Let's put away the torches and pitchforks!

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,224
6,579
1,743
Landlocked
#82
So you are saying Gundy is like Travis Ford yet his results show him to be much closer to Eddie Sutton at least in terms of records and position in the conference...and historically for our football program when you think about where we have been. It's really apples to oranges when comparing basketball and football coaching but IMHO wanting Gundy gone is extreme folly on the level of wanting Eddie gone in the down years (late 90's) , an unrealistic impression of our position, and worst of all, self defeating...in the very least it would be fan base splitting / shattering if it was to happen without due process of several seasons (and no, 10 win season are NEVER down seasons anywhere, least of all at Oklahoma State).

My advice would be to take a break if one cannot handle the ups and downs of following a football program that doesn't always win championships. It's not easy being an Oklahoma State fan and that is the very thing that makes the good seasons so much fun, we have been spoiled for about a decade but make no mistake it was very fun. IMHO, if a person cannot enjoy the good and root for the kids during the bad then what is the point of being a fan? Is it so we can stick out our chest and say we are a fan of a team that always wins Championships...to make us feel better about our own life? If so, we might as well be ou fans.
Dude........you're all over the place. I'm not comparing Travis Ford and Mike Gundy. I'm comparing my level of interest in watching their teams play. Obviously apples/oranges. I'm just saying that our football team with OCMY is dang near unwatchable. Its literally the same thing as Travis Ford's offense. Ford's teams ran down the court and jacked up 3's. Low % shots that, if they're falling on a given night, we can look really good. If they're not falling, we lose bad. That's exactly the OCMY offense. Low % plays that might hit big once in a while, but they'll put you in 3rd and long just as often. Its a gimmick way to score unless you have superior talent...........and we don't. Its also super boring to watch us rotate between 6 different plays that even our fans can call with a high degree of accuracy.

And I honestly don't care what you think about me as a fan, and I couldn't care less how much of a "real fan" you think you are. There's just as much "pride" from people like you who think they are superior for enjoying sucky football as uo fans who take pride in their championships. I guess whatever helps you sleep at night....
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,361
8,291
1,743
Earth
#86
Dude........you're all over the place. I'm not comparing Travis Ford and Mike Gundy. I'm comparing my level of interest in watching their teams play. Obviously apples/oranges. I'm just saying that our football team with OCMY is dang near unwatchable. Its literally the same thing as Travis Ford's offense. Ford's teams ran down the court and jacked up 3's. Low % shots that, if they're falling on a given night, we can look really good. If they're not falling, we lose bad. That's exactly the OCMY offense. Low % plays that might hit big once in a while, but they'll put you in 3rd and long just as often. Its a gimmick way to score unless you have superior talent...........and we don't. Its also super boring to watch us rotate between 6 different plays that even our fans can call with a high degree of accuracy.

And I honestly don't care what you think about me as a fan, and I couldn't care less how much of a "real fan" you think you are. There's just as much "pride" from people like you who think they are superior for enjoying sucky football as uo fans who take pride in their championships. I guess whatever helps you sleep at night....
First off, if you think the offense is THE problem...wow.

Second...
I do take more pride in our University knowing that it doesn't fall in line behind a sports program like other schools seem too. Got me. :innocent:

Yeah, I don't lose sleep over football...never have, never will, it's a game.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,361
8,291
1,743
Earth
#87
Rack, they have a standard of winning, of excellence, that's the thing. And if they fall below that, they demand that something change. That's the difference between us and them.
They cheated to build "excellence" at all cost over a period of 50 plus years...that's the difference between us and them...that and 100s of 1,000s of bandwagon fans.

That being said, one time they "demanded excellence," fired their head coach and ended up with Schellenberger and then Blake.
 
Last edited:
Sep 23, 2018
74
31
18
37
Memphis
#88
They cheated to build "excellence" at all cost over a period of 50 plus years...that's the difference between us and them...that and 100s of 1,000s of bandwagon fans.

That being said, one time they "demanded excellence," fired their head coach and ended up with Schellenberger and then Blake.
The "cheating" part aside (this happened during Barry Switzer's tenure and has no effect on anything, anymore), what effect do the "bandwagon fans" have on the program? I'm talking MEASURABLE effect that you can tie back to them. It's the coaches and players that ultimately have to perform. Kind of absurd that you'd mention bandwagon fans, as if to say they are partially responsible for OU being good.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
11,224
6,579
1,743
Landlocked
#89
First off, if you think the offense is THE problem...wow.

Second...
I do take more pride in our University knowing that it doesn't fall in line behind a sports program like other schools seem too. Got me. :innocent:

Yeah, I don't lose sleep over football...never have, never will, it's a game.
Read what I said. I think the offense is A problem among many. But that's still not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about entertainment value.

Let's extend the aforementioned analogy. You known another reason why Ford's teams were nearly unwatchable? Because they didn't play good defense. You know another reason? They fouled a lot. Basically, it was boring and painful to watch. Aside from a two-year period where we had superior talent (Smart in basketball, M2W in football), its been the same ol' same ol'. Schemes that put our players in a position to fail, lack of discipline, lack of defense. Its no fun to watch.

So you're saying the only way to be a legit football program is to cheat?
 
Apr 2, 2008
17,035
8,050
1,743
#91
First off, if you think the offense is THE problem...wow.

Second...
I do take more pride in our University knowing that it doesn't fall in line behind a sports program like other schools seem too. Got me. :innocent:

Yeah, I don't lose sleep over football...never have, never will, it's a game.
I am going on here to say the OFFENSE is a MAJOR problem in our lack of success. Our offense scores a bunch of points and pads stats but the numbers are deceiving because half the time we are doing it playing catch-up when other teams defenses know they have the lead.

OCWTF/FUMY has no consistency in his playcalling and he doesn’t have the right players to run the Mason Rudolph offense. You can’t chunk it deep half the time with corndog. He just can’t do it so we see drives that don’t work. Also, the offensive line is BAD so let’s throw more deep passes? Are you freaking kidding me? Why can’t we throw more screen passes 5 yards down field? Why can’t the cowboy backs get the ball more?

It’s all because gundy and FUMY can’t figure out that corndog needs high percentage plays not deep passes to open the offense. I guarantee that our offense would not look as bad if we didn’t have long developing plays.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,361
8,291
1,743
Earth
#92
Rack, I hear you about your point about having multiple 10-win seasons consistently in the last 4-5 years.

Here's my thing, and I think part of what Birry is saying:

Point 1.) You can win 10 games every season that the program exists, great. But if you lose to your in-state/in-conference rival basically every season, what's the point? This brings me back to why Gundy is 2-11 against them as head coach. What is holding him and the coordinators back from truly unleashing a varied playbook that puts OU on their heels, and allows us to actually *win* some games against them? As I said in a previous post, I'd be fine with winning half of our games against them. I don't think that's asking for much.

Point 2.) Let's look at some of the 10 wins from 2017. Let's look at margin of victory and how many points *we* gave up, even though we won. This has been my problem with Gundy for at least two or three years now: the *quality* of our wins is pure crap.

Texas Tech: We won 41-34. We gave up 34 points to an unranked team and had to sweat out a win. We were ranked #14 at the time, I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong. In their stadium, sure, but according to Gundy, this was one of the best teams he had ever coached/been a part of.

Texas: We won 13-10. There's a huge flop there. Again, against an unranked team, we struggled.

West Virginia: 50-39, they were unranked. Really? We let them score 39?

Iowa State: 49-42. See a pattern here?

Those were all on the road, so I will give them a slight benefit of the doubt. But they were all inferior teams that shouldn't have given us any problems.

And then, of course, don't get me started on the three home losses. Those were ALL embarrassing, and that includes OU.

This is the issue that I've seen developing. We've put so much emphasis on offense. We can more or less call ourselves Wide Receiver University at this point, which is cool, I guess. But it doesn't mean much if you're struggling to get wins when you don't have to be. If our defense is even half better than the last three years or so, we'd have two conference championships at least.
Point 1 - I'd rather we win 10 and lose to ou than win 6 and beat them...maybe just me. Certainly I'd rather we do both (i.e. win 10 or 11 or 12 and beat ou also like in 2011).

Point 2 - wins are wins are wins....it's really arrogant to start thinking we should win by this or that or more...it's kind of like Nebraska prior to firing Solich after he won 9 he got fired...where are they today? I just think we aren't quite as high and mighty as some think we are.

Yep, we have a pattern of really bad defense and that is what he's trying to change by hiring the new DC...is it working against the spread? NO, not yet...hopefully that will change but it didn't work so far...does against non-spread teams and non-power five teams. Problem is nearly everyone in conference is now running an offense we, nor anyone else in conference, seems to be able to defend. So we don't disagree with where the problem is...and neither does Gundy evident by his firing of long term assistant and friend last year.
 
Last edited:
Apr 2, 2008
17,035
8,050
1,743
#93
Point 1 - I'd rather we win 10 and lose to ou than win 6 and beat them...maybe just me. Certainly I'd rather we do both (i.e. win 10 or 11 or 12 and beat ou also like in 2011).

Point 2 - wins are wins are wins....it's really arrogant to start thinking we should win by this or that or more...it's kind of like Nebraska prior to firing Solich after he won 9 he got fired...where are they today? I just think we aren't quite as high and mighty as some think we are.

Yep, we have a pattern of really bad defense and that is what he's trying to change by hiring the new DC...is it working against the spread? NO, not yet...hopefully that will change but it didn't work so far...does against non-spread teams and non-power five teams. Problem is nearly everyone in conference is now running an offense we, nor anyone else in conference, seems to be able to defend. So we don't disagree with where the problem is...and neither does Gundy evident by his firing of long term assistant and friend last year.
Part of being in the big 12 is having the most efficient offense and we know that the best offense is not the Yurchich offense. It’s been proven and gundy has also decided that his google skills are better than a proven leach type offense.
 
Sep 23, 2018
26
13
3
44
Stillwater
#94
Are you freaking kidding me? Why can’t we throw more screen passes 5 yards down field? Why can’t the cowboy backs get the ball more?

It’s all because gundy and FUMY can’t figure out that corndog needs high percentage plays not deep passes to open the offense. I guarantee that our offense would not look as bad if we didn’t have long developing plays.
RA just stated that we DO have these plays and HAVE run them. I don't know who to believe. I can't seem to remember many passes in the 5-10 yard range and virtually no screen passes, but I'm probably wrong. I'm not counting the "bubble screen" to a wide receiver. I'm talking about let through the blitzers/lineman and dump a screen over their heads.

Everybody that was ever watched two football games knows that you run screen passes to counter a blitzing-over aggressive defense. Yet, we never seem to burn a defense with a screen pass, something is not right with this.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,361
8,291
1,743
Earth
#95
Read what I said. I think the offense is A problem among many. But that's still not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about entertainment value.

Let's extend the aforementioned analogy. You known another reason why Ford's teams were nearly unwatchable? Because they didn't play good defense. You know another reason? They fouled a lot. Basically, it was boring and painful to watch. Aside from a two-year period where we had superior talent (Smart in basketball, M2W in football), its been the same ol' same ol'. Schemes that put our players in a position to fail, lack of discipline, lack of defense. Its no fun to watch.

So you're saying the only way to be a legit football program is to cheat?
No, we are a legit football program and I don't think it's a result of cheating. I also think Gundy's teams are a LOT more fun to watch than Fords basketball teams. Does he need to make some changes? Sure.

Additionally regarding cheating, I would say that most, if not all, blue blood programs can be traced back to original cheating regarding money being poured into their football programs at some point by, in the case of ou, local businesses (car dealers) and State governments seeking to create a revenue / pride factor in their otherwise underperforming states. Certainly the factors that created the Blue Bloods are a thing of the past, but once a Blue Blood is created systems are still changed (intentionally or otherwise) to keep them in power because big $ media sees them as their financial gravy train, and indeed they are because of the numbers of fans they have traditionally. Bandwagon fans are indeed a part of success due to sheer numbers of viewers and ticket purchasers that create and sustain a college football economy.

The current playoff system, IMHO, is also designed to (intentionally or not), and does protect the blue bloods and continues to elevate their status as does the existence of the Power 5 conferences (that's why they removed the computers and talk about the stupid "eye test"). It's VERY hard to break into Blue Blood status, especially if the revenue deck is stacked against you (number of customers). The only way we have even come close is Boone Pickens money and his interest in making us one. When that ends or reaches it's "ceiling" as I believe we have seen, it's going to be dependent on building a larger fan base that creates a bigger economy. Otherwise we end up with the problem of basketball which was an attempt to create an economy of scale without the scale (i.e. charge fewer people more money). This is where we run into problems as people bail and we don't have the scale to cover up for fan loss.

This is all just my opinion...who cares. bottom line, we all want improvement and we all want to win championships, just some of us think we have had it pretty good and don't want to go back to when we didn't have that....we have seen our fan base go from being elated to win a few games if we made any bowl to being unhappy with anything less than 10 win seasons. It's an interesting study if nothing else.
 
Apr 2, 2008
17,035
8,050
1,743
#96
RA just stated that we DO have these plays and HAVE run them. I don't know who to believe. I can't seem to remember many passes in the 5-10 yard range and virtually no screen passes, but I'm probably wrong. I'm not counting the "bubble screen" to a wide receiver. I'm talking about let through the blitzers/lineman and dump a screen over their heads.

Everybody that was ever watched two football games knows that you run screen passes to counter a blitzing-over aggressive defense. Yet, we never seem to burn a defense with a screen pass, something is not right with this.
RA is full of orange :poo:
 
Feb 7, 2007
2,074
851
1,743
Sand Springs OK
#97
That's exactly how I feel about OSU football right now. Its literally become not fun to watch us play. Like.....I'd rather go mow my lawn than watch us lose in a shootout with Iowa State. So no.......I don't enjoy watching bad football, especially when we have more talent and get outcoached. Its pathetic, and I have better things to do with my time.
GMTA x 3 ^^^^^ - As I posted in the ISU game thread, I did go mow my lawn while the game was on last Saturday. I've specifically said, more than once, that life is too short for bad football. As to my time, I chose to keep my Saturday time available for attending granddaughter's soccer and saved the money from my 18 years of buying season tickets. I attended the season opener because it was on a Thursday when a friend from Texas couldn't use his tickets and I specifically bought tickets for the Boise State game because that was the only one that interested me this year.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,361
8,291
1,743
Earth
#98
The "cheating" part aside (this happened during Barry Switzer's tenure and has no effect on anything, anymore), what effect do the "bandwagon fans" have on the program? I'm talking MEASURABLE effect that you can tie back to them. It's the coaches and players that ultimately have to perform. Kind of absurd that you'd mention bandwagon fans, as if to say they are partially responsible for OU being good.
Twin - I would say that the level of interest and funding that ou has put their football team has continued to this day and started in the late 40's early 50's when rumor has it that the okc car dealerships approached Oklahoma A&M's Iba with a plan to "fund' our football program and were turned down because Iba valued integrity and amateurship of the game. They headed down to Norman instead. That's when it started and the status placed on that football program hasn't ended to this day. I would think you might need to do some research on this very site in order to educated yourself a little more on their history of "excellence."

Regarding "band wagon fans" they help increase the economy/size of the fan base which fuels money into the program. We actually need more of those.
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,361
8,291
1,743
Earth
#99
Part of being in the big 12 is having the most efficient offense and we know that the best offense is not the Yurchich offense. It’s been proven and gundy has also decided that his google skills are better than a proven leach type offense.
fact...
Oklahoma State is currently #12 in total offense....
"Proven Leach type" offense, Washington State, is #21.
;)
 
Apr 2, 2008
17,035
8,050
1,743
fact...
Oklahoma State is currently #12 in total offense....
"Proven Leach type" offense, Washington State, is #21.
;)
Washington state recruits are terrible. He is making caviar out of trash. OSU has the #12 offense with better players and playing terrible teams. When you are down 2 scores, it’s easier for our offenseto move on the opponents defense. We could have the #12 offense and still have a losing season because the stats don’t show the terrible field position Yurchich puts our defense in.