|
|
Post by cynicalpuppet on Jan 9, 2013 20:49:45 GMT -5
This poll was taken on the OU scout free site.  FIRE BOB STOOPS? Poll ends on 01/11/2013 YES: 337 votes NO: 335 votes |
|
|
|
Post by lynchmob42 on Jan 10, 2013 12:23:40 GMT -5
Ridiculous.
|
|
Mohawk
All-American
Posts: 189
|
Post by Mohawk on Jan 10, 2013 13:21:21 GMT -5
Apparently people have forgotten the John Blake years. All they see is a guy like Nick Saban and wonder why Stoops isn't producing to the same degree.
|
|
|
|
Post by cynicalpuppet on Jan 10, 2013 17:10:15 GMT -5
OU has gotten soft on defense. For whatever reason, it's true. I'm not one that wants Stoops fired. But it's obvious the problems we are having is on that side of the ball.
That said, our lack of depth at LB/DT is going to hurt for the next couple of years.
|
|
tetonhawk
All-American
Go Big Blue
Posts: 103
|
Post by tetonhawk on Jan 11, 2013 0:44:22 GMT -5
OU has gotten soft on defense. For whatever reason, it's true. I'm not one that wants Stoops fired. But it's obvious the problems we are having is on that side of the ball. That said, our lack of depth at LB/DT is going to hurt for the next couple of years. You will improve immensely with a new quarterback. imho |
|
|
|
Post by lynchmob42 on Jan 11, 2013 10:53:42 GMT -5
2012: 10-3*
2011: 10-3
2010: 12-2*
2009: 9-5
2008: 12-2*
2007: 11-3*
2006: 11-3*
*Conference Champions
People are seriously upset about this record?
|
|
|
|
Post by architechguy on Jan 11, 2013 11:30:08 GMT -5
I agree about the QB. Teams hitch their wagon to their QB and their success goes as he goes. Landry Jones was a good player, but limited, he wasn't good enough on his own to lift the team to a higher level.
Also, the talent at defensive line has really dropped off in the last few years. OU used to crank out one fire breathing DE or DT after another. Tommy Harris, Gerald McCoy, etc... where are the guys taking their place?
OU has the overall talent to keep them in the top 10-top 15 every year, they're in contention to play for a championship every season. They just haven't had that one player to put them over the top.
|
|
|
|
Post by cynicalpuppet on Jan 12, 2013 18:05:31 GMT -5
2012: 10-3* 2011: 10-3 2010: 12-2* 2009: 9-5 2008: 12-2* 2007: 11-3* 2006: 11-3* *Conference Champions People are seriously upset about this record? Unfortunately, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by lynchmob42 on Jan 12, 2013 19:01:29 GMT -5
Like I said before.... ridiculous. It would be one thing if you were getting these records and not winning the conference, like Nebraska, but when you consistently compete for and win the conference, you're doing the right things.
|
|
|
|
Post by archie on May 13, 2013 14:55:59 GMT -5
Anybody catch the comments that Bob Stoops made last week about the SEC and the media feeding propoganda? Naturally, he has been getting ridiculed like nobody's business around these parts.
However, as much as SEC folks I live around don't want to admit it, I think Bob has a little bit of a point. The SEC is incredibly top heavy, the top 6 in the conference last year went 30-0 against the bottom 8 in the conference and only played 9 of a possible 15 games against each other. Those 6 games would've produced 6 more losses between them, how would their final rankings have been impacted if they had 6 more losses shared between them?
|
|
|
|
Post by cynicalpuppet on May 13, 2013 16:28:00 GMT -5
archie, I wish Stoops had just left it alone, but he's not real good with the media...never has been. :\
|
|
|
|
Post by archie on May 14, 2013 15:47:29 GMT -5
I'm glad he said it. If nothing else, he planted the seed in the minds of the media. When November rolls around, we'll see if it gets brought up again in the annual BCS debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by archie on May 14, 2013 16:31:52 GMT -5
Also, I'm glad he used the word propaganda. That's the part that got everybody in these parts rolling their eyes, but it really is true. SEC teams get collective credit for things they didn't necessarily accomplish. What I'm talking about is the myth of the famed "gauntlet schedule". The idea is spread by SEC media that any team in the SEC that finishes with a winning record in conference is considered to have "run the gauntlet of the SEC", and every team that doesn't finish with a winning record is excused for having a losing record because the "SEC schedule is SUCH a challenging gauntlet". Well, the truth is that not every team's schedule of games is equally as challenging. Take the examples of Mississippi State and Vanderbilt. Both were considered to be the breakout teams of last year, the pinnacle of SEC competitiveness. They won 9 games and went 5-3 in conference. However, both of them went undefeated against the lightweights of their division, lost BADLY to the 3 heavyweights of their division, and lucked out by having the two lightweights of the opposite division on their schedule. What gauntlet exactly did they run? Same with Georgia, they went to the SEC Championship game and were 5 yards away from the national championship game. Their resume was a 28 point loss to South Carolina, a 7 point win over Florida, and ZERO games against the West contenders. Does ONE win against a ranked team really constitute "running the SEC gauntlet"?
THAT... is the propaganda that the media feeds the public about the SEC. The idea that every team in the conference runs some mythical gauntlet. It simply isn't true, but nobody in the media will talk about it if no coach has the gonads to say it in the first place. So it's too bad Stoops has to take the ridicule for it, but it needed to be said.
|
|
