Any "big game..."

[the_ouskull]

...is gone and gone. He's just Bob now. I've been saying it for a few years. I think that the "big game" coach left when Mike did.

Discuss.

the_ouskull

[the_ouskull]

Not that anybody gives a d*mn, but here's what I think...I think Bob needs to get comfortable enough with his offensive coordinators to allow them to call the plays on offense, and I think that Bob needs to take back over the defense, or beg Mike to come back from Arizona. I've said the same thing since the USC game. And by "take back over" I don't mean the play calling. I mean the coaching. ALL of it. The scheming, overseeing position coaches teaching technique, the execution of said techniques, AND the play calling.

Sadly, with Stoops' loyalty to his assistants, and the fact that Brent V's been with him since K-State (and don't take me literally, please, because I know Brent V wasn't at Florida with him) I don't see him getting let go happening. I'm one more game like this one; like the West Virginia game, etc... away from saying, "Yes, that's what we do, no doubt. We have to get rid of Brent V."

And honestly, I think it's the right thing to do NOW...

...but I don't coach the team, either. I'm not capable of doing so. I lack the knowledge, and the ability to consistently out-perform other coaches at the highest levels; coaches of teams against whom an overwhelming talent advantage in our favor does not exist. Sadly, this is something I have in common with our current defensive coordinator. When the talent is close, not necessarily even even... just close, we've been beaten, usually due to the failures; no, the breakdowns of our once-feared defense.

Since the loss of Mike Stoops as a defensive coordinator, our losses have been bigger, and they've come against less-talented teams. What's scary (to both Sooner fans, and Sooner enemies) is 2-11-1. For as good as Oklahoma has been over the past near decade, since losing Mike Stoops, 79% of our team's losses have come against (in my estimation) teams that were noticeably less physically talented that our own. Our defense is 2-10-2 (two losses were the result of the offense, 10 the defense, and 2 powers beyond normal control) since Mike Stoops left as well.

Allow me an explanation, please...

2001:

-- A loss to Nebraska, in Lincoln, in which we only allowed 20 points to an offense being led by a Heisman trophy winning quarterback. It was our offensive impotence that day (and season) that would hurt our team. The defense played well. Mike Stoops was still here.

-- A loss to Oklahoma State in Norman. This was baaad. Once again, our defense played their *sses off, only allowing 16 points to a fired-up team that averaged 23 per. We just could not move the football. Any. It was all on the offense.

2002:

These were on the defense, mostly... Although we weren't able to score REALLY well, 26 (in a 4 point loss at A&M) and 28 (in a 10 point loss at Stillwater) points are usually enough to win a game. It was our defense's inability to cover the play-action fade that got us destroyed by two vastly inferior teams.

Mike Stoops is 2-2 in losses since the National Championship season. Let's continue...

2003:

-- The most points our defense allowed all season long was 28 in a 24 point win against David Carr and Fresneck State. We only allowed an average of 13 per game that season... then Mike Stoops decided to take the Arizona job. Worst idea ever! But, even the 28 point loss to K-State in the Big 12 Championship game can't be laid at the lap of the defense, even though they weren't able to tackle worth a d*mn that evening, and they couldn't stay in their lanes to save their bloody lives at the L.O.S. Mainly because an offense that, up to that point, had averaged 48 points per game suddenly decided to put up 7 points in the Big 12 Championship game. That one's on the O, not the D. (Photo finish...)

-- If you watched the 2003 National Championship game against LSU, then you know that game was not on the defense... OR the offense... It was just a hard-nosed football game on both sides for both teams. One fatal coaching error, one that a brother may have talked him out of, (yes, TOTAL speculation on my part... I'm comfortable with that) to abandon the run at the end of the game did us in there.

The Oklahoma Defense is 3-2-1 in losses since the National Championship season.

2004:

--

The Oklahoma Defense is now 3-3-1 in losses since the National Championship season of 2000.

2005:

-- The TCU loss. Offense, even though our defense was also outplayed... Just by a far less talented team.

-- The UCLA loss. That one's TOTALLY on the defense. I'm a MJD fan now. Not because he beat OU, but because the way he played against us that day, I was scared NOT to like the guy.

-- The Texas loss is all on the defense. Yes, the offense only scored 12, but 12 points has won the RRS in the Bob Stoops era. Giving up 45 hasn't.

-- Then came the Texas Tech game.

The Oklahoma Defense is now 4-6-2 since the 2000 season.

2006:

-- The Oregon loss. Sorry guys, I'm blaming the defense, not the officiating. Although both received 50% of the blame votes... Our defense received a larger percentage of the electoral votes, and, therefore, wins a close call. The offense scored 33 in Autzen. That should have been enough.

-- The Tejas game. We allowed 4 yards per run, and 10 yards per pass. I don't care if the offense only put up 10. When you're allowing a team to literally march the field with the perfect averages for offensive production, then it's on the defense.

-- Boise State. This just in... 42 points ought to be enough to win a game when there is an overwhelming talent disparity. This was on the defense more than anything has ever, ever been on the defense.

The Oklahoma Defense is now 4-8-2 in losses since the 2000 season.

2007:

-- We allowed an unranked Colorado team to score 27 points, home field or not... We consistently gave up big first downs late in the second half to a freshman quarterback... It's on the defense.

-- The Tech game. Why are these always so f*cked up? I don't really blame the offense, even though we lost Bradford early... although the offense wasn't very... well, good. I blame the defense. We lost Bradford at the beginning of the game. Our defensive gameplan against Tech has always been a very, very good one. Last year, it wasn't. We allowed them 2 4th down conversions. Great defense isn't just about being solid, and about being able to make big plays when they're needed most. When your starting QB goes down, as a defensive player, you need to step up... not lay down.

-- West Virginia.

The Oklahoma Defense is now 4-11-2 in losses since the 2000 season.

2008

The Oklahoma Defense is now 4-12-2 in losses since the 2000 season.

We were a .500 team, loss-wise, when Mike Stoops was here. We also lost a H*ll of a lot fewer games...

We were 55-9 from 1999 until the Big 12 Championship game of 2003. That's a winning percentage of .859. Since then, we're 47-14, for a winning percentage of .770. And, as the lengthy part of my post explained, a much higher percentage of our losses have been as a result of the defense since Mike left.

But, as I already stated, I think that Coach Stoops is simply too loyal to "his people" to ever fire or demote Brent V. Whatever needs to be done needs to be done soon. We're losing waaaaaay too many games that we should be winning. Granted it's a non-quantifiable statistic, but in games we've lost since December of 2003, we're 2-11-1 talent-wise. (Meaning we've lost 2 games to teams of greater talent (2004 USC, and 2005 Tejas) 11 games to teams of lesser talent, and one game to a team of equal talent. (LSU in 2003)

How much longer can Stoops ignore this trend at the expense of his interpersonal relationships...?

the_ouskullspiracytheorist

[Danimal]

The Stoops boys were better off together. Mike is better off as the hell-raising DC than as the head cheese. Venables is a good DC but considering the huge talent-level he has too many games like the last couple bowls where OU just isn't ready.