only mean to emphasize the incredible impact these mistakes have made.

[HomerJSimpson]

The real surprise for a lot of people, I think, is how clueless they have looked at times, making big penalties, costly mistakes, and overall sloppy play. The Orange Bowl against USC aside, that's not like a Bob Stoops team. Clean that up, and there's a good chance they're 3-0 right now.




Yeah, that is what got me. Stoops has proven to be one of the better team coaches in the college ranks, and it is just surprising to see his team so "rough." Maybe you guys will go on streak late like many young teams do (starting at Red River maybe?).

[Airhog]

Hopefully we do go on a streak then. I don't think I could live anymore if I have to listen to IMTG all year about how TEXAS won.

[sooner333]

When your Heisman Trophy-winning QB graduates, when you lose four receivers to the nfl in one class, when you lose the majority of your offensive line, your best pass rusher, your middle linebacker, and you have four new starters in the secondary, there will be some growing issues. I promise.

As for the team, yeah, we lost by 17 points to UCLA...not a highlight of the Stoops era, but you look at the game, the offense played its best game, a bunch of new looks and formations installed last week. Secondary had their worst game, it's just one of those up and down things that will likely last through the year, with hopefully an upward trend.

The problem I think is that while the defense has always had a bend but don't break element, the team used to make up for that by taking more chances as well and creating turnovers. Now, instead of getting the turnovers to create field position, the other team goes on long, tiring drives that stop short early in the game, but can be sustained toward the end of the game. I mean, you look at the 2000 team, name the best players on the defense...pretty much all freshmen, sophomores and Rocky Calmus...the defensive line was no more inexperienced than this year. The difference between that team and this team defensively is that team took more chances while staying within the scheme. They also had more intensity and played harder, hitting harder as well. Ontei Jones made bunches of mistakes, but he could still give you a lick. JT Thatcher intercepted something like 7 passes...he started his career at OU as a running back. That team not only had young talent, but players willing to make plays...this years team plays soft.

I can't blame the offense, they are just young. Long had his head up his ass for the first two games, but he turned it around last game and gave Bomar a chance to succeed and had a bunch of new looks (whether or not it was him, or Stoops and Wilson who made this happen, Long will end up getting the credit, unless he's gone at the end of the year).

[digamma]

I went to the OU-UCLA game yesterday. I'm not a fan of either team, but UCLA offers a great mini-pack for season tickets and you can't beat the Rose Bowl as a tailgating venue.

So, as an impartial observer, a few thoughts...

I think the skill position guys will come together on offense. They're young, but talented. The problems on offense start and end with the offensive line. It's just not good. Missed assignments on stunts, no protection for Bomar, being overmatched on the run (granted UCLA had 9 in the box at times). This is in stark contrast to their lines of the last two years which were fantastic.

Yesterday, turnovers killed OU. 17 points off turnovers and they were directly off the turnovers. Without those, OU leads by at least 10 going into the fourth quarter.

The defense tired yesterday, but I really don't think it played that badly. They shut down Maurice Drew (and by focusing on him, you're gong to give up some on the short to mid range passing game, but that has to be the focus playing UCLA). They didn't give up a drive for a touchdown until the fourth quarter.

Not sure that adds much. The thing I was really amazed by was the contrast of the offensive line compared to the last two seasons.

[Cuckoo]

Agree wholehearetedly with everything digamma wrote. I think OU expected their offensive line to be okay with several upper classmen that had been back-ups stepping in to finally start, combined with a couple promising underclassmen. That failed miserably, and the past couple of games, they've started giving a couple of true freshmen extended minutes, knowing that the older guys aren't cutting it so you might as well give the youngsters experience.

I think, in the end, they'll be fine there (Robinson and Barresi certainly look the part). But digamma's right on in that they certainly haven't gelled yet.

[Noop]

OU will be fine Stoops needs to start rotating those young guns when they are blowing out teams. That would be my only gripe for a team I dont personally cheer for but watch intently(If that makes any kind of sense) As some of you may know I am a fan of college football and one trend I noticed is there are not alot of leaders who are superstars around the country. AP is their best player but in my opinion has showed poor leadership. OU will take their lumps this season and proceed to do it all again so to speak(except I want my Noles to win the National Title this time :))

[Karlifornia]

This is like after banging the town whore, you see on her going to the movies with another dude. You kind of get this sinking feeling, but you know she'll be lickin' your balls again tomorrow.

[Noop]

This is like after banging the town whore, you see on her going to the movies with another dude. You kind of get this sinking feeling, but you know she'll be lickin' your balls again tomorrow.
Even for me this is nasty.

[Joe]

That sounds amazingingly like your comment that Texas would overlook Rice.

Rice put up a good fight. It was closer than I thought it would be.



:D

[cartman]

You think you would at least beat OU once before you talked about how your coach has started the demise of OU football.

Well Brown does have two wins over OU, and one of them was even a Stoops coached team.

[Vegas Vic]

I'm going to cut IMTG some slack here, as he does bring up some valid points.

The biggest reason for OU's failure this year is the bust of the 2003 recruiting class. It was highly heralded by Rivals.com and everyone else, but the end result has been a fiasco. The majority of the class has either quit, flunked out or transferred, and the end result is that a lot of true freshman are playing vital roles this year. The bad news is that OU will likely be playing in the Alamo Bowl (if they qualify). The good news is that this is likely a blip on the radar, and they will be back on track next year.

Otherwise, you would have to believe that it was a fluke that Stoops won a National Championship, three Big XII Titles, a Rose Bowl, Cotton Bowl and Orange Bowl.

[Airhog]

Im not, I don't think I have every posted a thread that specifically states a team sucks. It's not called for, and is borderline trolling IMHO.