Question.....
- Thread starter CTOkie
- Start date
My guess is after the USC meltdown.....even now, it is my opinion that it was OU's most embarrassing defeat, eclipsing Switzer's loss in the 1978 Orange Bowl to Arkansas 31-6.
The 2004 team was one of OU's most highly regarded team and went 12-0. The game was over by halftime as USC led 38-10.
The 2004 team was one of OU's most highly regarded team and went 12-0. The game was over by halftime as USC led 38-10.
Today on CFD daily they discussed that. Said it was time to get rid of that moniker. I was thinking when they use it today its more of a mocking jab at him. They are the ones though that created that label.
Houstons coach ( Herman ) is now being praised by the media just like Bob was early in his career. Once Herman becomes average the media will quickly turn on him also.
Houstons coach ( Herman ) is now being praised by the media just like Bob was early in his career. Once Herman becomes average the media will quickly turn on him also.
Some in the media called this years team and this was before the Houston game possibly Bob's best team in his tenure. Really? Had not even played a game yet so what made them think that? Only goes to show that they just open their mouths and say whatever they want.
I really do think this was about the timeframe the moniker "Big Game Bob" really began taking a hit. Because up until that this time, OU was about the most invincible football program in the country!!
I think it started a year prior to the USC debacle in 2003 when OU just rolled thru the season, then got beat by KSU in the Big XII title game and many in the country didn't think OU deserved to be in the national title game. Then of course they lost to LSU.
Then the next season 2004, OU rolls again thru the regular season, then just got beyond embarrassed by USC. Hard to be considered a "Big Game" coach when you have prolly the most embarrassing national title game loss in college football history on your resume, not to mention losing 2 national title games in a row when you were considered about the top coach in the country at the time.
Then I think the final nail in the coffin was a couple of years after that when Bob's squad put Boise State on the map when they just came into that Fiesta Bowl ridiculously flat and lost that game. That was just really a sad display.
I agree that I believe it was heard after Baylor last year, and if not, definitely after the OSU throttling.
Was this before or after the Clemson debacle which was THE big game last year.
If you get to enough really big games, you lose a few.
If you think that Big Game Bob means you win every game, then you're going to be disappointed. But Bob has a .500 or winning record against most every coach he ever faced.
If you think that Big Game Bob means you win every game, then you're going to be disappointed. But Bob has a .500 or winning record against most every coach he ever faced.
Yeah I know.....like an 8-9 bowl record and a 1-4 record in national championship games or playoffs.
And last year, a 3-0 record getting to the CFP. How many of those don't you consider to be big games? Baylor? TCU? OSU? 7-1 record when we had the CCG. Your definition of big games appears to be only when we get beat.
The last six years, since the CCG went away, we've played home and home against UTenn, Notre Dame and Florida State. 5-1 in those games, with the only loss to an undefeated Domer team that played in the NC game. Which of those six wasn't a big game?
There are a dozen Big XII coaches who coached in at least one conference championship game, whom Bob has faced head to head. He is 1-1 against Frank Solich and has a winning record against everybody else. Combined record against those coaches including the ones who won the conference since the CCG went away is 69-22. Let's assume more than a few of those were big games. That would have to be considered the list of the 12 best other conference coaches during Stoops' time at OU.
You'll likely only consider either of the next two games against Ohio State a big game if we lose.
The last six years, since the CCG went away, we've played home and home against UTenn, Notre Dame and Florida State. 5-1 in those games, with the only loss to an undefeated Domer team that played in the NC game. Which of those six wasn't a big game?
There are a dozen Big XII coaches who coached in at least one conference championship game, whom Bob has faced head to head. He is 1-1 against Frank Solich and has a winning record against everybody else. Combined record against those coaches including the ones who won the conference since the CCG went away is 69-22. Let's assume more than a few of those were big games. That would have to be considered the list of the 12 best other conference coaches during Stoops' time at OU.
You'll likely only consider either of the next two games against Ohio State a big game if we lose.
Last edited by a moderator:
2015, 3-0 vs TCU, Baylor and OSU when each team was without its starting (and very good) quarterback ? Sure, I remember.
I remember the big games OU has won over the years. I also remember what I consider to be excessive big game....and sometimes not-so-big game...defeats.
There is also the many annual high preseason rankings that prove by season's end to be wrong most of the time....2000, 2013 and 2015 being exceptions.
But you keep telling me what I think as this program gets further and further away from its last national championship, 16 years ago.
I do believe, like you, that Stoops is as good a coach as this team can have and that his record is HOF worthy. If people want him removed, it's has to result in an upgrade...and given the landscape of CFB, what available coach would represent an upgrade at this time ? No one, that's who.
However, if anyone here was told in 2000 that OU would not win another championship for at least the next 16 years, it would not have been believed. And if all is well for you to have OU winning 80% of its games, getting ranked in the top 20 and going to a bowl, then go for it. That certainly doesn't make you spoiled like the rest of us.
The only two things I'd say in reply to your post, besides that I agreed with the spirit of it and the context, is that preseason rankings are largely built on Bob's quality and reputation. So if we make the CFP and return key skill guys, like the qb that finished fourth in the Heisman, and two high quality running backs, then we are going to be ranked high, despite some key losses elsewhere. That doesn't make the preseason rankings accurate related to this year's group.
Just about any other time that has happened in the past, that is that we were highly ranked, and then finished lower ranked by more than a few notches, it was mostly because of injuries. Sure, it's part of the game. But it also is highly impactful on performance.
A lot has been made by BStoops about Baker's overlooking open guys against Houston, too patiently looking for more down the field. I suspect that is the way he played last year in "this offense." But he had an elite receiver last season, and this year, he doesn't. So in key circumstances in 2015, he "locked on," to Shep and it worked out pretty good, because Sterling could get open and CTDB better when doubled a good part of the time than the other guys could with less coverage.
It was surmised by optimistic Bob, that it might improve us in the passing game, because more guys were going to get involved. But it makes coverages less predictable. Last year, Baker had a better idea how the coverage was going to rotate, because Sterling was going to get a little extra attention. Or more. This year, the defense can be more creative against us.
That could mean that in the "same offense," that Baker has to play and think differently. And he's going to have to change his approach more than a little. He's going to have to take what "this offense" gives him. The adjusting sure could have used a week against somebody with less talent, and at home.
The other thing is that winning an NC takes a whole lot of good fortune, unless you are way better than everybody else. If you're USC in 2004, or Alabama a couple of times in the last decade, that might be less true. But you still must be lucky to some extent. Avoiding injuries to the guys where the back up isn't quite up to the level of the starter are very important. Everybody in the country has some vulnerability in that. Some are more vulnerable than others.
I mean, Jason White going down with season ending knee problems, was the opposite of lucky. Especially true when it happened both times without contact. Jamal Brown getting knocked out of the CCG in 2003 was a crucial loss, even in a game where OUr record was so good, that we were making the NC game even with a loss, because his leaving, left White really vulnerable to getting beat up. And when that happened, it hurt Jason so severely that he wasn't the same player in the NC game.
It's not about who is on your roster. It's about who is available to play on game day, and how many of the truly key guys are how healthy? OU benefitted from that greatly against FSU, when they lost their top receiver for grade issues before the NC game. We used up a whole lot of luck in 2000. You have to put yourself into position to be lucky. But that year, it seemed that all the little things went OUr way, some that you control and some that you can't. One OLine injury that year at any position would have been a difference maker. We had no depth. But we had good fortune there.
The next year, the opposite was true. I don't believe in Karma. But sometimes, stuff just happens. Or doesn't. OU has less depth than most national teams, IMO, because our home recruiting base is so much thinner.
The only other school with the shortage of home grown talent who is ranked pretty high most years is Oregon. And Phil Knight has been paying for that talent for more than a decade.
Just about any other time that has happened in the past, that is that we were highly ranked, and then finished lower ranked by more than a few notches, it was mostly because of injuries. Sure, it's part of the game. But it also is highly impactful on performance.
A lot has been made by BStoops about Baker's overlooking open guys against Houston, too patiently looking for more down the field. I suspect that is the way he played last year in "this offense." But he had an elite receiver last season, and this year, he doesn't. So in key circumstances in 2015, he "locked on," to Shep and it worked out pretty good, because Sterling could get open and CTDB better when doubled a good part of the time than the other guys could with less coverage.
It was surmised by optimistic Bob, that it might improve us in the passing game, because more guys were going to get involved. But it makes coverages less predictable. Last year, Baker had a better idea how the coverage was going to rotate, because Sterling was going to get a little extra attention. Or more. This year, the defense can be more creative against us.
That could mean that in the "same offense," that Baker has to play and think differently. And he's going to have to change his approach more than a little. He's going to have to take what "this offense" gives him. The adjusting sure could have used a week against somebody with less talent, and at home.
The other thing is that winning an NC takes a whole lot of good fortune, unless you are way better than everybody else. If you're USC in 2004, or Alabama a couple of times in the last decade, that might be less true. But you still must be lucky to some extent. Avoiding injuries to the guys where the back up isn't quite up to the level of the starter are very important. Everybody in the country has some vulnerability in that. Some are more vulnerable than others.
I mean, Jason White going down with season ending knee problems, was the opposite of lucky. Especially true when it happened both times without contact. Jamal Brown getting knocked out of the CCG in 2003 was a crucial loss, even in a game where OUr record was so good, that we were making the NC game even with a loss, because his leaving, left White really vulnerable to getting beat up. And when that happened, it hurt Jason so severely that he wasn't the same player in the NC game.
It's not about who is on your roster. It's about who is available to play on game day, and how many of the truly key guys are how healthy? OU benefitted from that greatly against FSU, when they lost their top receiver for grade issues before the NC game. We used up a whole lot of luck in 2000. You have to put yourself into position to be lucky. But that year, it seemed that all the little things went OUr way, some that you control and some that you can't. One OLine injury that year at any position would have been a difference maker. We had no depth. But we had good fortune there.
The next year, the opposite was true. I don't believe in Karma. But sometimes, stuff just happens. Or doesn't. OU has less depth than most national teams, IMO, because our home recruiting base is so much thinner.
The only other school with the shortage of home grown talent who is ranked pretty high most years is Oregon. And Phil Knight has been paying for that talent for more than a decade.
Last edited by a moderator:
You whiny jackasses have a terrible memory. We won the 2014 Sugar Bowl and that phrase was all anyone heard. We beat Tennessee last year, at their home, in 2OTs.
If I'm ever NOT an OU fan, it will be because of the idiot 'OU fans'.
If I'm ever NOT an OU fan, it will be because of the idiot 'OU fans'.
Oh snap!
In his defense, I really doubt that Bob ever embraced, much less liked that handle.
It was conjured up by some sports reporter and parroted by a million fans.
What makes you think one side or another is the side of "idiot fans"??
You just have a different viewpoint than other fans. That's all. Doesn't make one side "idiots" or not. They just think differently than you.
The team we are all fans of were victims though.....on Saturday....bad football....bro.
After reading some of these posts, a thought occurred to me. I'm not sure I ever heard the phrase Big Game Bob without some level of sarcasm. It wasn't until he lost a big game or two, that the moniker started to be used as in, "What happened to Big Game Bob?"
I just know that Bob wins three or four or five big games virtually every season. And losing to Houston might not be acceptable to some, but that was a good looking team last Saturday. Not good for Houston. Just good. I hated losing. But I don't view it as some sort of negative trend. I think we won at least four big games last season. I know that when I watched the Tennessee game, I figured that beating any SEC team except maybe Vanderbilt, is a big big win.
Last year had several thrilling, big games. Tennessee as mentioned, and the hat trick
end of season, Baylor, TCU and the pokes.
Plz, don't bore me with the insipid..."Well, they didn't have their starting QBs on hand".
All history cares about is was it a win or a loss.
That applies when things work for you, and also when they go against you.
That applies when things work for you, and also when they go against you.
But of course...see aformentioned OU/Fla.
Maybe we all don't agree on what's a big game. For me playing a ranked out of conference team is a big game. Any bowl game is big. Any game for all the marbles is a big game as in National Championship. And, of course "the" game for a conference championship is a must big game. Oh, and Texas/OSU. Can't believe I forgot that.
That won't happen Saturday. Bob hardly ever loses two in a row. Nice rip of Saban.
Well to be fair, that was Saban's first year, and he has rebounded to not make it a habit since.
The reason Bob is getting grief is the same reason Les Miles is getting grief: A UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED SHORTCOMING WAS NOT FIXED.
Les's inability to diversify his offense with a competitive passing game is apparent to all
Unlike Les, Bob & Co had apparently fixed their problem after the UT game last year - getting Mixon and Perrine more involved (almost the exact opposite of Les's problem). And then we have Mayfield run the ball more than Mixon and Perrine combined vs. Houston. Why in the hell did we regress? Mixon and Perrine getting touches is not an execution problem.
Les's inability to diversify his offense with a competitive passing game is apparent to all
Unlike Les, Bob & Co had apparently fixed their problem after the UT game last year - getting Mixon and Perrine more involved (almost the exact opposite of Les's problem). And then we have Mayfield run the ball more than Mixon and Perrine combined vs. Houston. Why in the hell did we regress? Mixon and Perrine getting touches is not an execution problem.
"Hardly ever"......I left myself an out. But I expect a better game from the Sooners and a win Saturday. Not losing three in a row over a 17 year career is something that a lot of coaches can't claim, however. Boy, a loss Saturday would be terrible now that you mention the 3 in a row deal. Surely that won't happen.