narfa wrote: Kind of funny how we get to this point. In the first half of the 2000s, both Stoops and Tressel were considered the best big game coaches.

narfa wrote: You're asking me to explain why oddsmakers are wrong?

cincydawg4 wrote:

narfa wrote: You're asking me to explain why oddsmakers are wrong?

Oddsmakers don't care who wins.  Their employers always win if the bets are done right.

coopercougar wrote:

hidownthai95 wrote: so glad buckeyes did not get Stoops' brother for DC

Don't be so quick with that.  This year Mobilhoma's defense was as well coached as it has been in years.  Their problem is talent.  Mike Stoops said it after the game and some can accuse him of throwing his players under the bus but he said his defense didn't have the explosive playmakers to keep up with A&M's offense and he's right.  

The reason Bob got rid of Brent Venebales and brought Mike back was because Venebales was getting dominated on the recruiting front, especially for really explosive defenders... basically since Gene Chizik showed up in Austin.  Bob got really concerned a couple of years ago when Tim DeRuyter became the DC at A&M and started beating Venebales for defenders.  Mike is a better recruiter but he's also a better coach.  He coached around a lot of the talent deficiencies he had this year, especially on the DL, but A&M exposed Mike's unit where they are weakest.

Bob becomes his own worst enemy this time of year.  He is the anti-Mack.  Mack meddles during the season, bothers his coordinators and makes things overly complicated for everyone, but in the bowl break he steps back, strips everything down to simplest form and then lets his coordinators do their thing.  That is why his bowl record is so good.  Bob is the exact opposite.  He gets out of the way during the season and lets his coaches coach and they create a nice little machine that hums along, but in the bowl break Bob tries to out-smart everyone by changing up everything they do.  The Cotton Bowl was a good example. Instead of being the hyper-fast offense they had been so successful running all year trying to run 100 plays and score 50+, Bob had them grinding the clock.  They went fast early and moved the ball well and then slowed down to grind the clock and the machine came to a grinding halt.  When they tried to speed back up they were out of rhythm.  He did the exact same thing in '08 when he had one of the greatest offenses of all time and went into the BCS title game against Florida and decided he was going to be a completely different offense.  In a way, Bob's gameplan for A&M worked... Mobilhoma dominated the TOP.  Of course, he neutered his own offense to accomplish that.

If you're a dirt burglar fan, your hope is that Mike can recruit some difference makers on defense and then convince his brother to butt out.  You also hope that he considers bringing Mark Mangino back to the trailer park to run the offense because Heupel doesn't have the stones to stand up to Bob.  Mangino can sit on Bob and do his job just fine.

SCUMbuster wrote: "Big Game" Bob loses another one...surprising no one.

Choklahoma and VaTech are consistent BCS losers, gotta give them that. With Wisconsin making a late charge to join this elite group.

hidownthai95 wrote: 6burgh is the one who is blatantly wrong.

it doesnt matter what the oddsmakers put the lines at. fact is tressel won. My god are expectations so vastly high for tOSU they have to be favored in every game or theyre not a good enough team?

I dont understand WTF youre talking about 

BuckeyeRob wrote:

truebuckeye99 wrote:

In 14 years under Stoops, Oklahoma is 7-6 in bowl games (missing one year of probation due to the Brett Rhomar debacle) and won one national championship. In that same 14 year stretch, Ohio State is 6-6 in bowl games including 5-3 in BCS bowls (having missed one year due to a 6-6 record under Coop and this year due to a probation because of Tressel lying to the NCAA) and won one national championship. Under Stoops, the Sooners are 1-3 in national championship games and Ohio State is 1-2 during that same stretch under JT.

Stoops has a combined record of 148–36 (.804). He has only lost 4 games in Norman, and accumulated a home winning streak of 39 consecutive games from 2005 to 2011.He led the Sooners to the 2000 BCS National Championship and finished the season undefeated, outscoring 13 opponents by a combined 481–194. Stoops' teams have finished the season ranked in the Top 10 of the polls for 9 of 10 seasons, 6 of those 9 being in the Top 5.

So you are comparing Bob Stoops to 3 different coaches... way to go....

6burgh wrote: Vegas sets the odds so that half of the bets are on one team and half on the other.

The point was about the perception. If the perception of OSU's coach was that he was a big game coach then the betting public would have had a lot more faith in OSU and the Buckeyes would have been favored based on talent on the field.

Amazing that OSU fans have such a low opinion of the program, its players and its resources that they'll defend a coach as a legend who was 1-6 against peer programs FL, LSU, Texas and USC.

6burgh wrote: Vegas sets the odds so that half of the bets are on one team and half on the other.

The point was about the perception. If the perception of OSU's coach was that he was a big game coach then the betting public would have had a lot more faith in OSU and the Buckeyes would have been favored based on talent on the field.

Amazing that OSU fans have such a low opinion of the program, its players and its resources that they'll defend a coach as a legend who was 1-6 against peer programs FL, LSU, Texas and USC.

6burgh wrote: Oklahoma doesn't have the quality recruiting base of Ohio State. Stoops must reach out into Texas and other states. Thus their average star ratings are probably the lowest of any major power.

Stoops "has been to" 4 NC games, has won over 80% of his games and is 7-7 in bowls. None of his wins are vacated. Fans can't defend OSU's last coach's record  to all ends then call Oklahoma the "worst big-time program".

6burgh wrote: Vegas sets the odds so that half of the bets are on one team and half on the other.

The point was about the perception. If the perception of OSU's coach was that he was a big game coach then the betting public would have had a lot more faith in OSU and the Buckeyes would have been favored based on talent on the field.

Amazing that OSU fans have such a low opinion of the program, its players and its resources that they'll defend a coach as a legend who was 1-6 against peer programs FL, LSU, Texas and USC.

UCLAMarv wrote: Oklahoma has been recruting players nationally for over 40 years, so that isn't the problem.

One area in which I've noticed a severe dropoff over the past five years is the DT position; I don't know if it's the talent, suspect S&C traning principles, or something else.

BobLobla wrote: Sooners are consistently mediocre and haven't won a big game in forever. Sure Texas is garbage right now but atleast they have the potential to flip the switch and be viable. Sooners are the biggest chumps in the nation IMO. Why they receive a plush pre-season ranking every year is beyond me. Being an Oklahoma fan would be the most frustrating of any program. Are they the country's best example of a toothless paper tiger?

6burgh wrote:

UCLAMarv wrote: Oklahoma has been recruting players nationally for over 40 years, so that isn't the problem.

One area in which I've noticed a severe dropoff over the past five years is the DT position; I don't know if it's the talent, suspect S&C traning principles, or something else.

Twenty years ago a player had to go to a ND or Michigan to get on national TV. Now players can stay home or go to any school and get national and NFL exposure. This has hurt teams that have recruited nationally like Michigan, ND, Oklahoma and Nebraska. Of course ND is doing well this year, but as a general rule.