What if we don't make the CCG?

  • 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.
Jun 16, 2020
380
74
28
34
Atlanta
#41
So you’re saying we should do a home and home with someone like Georgia or maybe play the defending national champion Florida State in a season opener? How about maybe a season opener with Mississippi State with Dak Prescott at quarterback?

Pick another topic, strength of schedule is NOT a reason why we don’t regularly beat OU. Perhaps OU being one of the top 3 programs in the history of college football and having the hottest offensive coach in the country might be more of a reason?
When were those games 2013 and 2014? Since you have all of the answers what is the solution to not be 2-13 vs your in state rival? If you cant beat them when you have your best roster when does it end 2-17? I am offering what I would do but if you want to be happy about playing tulsa and boise state every year have at it. You seem to know what’s not the reason but offer no ways to try to close the gap other than say they have a better coach and are a better program.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,558
6,985
1,743
Landlocked
#42
I'm sticking with my hypothesis until it's proven wrong.

Gundy runs a system that's simple and safe, because it allows for consistency. It allows us to win 8-9 games a year, mostly because we play such a weak schedule, and we recruit good *enough* players to have success against teams like KU, KSU, and ISU. But it has no chance against elite teams, which may include uo given their athletic superiority most years.

The only way we have a chance at more is to have an offense that leverages scheme over athleticism (like when DH was the OC). But we went away from that to satisfy Gundy's need for a run-first, safe, predictable, simple offense. As long as we run the current offense, we have basically no chance at getting into the CFP, and will only make our own CCG in a down year (maybe this year?) or if another team stumbles badly.

Gundy's current offensive philosophy creates a low ceiling before we even play the games, and I guess a lot of our fans are cool with that, because they "sat through the 0-10-1 season". Nevermind that we could have (and have already had) more success with a better approach, but our head coach went away from it (why???).

Our success isn't limited only by our o-line play, recruiting in general, Stillwater, injuries, or refs. That may have been the case when we were fighting to be bowl eligible when Miles took over, but we're beyond that. Our facilities and recent success allow us to be beyond that. Our goal, now, needs to be beyond 8-9 wins and a random bowl. It's time to turn the corner. But we can't do that unless Gundy changes a few things, and it doesn't seem likely that he will.
 
Aug 22, 2006
1,668
610
1,743
SE Oklahoma
#43
What if we make the CCG?

Are all you Gundy bashers going to eat crow? Are all you people that think SI should be starting over SS going to be happy with the program? Or will you sit around and wait for some adversity to happen, so you can come back and say "I told you so."

Are you more motivated to come on here to celebrate a win or complain about a loss?
I doubt there are many here that want to lose to OU, and in reality that's what we are talking about here. Bedlam is the one game where we generally open up the entire offense so I am hopeful that our defense continues what it has done all season. I always cheer for the pokes no matter what.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,558
6,985
1,743
Landlocked
#44
I doubt there are many here that want to lose to OU, and in reality that's what we are talking about here. Bedlam is the one game where we generally open up the entire offense so I am hopeful that our defense continues what it has done all season. I always cheer for the pokes no matter what.
Defense is our only chance against uo. If we get some turnovers (and maybe a defensive score), we'll have a chance. But our run-first offense can't work against them without some major playmaking on the defensive side of the ball.
 

MustangPokeFan

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2005
8,160
4,094
1,743
Mustang, Ok
www.newshoesband.net
#45
You seem to know what’s not the reason but offer no ways to try to close the gap other than say they have a better coach and are a better program.
I didn’t say I was happy about it, but sometimes the truth hurts!

There’s definitely a huge mental block associated with this game. If we just treated it like any other game, like we have treated Texas in the last 10 years, we would’ve won more. It’s because we are so obsessively desperate to win this one game that we rarely ever do.

My recommendation is to calm down, focus, execute at a high-level with the same expectation of winning we carry into our other games and try to ignore the uniforms the other side are wearing and we just might win!
 
Nov 16, 2013
4,533
2,369
743
34
tractor
#46
I'm sticking with my hypothesis until it's proven wrong.

Gundy runs a system that's simple and safe, because it allows for consistency. It allows us to win 8-9 games a year, mostly because we play such a weak schedule, and we recruit good *enough* players to have success against teams like KU, KSU, and ISU. But it has no chance against elite teams, which may include uo given their athletic superiority most years.

The only way we have a chance at more is to have an offense that leverages scheme over athleticism (like when DH was the OC). But we went away from that to satisfy Gundy's need for a run-first, safe, predictable, simple offense. As long as we run the current offense, we have basically no chance at getting into the CFP, and will only make our own CCG in a down year (maybe this year?) or if another team stumbles badly.

Gundy's current offensive philosophy creates a low ceiling before we even play the games, and I guess a lot of our fans are cool with that, because they "sat through the 0-10-1 season". Nevermind that we could have (and have already had) more success with a better approach, but our head coach went away from it (why???).

Our success isn't limited only by our o-line play, recruiting in general, Stillwater, injuries, or refs. That may have been the case when we were fighting to be bowl eligible when Miles took over, but we're beyond that. Our facilities and recent success allow us to be beyond that. Our goal, now, needs to be beyond 8-9 wins and a random bowl. It's time to turn the corner. But we can't do that unless Gundy changes a few things, and it doesn't seem likely that he will.
You left out one thing. Gundy was forced to allow Holgy to run his offense and it was probably strongly suggested Monken get the same latitude. I know Monken and Gundy are friends, but that kind of offense is not in Gundy's wheelhouse. If someone hadn't demanded the changes there would have been no 2011.

We just need to face up to the fact that we are now a pedestrian offense that tries to act like it's still able to blow people out. I will cheer for my team, but we are a shadow of what once was. If they figure out how to beat the goons I will be excited and happy, but the Magic 8 Ball is saying "Not likely"

One other thing, I supported Gundy this summer and they have moved beyond that drama. I admire the way they run a clean program and have navigated the pandemic. Gundy needs to get out of his own way and get an offense the defense can be proud of
 
Jun 25, 2011
587
387
613
#47
I worry we have hit Gundy’s plateau. He has been good at getting the school attention (of course that sword cuts both ways) but he goes from “colorful” to “weird” real quick if we never break the barrier. He clearly has an ou problem and I can’t help but think it will raise its head again Saturday, win or lose. I also believe that he is not the offensive genius he seems to think himself to be..he needs a headstrong oc that will buck up against him if we are to ever reach the top.
I do think Gundy has hit his plateau. Perhaps that is why Holder mentioned that if he was Gundy he would be pounding the trail for 4 and 5 star players. Maybe Holder also thought Gundy had hit his ceiling and was trying to light a fire in Gundy to take the next step. Gundy's teams seem to outplay their stars, but to break through his ceiling he needs to figure out how to recruit better.
 
Sep 29, 2011
1,867
413
713
61
Breckenridge, CO
#52
Not ultra conservative on offense
Yurcich was a very good OC, was ready for Power 5 and proved it
Gundy hasn't changed is offensive philosophy
We don't play to win by 3

Pretty much guts your entire rant

Yurcich wasn't a good OC till like year 3. We have changed our offensive philosophy since year one with Yurcich. Thats when we went to the current offense of passing to the sidelines, running up the middle or throwing it deep. Maybe ultra conservative is the wrong terminology maybe ultra simple is better. And I haven't watched a game in at least 3 years where we played to demoralize an opponent. We don't scare anyone offensively anymore.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
In Yurcich’s first year we averaged 520 yds of offense per game without a single all-conference player. 510 yds per game in 2014 with a waaaaay below average QB and stable of RBs.

The goal is not to be complicated, simple, aggressive, conservative or to demoralize anyone. Failure to do any of the aforementioned is meaningless. The goal is to win games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Aug 22, 2006
1,668
610
1,743
SE Oklahoma
#53
Not ultra conservative on offense
Yurcich was a very good OC, was ready for Power 5 and proved it
Gundy hasn't changed is offensive philosophy
We don't play to win by 3

Pretty much guts your entire rant

Yurcich wasn't a good OC till like year 3. We have changed our offensive philosophy since year one with Yurcich. Thats when we went to the current offense of passing to the sidelines, running up the middle or throwing it deep. Maybe ultra conservative is the wrong terminology maybe ultra simple is better. And I haven't watched a game in at least 3 years where we played to demoralize an opponent. We don't scare anyone offensively anymore.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
In Yurcich’s first year we averaged 520 yds of offense per game without a single all-conference player. 510 yds per game in 2014 with a waaaaay below average QB and stable of RBs.

The goal is not to be complicated, simple, aggressive, conservative or to demoralize anyone. Failure to do any of the aforementioned is meaningless. The goal is to win games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But you're forgetting 2013, his 1st year. Easy to forget I guess

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
 
Sep 12, 2008
346
93
1,578
#55
How many more times should Gundy have won against OU?

Are we the better team going into this game?

The Texas game was hugely disappointing, because we clearly were the better team and we gave it away.
 
Nov 16, 2013
4,533
2,369
743
34
tractor
#56
How many more times should Gundy have won against OU?

Are we the better team going into this game?

The Texas game was hugely disappointing, because we clearly were the better team and we gave it away.
We are #1 in the conference and have two teams that beat the goons while losing to a horrific whorn team the goons beat. We have as good or better talent, but the question is do we turtle up?
 
Sep 29, 2011
1,867
413
713
61
Breckenridge, CO
#57
I'm sticking with my hypothesis until it's proven wrong.

Gundy runs a system that's simple and safe, because it allows for consistency. It allows us to win 8-9 games a year, mostly because we play such a weak schedule, and we recruit good *enough* players to have success against teams like KU, KSU, and ISU. But it has no chance against elite teams, which may include uo given their athletic superiority most years.

The only way we have a chance at more is to have an offense that leverages scheme over athleticism (like when DH was the OC). But we went away from that to satisfy Gundy's need for a run-first, safe, predictable, simple offense. As long as we run the current offense, we have basically no chance at getting into the CFP, and will only make our own CCG in a down year (maybe this year?) or if another team stumbles badly.

Gundy's current offensive philosophy creates a low ceiling before we even play the games, and I guess a lot of our fans are cool with that, because they "sat through the 0-10-1 season". Nevermind that we could have (and have already had) more success with a better approach, but our head coach went away from it (why???).

Our success isn't limited only by our o-line play, recruiting in general, Stillwater, injuries, or refs. That may have been the case when we were fighting to be bowl eligible when Miles took over, but we're beyond that. Our facilities and recent success allow us to be beyond that. Our goal, now, needs to be beyond 8-9 wins and a random bowl. It's time to turn the corner. But we can't do that unless Gundy changes a few things, and it doesn't seem likely that he will.
You left out one thing. Gundy was forced to allow Holgy to run his offense and it was probably strongly suggested Monken get the same latitude. I know Monken and Gundy are friends, but that kind of offense is not in Gundy's wheelhouse. If someone hadn't demanded the changes there would have been no 2011.

We just need to face up to the fact that we are now a pedestrian offense that tries to act like it's still able to blow people out. I will cheer for my team, but we are a shadow of what once was. If they figure out how to beat the goons I will be excited and happy, but the Magic 8 Ball is saying "Not likely"

One other thing, I supported Gundy this summer and they have moved beyond that drama. I admire the way they run a clean program and have navigated the pandemic. Gundy needs to get out of his own way and get an offense the defense can be proud of
Not “akrut” and just another perpetuation of a false narrative.

It was suggested to Gundy he hire an OC to get him away from calling plays and to allow him to focus on the entire team. He CHOSE Holgorson because of his offensive success, and because his offense more closely fit our personnel (Weeden) than the then current zone-read offense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Sep 29, 2011
1,867
413
713
61
Breckenridge, CO
#58
Not ultra conservative on offense
Yurcich was a very good OC, was ready for Power 5 and proved it
Gundy hasn't changed is offensive philosophy
We don't play to win by 3

Pretty much guts your entire rant

Yurcich wasn't a good OC till like year 3. We have changed our offensive philosophy since year one with Yurcich. Thats when we went to the current offense of passing to the sidelines, running up the middle or throwing it deep. Maybe ultra conservative is the wrong terminology maybe ultra simple is better. And I haven't watched a game in at least 3 years where we played to demoralize an opponent. We don't scare anyone offensively anymore.



Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
In Yurcich’s first year we averaged 520 yds of offense per game without a single all-conference player. 510 yds per game in 2014 with a waaaaay below average QB and stable of RBs.

The goal is not to be complicated, simple, aggressive, conservative or to demoralize anyone. Failure to do any of the aforementioned is meaningless. The goal is to win games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But you're forgetting 2013, his 1st year. Easy to forget I guess

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
No, his first year, as I pointed out was 2013 when we averaged 520 yds per game without a single all conference player. We went 10-2 and then lost to Mizzou in Cotton Bowl.


Edit. I misread 2013. S/b 450 yds/gm. Doesn’t change the answer.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,558
6,985
1,743
Landlocked
#59
Not “akrut” and just another perpetuation of false narrative.

It was suggested to Gundy he hire an OC to get him away from calling plays and to allow him to focus on the entire team. He CHOSE Holgorson because of his offensive success, and because his offense more closely fit our personnel (Weeden) than the then current zone-read offense.
In my view, it doesn't matter (nor will any of us really know) why Holgersen was hired. Here are the facts, though. We had immense success with him here, because his offense gave us a chance against superior opponents; something we've lost since he left.

My hypothesis is that we can't beat an elite team with our current offensive system, and we either have to accept that we'll never be a CFP team, or we have to change something to get there.

The Colonies didn't line up in musket lines and go toe-to-toe against the British in the Revolutionary War, because we simply didn't have the forces to win that kind of war. Our leaders knew that, so they devised new tactics that leveraged our advantages.

David didn't stroll up to Goliath with a sword and try to fight hand-to-hand. He knew he stood no chance in that kind of fight against a superior opponent. So he leveraged what he had, and used it in a unique way to gain an advantage.

Gundy is basically lining us up in fields against the most powerful opponents, and (I guess?) thinks that we can win toe-to-toe fights with the big boys when that is simply an impossibility given the recruiting disparities at play. We have to find a different way to have success, or we have to settle for 8-9 wins and a random bowl.

Unfortunately, it appears that Gundy and our fans would rather settle than make the necessary (and small tweaks) that give us a fighting chance against the big boys.
 
Aug 22, 2006
1,668
610
1,743
SE Oklahoma
#60
520, 545, 550, 450, 380 Holgy, Monken 2 years, Yurcich 2 years. He improved with Rudolph and Washington without a doubt. But lets not make it out like he set the world on fire and was an all time hire. It was definitely a downgrade at the time and was noticeably different.