spaceman wrote:

BootleggersBoy wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- spaceman wrote:

ZachGivens wrote:Berry Tramel: "Those close to the program say both coaches and players grew frustrated at Kittle's lack of coaching acumen."

"When Stoops' critics say he's gotten complacent and soft, the best evidence is Bruce Kittle."

"The natives are restless, and I don't mean the Chickasha plumber or the Shawnee druggist or the Oklahoma City writer. I mean influential boosters and donors and decision-makers, who still are loyal to Stoops but want to know why he's not winning like the Sooners did not so long ago. Which is why the guillotine was sharpened."

---------------------------------------------

Stoops is doing what you want. What will satisfy you?

Unlike you, I refuse to give Bobby an A for trying. When he puts a legitimate contender on the field again I will give him credit. 

SkunksButtSmell wrote: No offense Numbers, but you were the one who started this by injecting yourself into his comment about Tramel.  Just because he mentions Tramel doesnt mean he was talking bad about you, but that appears to be how you took it.  And it does seem kind of strange that a Mod. interjects themselves into conversations the way you do.

12233 wrote:

LVokie wrote:

12233 wrote:

LVokie wrote:

12233 wrote:

EagleGrowl3 wrote: Tramel's guess. He no longer has sources. The staff will barely talk to him.

LMAO!!! You won't buy Trammel's story because you were Kittle's biggest defender on the board. Every time I posted something negative about Bob hiring Kittle, you jumped in to tell me how wrong I was, and how Kittle was the best position coach on the staff. It looks like you couldn't have been more wrong.

It doesn't matter whether Trammel got information from his sources or made up the whole story just for kicks. The fact is, Bob Stoops told us all we need to know about the coaching ability of Bruce Kittle. Apparently Kittle was so incompetent, even a head coach who was one of his best friends had to fire him.

Firing Kittle had to be terribly difficult for Stoops. It's not easy to fire a close friend, especially when the hire was extremely questionable to start with. Bob took a chance when he hired Kittle, because, like I said, over and over, Kittle had absolutely no experience as a position coach at the college level. It turned out to be a bad decision and Bob was forced to admit it was a mistake and correct it. Not easy for Bob on any level.

I take no solace in a man losing his job, but I've taken the heat on this board for two years, much of it from you, for my opposition to the hire. Based on Bob's decision to fire Kittle, it would appear I was right from day one. Bob not only fired Kittle, he didn't even make an attempt to call it a resignation...he just canned him outright. Tough, tough decision for Bob Stoops, but one he obviously felt he had to make.

Dude ... Valium.  Counseling.  Maybe both.  The man's gone, just like you wanted.  Your world is all fresh and new.  So chill the 'bleep' out.

I'll give your advice serious consideration. But you could have just said, "You were right." Would have been kinda nice.

I never said you were wrong in the first place.  Hackles down; it'll make it that much easier to pat yourself on the back.

With all the criticism, cussing out and just general heat I took for two years, maybe I'm entitled to a pat on the back. Please don't talk to me about hackles. You are the one who started this with your comments about Vallium and counseling. I have always treated you with respect on this board and only ask the same in return. I have no problem with anyone who wants to disagree with me, but we are both Sooners and should be able to disagree without snide remarks and personal attacks. At least, that's the way I see it.

rebelreal wrote: Zone blocking teams its probably not a good idea to split up the O-linemen imo.

Jhn412412 wrote: 12233,

I completely agree with you on this subject.  Anyone justifying the hiring of Kittle is a blind homer.  Would you catch Saban hiring a nobody to coach at one of the best colleges in the country?  No.  There is no dispute, an inexperienced best friend of BStoops is not qualified to coach at a university like Oklahoma.  I would be mad if they added him to the staff of Edmond North.

It was the "rationale" by which 12233 disagreed with the hire that I think Eagle disagreed with him about.

The "pay your dues" camp. Every exchange I personally saw that was the core issue. I am in Eagle's camp, meaning I don't care if they were a lawyer or pastor or whatever as long as we get the top talent! I understand why some talented coaches don't go the coaching route. Very hard on your family and takes years before you make much money.

Now turns out 12233 was correct it is was a poor hire based on his ability. Now I for one just want us to find the best people for the job without the union laden seniority rules crap.

Talent rules.

12233 wrote:

EagleGrowl3 wrote:

champions77 wrote: 

To create a second Offensive Line Coaching position to hire a college teammate and friend, who up until that time had been a Minister and a assistant High school coach, is not the type of pedigree that gets hired at a place like OU.

If you don't have a GA who was an OL, I agree with having 2 OL coaches. 15+ guys are too many for one man to coach.

Eagle, didn't you post not long ago that about 20% of college teams have 2 O-Line coaches. I assume that means 80% have only one. I have no idea how many schools have GA's who played O-Line, but I can tell you for sure that not one of the teams that has played for the NC in the last 10 years currently has more than one O-Line coach.

Prior to the hiring of Kittle, Bob only saw the need for one O-Line coach, and now that Kittle is gone, apparently we are magically back to needing only one. It seems fairly clear to me that Bob created a second O-Line coaching position for no purpose other than hiring his buddy.

EagleGrowl3 wrote:

12233 wrote:

EagleGrowl3 wrote:

champions77 wrote: 

To create a second Offensive Line Coaching position to hire a college teammate and friend, who up until that time had been a Minister and a assistant High school coach, is not the type of pedigree that gets hired at a place like OU.

If you don't have a GA who was an OL, I agree with having 2 OL coaches. 15+ guys are too many for one man to coach.

Eagle, didn't you post not long ago that about 20% of college teams have 2 O-Line coaches. I assume that means 80% have only one. I have no idea how many schools have GA's who played O-Line, but I can tell you for sure that not one of the teams that has played for the NC in the last 10 years currently has more than one O-Line coach.

Prior to the hiring of Kittle, Bob only saw the need for one O-Line coach, and now that Kittle is gone, apparently we are magically back to needing only one. It seems fairly clear to me that Bob created a second O-Line coaching position for no purpose other than hiring his buddy.

I'd have 2. Or at least 1 GA.

12233 wrote:
Skunks, I think you're wrong. Please go back and look at the thread. It was Eagle Grow's comment about Trammel that I responded to. Eagle Grow and I have been disagreeing about the Kittle hire for two years, and my reaction to his comment about Trammel was nothing more than a continuation of that debate. LVokie had nothing to do with it.

This is a three page thread and LVokie didn't have a single post on the entire thread until his remarks toward me about taking Vallium and needing counseling. He was the one who inserted himself in the ongoing disagreement between EagleGrow and myself.

LVokie has the right to comment on the board anytime he wants. My only problem with his post was I didn't appreciate the snide remarks. He wasn't participating in the discussion and if he was unhappy with my comments it would have been easy enough to just ignore them. I have never once been critical or disrespectful of him, but I guess I shouldn't have necessarily expected the same treatment in return.

LVokie wrote:

12233 wrote:
Skunks, I think you're wrong. Please go back and look at the thread. It was Eagle Grow's comment about Trammel that I responded to. Eagle Grow and I have been disagreeing about the Kittle hire for two years, and my reaction to his comment about Trammel was nothing more than a continuation of that debate. LVokie had nothing to do with it.

This is a three page thread and LVokie didn't have a single post on the entire thread until his remarks toward me about taking Vallium and needing counseling. He was the one who inserted himself in the ongoing disagreement between EagleGrow and myself.

LVokie has the right to comment on the board anytime he wants. My only problem with his post was I didn't appreciate the snide remarks. He wasn't participating in the discussion and if he was unhappy with my comments it would have been easy enough to just ignore them. I have never once been critical or disrespectful of him, but I guess I shouldn't have necessarily expected the same treatment in return.

(1) Eagle was commenting on the general tendency of reporters these days (especially when it comes to OU football, it seems) to pull stuff out of their butts at least as often as they actually obtain facts from reliable sources.  Nothing more.  Nothing to do with whether the Kittle hire was actually wrong (and I totally agree that it was wrong, remember that) and everything to do with nobody outside the program (neither Trammel, nor I, nor you, nor anybody else) having much of a clue as to exactly what was going on inside the program that led to Kittle's dismissal.  Eagle doesn't know, you don't know, I don't know, and it's a pretty good bet that Trammel doesn't know, either; can we at least agree on that? 

(2) It's easy to ignore your comments on Kittle (assuming I want to; again, I agree that hiring him was a bad idea, for pretty much the same reasons you've posted) when they only pop up every once in a while.  However, no offense, but you've taken on a "Max vs. Shipp" vibe of late when it comes to this.  It's everywhere.  I got snide with him, and I got snide with you, because we get it.  Okay?  You were right.  The dissenters were wrong.  It does not merit a cookie or a trophy, and repeating it in any thread remotely relating to our offensive line coaching isn't going to get you one.  The favor I ask (not a demand, because I'm in no position to issue one) is simple: let it go and move on.

BootleggersBoy wrote: Kittle's hire was more about the demotion of james patton than anything else

If your statement is true, it shows how elementary Bobby's football judgment has become. IMO, the Kittle hire was a result of Bobby's arrogance and it exposed his lack of respect for Oklahoma Football.

BootleggersBoy wrote: Kittle's hire was more about the demotion of james patton than anything else

If your statement is true, it shows how elementary Bobby's football judgment has become. IMO, the Kittle hire was a result of Bobby's arrogance and it exposed his lack of respect for Oklahoma Football.



---------------------------------------------

so in a fact you're saying that as we get older we don't become wiser we become stupid. To take that leap even further that means that at 1. you thought bob was some type of a genius?

12233 wrote: 

I wouldn't even have commented on it if Eagle had not immediately attacked Trammel. Maybe I'm too sensitive about the issue, but IMO, if Trammel had been supportive of Kittle, we would not have seen the attack from Eagle. However, I'll openly admit if Trammel had been supportive of Kittle, I would have been the one immediately attacking him. So, poor ole Trammel just couldn't win. In any case, as usual, I was not the originator of the thread, even though it definitely supported my point of view.

BootleggersBoy wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- spaceman wrote:

BootleggersBoy wrote: Kittle's hire was more about the demotion of james patton than anything else

If your statement is true, it shows how elementary Bobby's football judgment has become. IMO, the Kittle hire was a result of Bobby's arrogance and it exposed his lack of respect for Oklahoma Football.



---------------------------------------------

so in a fact you're saying that as we get older we don't become wiser we become stupid. To take that leap even further that means that at 1. you thought bob was some type of a genius?

Are you defending Bobby's decision to hire Kittle? IMO, Kittle was not qualified to coach at the 6A high school level. Thanks to Bobby he landed a coaching gig at Oklahoma. Einstein? Ticktock! 

spaceman wrote:

BootleggersBoy wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- spaceman wrote:

BootleggersBoy wrote: Kittle's hire was more about the demotion of james patton than anything else

If your statement is true, it shows how elementary Bobby's football judgment has become. IMO, the Kittle hire was a result of Bobby's arrogance and it exposed his lack of respect for Oklahoma Football.



---------------------------------------------

so in a fact you're saying that as we get older we don't become wiser we become stupid. To take that leap even further that means that at 1. you thought bob was some type of a genius?

Are you defending Bobby's decision to hire Kittle? IMO, Kittle was not qualified to coach at the 6A high school level. Thanks to Bobby he landed a coaching gig at Oklahoma. Einstein? Ticktock! 

BootleggersBoy wrote: Spaceman wants BOB fired

I recall a posting where he wanted Bob, Joe C and Boren all fired.

Is that your way of saying yes to my previous question? Why are you behaving like a SSPer? I realize you are having a difficult time accepting the fact Bobby has entered into the crisis management phase of his coaching career. If he makes anymore boneheaded moves like the one he made with Kittle, his virtual statue will become tarnished and his exit will be bitter. Ticktock.