Stoops gets another raise.

[Pigsknuckles]

Serious cabbage, hard to comprehend. Not bad for a coach whose bowl record is 4-6 the past 10 years, with losses the last three years. That's not meant as a slam. I'm sure he is good for a lot of revenue. If I were an OU administrator, fan or booster, I too, would want to do what it took to keep him around.  Looks like some other coaches got a piece too.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sports/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20090624_297_0_ARDMOR2277&sport=Football

[Jim Harris]

Serious cabbage, hard to comprehend. Not bad for a coach whose bowl record is 4-6 the past 10 years, with losses the last three years. That's not meant as a slam. I'm sure he is good for a lot of revenue. If I were an OU administrator, fan or booster, I too, would want to do what it took to keep him around.  Looks like some other coaches got a piece too.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sports/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20090624_297_0_ARDMOR2277&sport=Football

half of this is distributed to the players, though.

[ErieHog]

If you remember the John Blake era, and the change in program revenues, this isn't hard to understand at all.

[hogfan064]

Sure he's lost some bowl games recently, but he's making it to BCS bowls.  Stoops probably has more BCS appearances than any other coach I'd imagine.  If not he's in the top 3 with Carrol and Tressel. 

[The Hogfather]

Dominate an inferior conference, lose more bowl games than he wins, can't win the big games (even though his nickname is Big Game Bob), gets touted by everyone as a great coach (which I can't figure out), and gets more and more money.

Yes, yes, I know, he's been to a bunch of BCS games and has won a NC (even though he's 1-3 in NC games).  Yes, yes, I know, he has a great win %.

He's a decent coach.  There are more than a few coaches who could duplicate, if not surpass, his accomplishments at Oklahoma.  Their program is set up for success.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Dominate an inferior conference, lose more bowl games than he wins, can't win the big games (even though his nickname is Big Game Bob), gets touted by everyone as a great coach (which I can't figure out), and gets more and more money.

Yes, yes, I know, he's been to a bunch of BCS games and has won a NC (even though he's 1-3 in NC games).  Yes, yes, I know, he has a great win %.

He's a decent coach.  There are more than a few coaches who could duplicate, if not surpass, his accomplishments at Oklahoma.  Their program is set up for success.

It is also about the money generated and he generates a lot for Oklahoma. That being said, if some of these coaches making these huge bucks had to repay say, $250K-$500K every time they lost a BCS level bowl(or at least didn't get their bonus bucks for going), I suspect the focus might be greater.

[The Hogfather]

It is also about the money generated and he generates a lot for Oklahoma. That being said, if some of these coaches making these huge bucks had to repay say, $250K-$500K every time they lost a BCS level bowl(or at least didn't get their bonus bucks for going), I suspect the focus might be greater.

Yes, I know.  I'm just talking about his coaching resume and the media portraying him as some GREAT coach.  He's decent.  He's most certainly not GREAT.

[hogfan064]

Dominate an inferior conference,

The Big XII is the 2nd best conference in college football.  It's not like he's dominating the WAC. 

[The Hogfather]

The Big XII is the 2nd best conference in college football.  It's not like he's dominating the WAC. 

Might as well be.  When I said dominate an inferior conference, I meant the majority of teams in the conference are inferior to his own team (apart from Texas some years).  It's the same as Boise State dominating the WAC.

[hogfan064]

Might as well be.  When I said dominate an inferior conference, I meant the majority of teams in the conference are inferior to his own team (apart from Texas some years).  It's the same as Boise State dominating the WAC.

Texas and Nebraska are both big time programs in the BigXII.  Both schools have tons of resources to draw from.  Texas A&M also has plenty of money, fans, and a great stadium. 

Yes, OU should dominate the conference most of the time and Stoops does what he is supposed to do.  This is something that OU couldn't do in the 90s

Stoops has lost 19 games this decade.  Those losses were to

01 Nebraska-Still a power at the time
01 Oklahoma State
02 Texas A&M
02 Oklahoma State- 9 win team
03 KSU-Big XII Champs
03 LSU-National Champs
04 Southern Cal-National Champs
05 TCU- Team went 11-1
05 UCLA-10 win team
05 Texas-National Champs
05 Texas Tech
06 Oregon-BS loss
06 Texas- 10 win team
06 Boise State- 12-0 team
07 Colorado
07 Texas Tech
07 West Virginia- Big East Champs
08 Texas- Top 3 team
08 Florida-National Champs

Most of the teams he has lost to have been very good teams.  He does have 3-4 bad losses, but in a decade that will happen to anyone.  If I'm not mistaken only 1 of those teams(01 OSU) had a losing record to end the year. 

[hogfan064]

Stoops recent bowl slump isn't that bad.  Tom Osborne went 0-7 in bowl games from 87-93.  How did he follow this slump?  In his last 4 years Nebraska went 49-2 with 3 National Championships.  In the year he didn't win the NC his team went 11-2 and won the Orange Bowl. 

[The Hogfather]

Texas and Nebraska are both big time programs in the BigXII.  Both schools have tons of resources to draw from.  Texas A&M also has plenty of money, fans, and a great stadium. 

Yes, OU should dominate the conference most of the time and Stoops does what he is supposed to do.  This is something that OU couldn't do in the 90s

Stoops has lost 19 games this decade.  Those losses were to

01 Nebraska-Still a power at the time
01 Oklahoma State
02 Texas A&M
02 Oklahoma State- 9 win team
03 KSU-Big XII Champs
03 LSU-National Champs
04 Southern Cal-National Champs
05 TCU- Team went 11-1
05 UCLA-10 win team
05 Texas-National Champs
05 Texas Tech
06 Oregon-BS loss
06 Texas- 10 win team
06 Boise State- 12-0 team
07 Colorado
07 Texas Tech
07 West Virginia- Big East Champs
08 Texas- Top 3 team
08 Florida-National Champs

Most of the teams he has lost to have been very good teams.  He does have 3-4 bad losses, but in a decade that will happen to anyone.  If I'm not mistaken only 1 of those teams(01 OSU) had a losing record to end the year. 

How many of those games were they favored in?  I'd Imagine all of them but Southern Cal in '04 (they only got beat 55-19 in the NC game).

[WilsonHog]

Stoops gets paid because of the alternative for OU. They thought that after the success Chuck Fairbanks and Barry Switzer experienced that anyone could do it... then they were burned by Gary Gibbs and John Blake.

Anything Stoops wants, Stoops gets. The alternative is never a sure thing.   

[hogfan064]

How many of those games were they favored in?  I'd Imagine all of them but Southern Cal in '04 (they only got beat 55-19 in the NC game).

Not sure.  Florida was favored this year right I believe.  01 Nebraska had an undefeated regular season, so they might have been favored.  Texas won the NC in 05 and OU had a down season so the Horns might have been favorered that year.

I'd say that 5 of those games OU was likely the underdog in.  The games that they were favored in I doubt they were huge favorites except in the 01 OSU game, 02 A&M, 05 TCU, Boise State, and maybe one of the TTU games. 

On average Stoops is upset once a year, again not bad at all.

[hogfan064]

Stoops gets paid because of the alternative for OU. They thought that after the success Chuck Fairbanks and Barry Switzer experienced that anyone could do it... then they were burned by Gary Gibbs and John Blake.

Anything Stoops wants, Stoops gets. The alternative is never a sure thing.  

Exactly.  There is no sure thing in sports.  Sure, OU should be a power most years, but that wasn't the case in the 90s.  LSU and Southern Cal should also be powers most years, but those 2 weren't anything that special in the 90s either.  Nebraska has had its down time too.  Florida under Zook was mediocre. 

Bad coaches can run programs down.  Stoops keeps OU where they should be.  A top 5 team nearly every year.  OU, Southern Cal, Florida, LSU, and Ohio State have been the dominant CFB programs this decade. 

[WilsonHog]

Exactly.  There is no sure thing in sports.  Sure, OU should be a power most years, but that wasn't the case in the 90s.  LSU and Southern Cal should also be powers most years, but those 2 weren't anything that special in the 90s either.  Nebraska has had its down time too.  Florida under Zook was mediocre. 

Bad coaches can run programs down.  Stoops keeps OU where they should be.  A top 5 team nearly every year.  OU, Southern Cal, Florida, LSU, and Ohio State have been the dominant CFB programs this decade. 

Talent and coaching will position a team to win a national title, but some luck is required as well. It's stupid for a fan of any school to expect national championships. About all any fan should reasonably expect - even those of OU, USC, Florida, etc. - is that most years they will be positioned to play for a national title. Some years that'll turn in to 9-3 or 10-2, some years it'll turn into a berth in the national title game, and some years it'll turn into a national title.   

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Stoops gets paid because of the alternative for OU. They thought that after the success Chuck Fairbanks and Barry Switzer experienced that anyone could do it... then they were burned by Gary Gibbs and John Blake.
Anything Stoops wants, Stoops gets. The alternative is never a sure thing.   

Don't forget that one year experiment with Howard Schnellenberger. And in Gibbs defense, he was hired to do one thing really and that was to restore order after things got out of hand, but of course they figured he could coach the team to successful seasons as well. Well, they were 50% right and he did restore order.

[Oliver]

Yes, I know.  I'm just talking about his coaching resume and the media portraying him as some GREAT coach.  He's decent.  He's most certainly not GREAT.

While Stoops has his flaws...mostly in winning The Big Game against teams outside the Big 12...to say he's a decent coach seems to be a stretch.  Having given Stoops resume in a previous post, what do you think constitutes/qualifies a GREAT coach in your mind?

[WilsonHog]

While Stoops has his flaws...mostly in winning The Big Game against teams outside the Big 12...to say he's a decent coach seems to be a stretch.  Having given Stoops resume in a previous post, what do you think constitutes/qualifies a GREAT coach in your mind?

Let's see where we can go with this.

Great coaches....

(1) Pete Carroll
(2) Urban Meyer

Who else, and what are the qualifications? This may wind up being a pretty slippery slope. 

[bigdaddyhawg]

Dominate an inferior conference, lose more bowl games than he wins, can't win the big games (even though his nickname is Big Game Bob), gets touted by everyone as a great coach (which I can't figure out), and gets more and more money.

Yes, yes, I know, he's been to a bunch of BCS games and has won a NC (even though he's 1-3 in NC games).  Yes, yes, I know, he has a great win %.

He's a decent coach.  There are more than a few coaches who could duplicate, if not surpass, his accomplishments at Oklahoma.  Their program is set up for success.

Wow, this one is a head scratcher.

The Big 12 an "inferior conference"??  By what standard could you possibly say that with a straight face??

They are second behind the SEC most years, and usually a very close second at that.  There's no intelligent person on the Earth that knows and understands college FB would every say the Big 12 was inferior.  Bad comment.

Listen, I don't like Bob Stoops one bit.  I think he's a gold plated pr$ck.  He's arrogant and acts like he's just that much better than EVERYONE else around. 

But to say "he's a decent coach" is another stupid statement.  Do you actually watch college FB games?  If you watched any OU games you would know he puts a great product on the field, week in and week out.  He has a "dominant program" going at Norman. 

That dominance doesn't just happen, friend.  (See Oklahawg's comments above)  He's a great college FB coach and his teams play at the very highest level.

You deride him about his BCS record, and I think there could be fair criticism there -- to a point.  His last two championship losses were to GREAT FB teams that were loaded with tons of NFL type talent.  Last year's loss wasn't some blowout.  The game turned on that goal line stand.  Sooners score there and I think they win.  That means the two teams were so close in their play that one play made the difference.  There is nothing to point to in that and say "decent coach".

And Stoops is also a great recruiter -- at the very top, maybe the very best out there.

What else could you possibly want your coach to do??  Even Bear Bryant or Joe Pa or Pete Carroll or Darrell Royal or whoever you do consider great didn't win a championship every time they had the chance.

[The Hogfather]

'01 Nebraska:  Oklahoma #2, Nebraska #3
'01 Okla St:    Ok St. ended the season 4-7.  Oklahoma State was 3-7 when they beat Oklahoma.
'02 A&M:        A&M ended the season 6-6.
'02 Ok St:      Ok St. ended the season at 8-5, not with 9 wins.
'03 KSU:                  Oklahoma #1, KSU #13---they were only Big XII Champs because a Stoops led team choked and lost 35-7
'03 LSU:                    LSU was BCS #1, Oklahoma BCS #2 (only because Oklahoma choked against KSU, though)
'04 Southern Cal:         USC BCS #1, Oklahoma BCS #2
'05 TCU:                   TCU unranked, Oklahoma #7
'05 UCLA:              Oklahoma #21, UCLA unranked
'05 Texas:              Texas was favored and undefeated
'05 Texas Tech:         TT was ranked #21 and favored
'06 Oregon:    Oregon was #18, Oklahoma #15.  It was at Oregon, so it might have been close on favoritism.   Oklahoma was ranked higher.
'06 Texas:                Texas #7, Oklahoma #13
'06 Boise:                 #8 Oklahoma, #9 Boise.  Oklahoma was favored by more than a TD.
'07 Texas Tech:          TT unranked, Oklahoma #3
'07 West Virginia:        Oklahoma #3, WVU #9
'07 Colorado:              Colorado sucked.
'08 Texas:                 #1 OU, #5 Texas
'08 Florida:                 Florida was favored.

So, by my calculations 12-6-1 favored to win in the losses he had.  That's not good.

Exactly.  There is no sure thing in sports.  Sure, OU should be a power most years, but that wasn't the case in the 90s.  LSU and Southern Cal should also be powers most years, but those 2 weren't anything that special in the 90s either.  Nebraska has had its down time too.  Florida under Zook was mediocre. 

Bad coaches can run programs down.  Stoops keeps OU where they should be.  A top 5 team nearly every year.  OU, Southern Cal, Florida, LSU, and Ohio State have been the dominant CFB programs this decade. 

I didn't say it was impossible to lose at these programs.  I said that OU is set up for success.  You don't have to be a world-beater to put up good numbers there and get to BCS games/NC games (in the Big XII), with the advantages OU has over all the teams in their conference not named Texass.

[The Hogfather]

Wow, this one is a head scratcher.

The Big 12 an "inferior conference"??  By what standard could you possibly say that with a straight face??

Reading is your friend.

[NWASooner]

Stoops is one of the top 5 coaches in college football.  If every job were open and no current coach had a job, who would go in the fantasy coach draft?  Stoops is certainly in the mix with the Meyers and Carroll's of the world.  He rarely looses to inferior teams and is probably 50/50 against comparable teams.  True, most of the teams OU plays aren't even talent wise but recruiting is part of the package and Stoops' recruiting classes are solid every year.  His track record with QB's is second to none.

Also, football revenue at OU is 10 times what it was when he took over.  From that angle, he's worth every dime.  Like another poster said, if Stoops is an "average" coach, who are some great ones?

What got me is how much they're paying Capel.  He's in the $1.8 range before retention bonuses kick in.  They really ponied up for him.  That tells me he's staying at OU until Duke opens up.  It also goes to show that OU is a solid basketball job.  They pay A-list money but only have B-list expectations.

[Oliver]

Let's see where we can go with this.

Great coaches....

(1) Pete Carroll
(2) Urban Meyer

Who else, and what are the qualifications? This may wind up being a pretty slippery slope. 

At this point, I'm more interested in why Pete Carroll and Urban Meyer are great coaches.  Not saying I'm disagreeing, but is it number of national titles?  Performance in Bowl Games?  I mean apart from these (and head to head record), Stoops arguably has a more impressive resume than either of these coaches.

[NWASooner]

I said that OU is set up for success.  You don't have to be a world-beater to put up good numbers there and get to BCS games/NC games (in the Big XII), with the advantages OU has over all the teams in their conference not named Texass.

There are tons of schools set up for success where coaches don't win.  Bama comes to mind.  Florida with Zook.  USC before Pete Carroll.  Texas before Mack Brown.  LSU before Saban.  All had LONG stretches of mediocrity despite built in advantages.

It's like writing off Phil Jackson as a coach.  Sure, he won with Jordan/Pippen and Kobe/Shaq but Doug Collins and Del Harris couldn't.

[WilsonHog]

At this point, I'm more interested in why Pete Carroll and Urban Meyer are great coaches.  Not saying I'm disagreeing, but is it number of national titles?  Performance in Bowl Games?  I mean apart from these (and head to head record), Stoops arguably has a more impressive resume than either of these coaches.

What about Joe Paterno? Bobby Bowden? Are they "great coaches" because of the number of years they've been in the game?   

[idochog]

What got me is how much they're paying Capel.  He's in the $1.8 range before retention bonuses kick in.  They really ponied up for him.  That tells me he's staying at OU until Duke opens up.  It also goes to show that OU is a solid basketball job.  They pay A-list money but only have B-list expectations.

A list $$ but b-list expectations sounds like the perfect job for Hootie.

[NWASooner]

At this point, I'm more interested in why Pete Carroll and Urban Meyer are great coaches.

Um, maybe it's because they win a lot of games?

[bigdaddyhawg]

Reading is your friend.

There's another intelligent response.  Yeah, you really addressed those points, bubba.  Touche'!

[Oliver]

What about Joe Paterno? Bobby Bowden? Are they "great coaches" because of the number of years they've been in the game?   

Another great point.  Meyer doesn't have their years so some of his accolades can't look as impressive, but should we hold that against him?  Should we handicap Paterno or Bowden because they've had so many years to accomplish things?

[NWASooner]

What about Joe Paterno? Bobby Bowden? Are they "great coaches" because of the number of years they've been in the game?   

They WERE great.  If they were on the open market, how many schools would be bidding big money for their services?

[Oliver]

Um, maybe it's because they win a lot of games?

So does Stoops but it was argued in an earlier post that Stoops was a "decent" coach.

[WilsonHog]

They WERE great.  If they were on the open market, how many schools would be bidding big money for their services?

Now throw Steve Spurrier in that mix. Hottest coach in the country several years ago, but now...?

[The Hogfather]

Wow, this one is a head scratcher.

The Big 12 an "inferior conference"??  By what standard could you possibly say that with a straight face??

They are second behind the SEC most years, and usually a very close second at that.  There's no intelligent person on the Earth that knows and understands college FB would every say the Big 12 was inferior.  Bad comment.

Listen, I don't like Bob Stoops one bit.  I think he's a gold plated pr$ck.  He's arrogant and acts like he's just that much better than EVERYONE else around. 

But to say "he's a decent coach" is another stupid statement.  Do you actually watch college FB games?  If you watched any OU games you would know he puts a great product on the field, week in and week out.  He has a "dominant program" going at Norman. 

That dominance doesn't just happen, friend.  (See Oklahawg's comments above)  He's a great college FB coach and his teams play at the very highest level.

You deride him about his BCS record, and I think there could be fair criticism there -- to a point.  His last two championship losses were to GREAT FB teams that were loaded with tons of NFL type talent.  Last year's loss wasn't some blowout.  The game turned on that goal line stand.  Sooners score there and I think they win.  That means the two teams were so close in their play that one play made the difference.  There is nothing to point to in that and say "decent coach".

And Stoops is also a great recruiter -- at the very top, maybe the very best out there.

What else could you possibly want your coach to do??  Even Bear Bryant or Joe Pa or Pete Carroll or Darrell Royal or whoever you do consider great didn't win a championship every time they had the chance.

Put Stoops at Oklahoma State, instead of Oklahoma, and he wouldn't have a 10 win season.  Go win a BCS game at Louisville, take North Carolina to prominence, take Wake Forest to a BCS game, get Vandy to a bowl game from the SEC East, take Cincinnati to a BCS game, do this at Florida State (a FSU that wasn't crap before you came), do this at Penn State, lead West Virginia to two BCS bowl games.  Sorry, but to me, taking Oklahoma to a bunch of BCS games and NC games and LOSING doesn't make him a great coach.  He's a decent coach.

Those teams that they've lost to with "tons of NFL talent" have approximately the same amount or less than his teams had.

Yeah, he's a good recruiter..............to Oklahoma.  I don't think he'd be nearly as good at Arkansas or Oklahoma State or Mississippi.

I'm not willing to do the research, but I'd bet Bear Bryant, Joe Pa, Darrell Royal, and Pete Carroll ALL have a better record in BCS caliber bowl games, or a better bowl record, period.

[The Hogfather]

There are tons of schools set up for success where coaches don't win.  Bama comes to mind.  Florida with Zook.  USC before Pete Carroll.  Texas before Mack Brown.  LSU before Saban.  All had LONG stretches of mediocrity despite built in advantages.

It's like writing off Phil Jackson as a coach.  Sure, he won with Jordan/Pippen and Kobe/Shaq but Doug Collins and Del Harris couldn't.

Florida and Bama and LSU are set up for success, but they have more competition each year than one team.  Instead of having one other team on their level, they have 4 or 5 a year.  That makes it tougher to perpetuate success.

Texas is in the same boat as you.  USC I would say is in the same boat as you.  I think Carroll's teams lose too many games they shouldn't.  But, they dominate in bowls.

[Oliver]

Put Stoops at Oklahoma State, instead of Oklahoma, and he wouldn't have a 10 win season.  Go win a BCS game at Louisville, take North Carolina to prominence, take Wake Forest to a BCS game, get Vandy to a bowl game from the SEC East, take Cincinnati to a BCS game, do this at Florida State (a FSU that wasn't crap before you came), do this at Penn State, lead West Virginia to two BCS bowl games.  Sorry, but to me, taking Oklahoma to a bunch of BCS games and NC games and LOSING doesn't make him a great coach.  He's a decent coach.

Those teams that they've lost to with "tons of NFL talent" have approximately the same amount or less than his teams had.

Yeah, he's a good recruiter..............to Oklahoma.  I don't think he'd be nearly as good at Arkansas or Oklahoma State or Mississippi.

I'm not willing to do the research, but I'd bet Bear Bryant, Joe Pa, Darrell Royal, and Pete Carroll ALL have a better record in BCS caliber bowl games, or a better bowl record, period.

Sub "Pete Carroll" in for "Bob Stoops" in this argument, and your same points are made.  But I imagine you would call Carroll a great coach.  Is his one more NC and Bowl Game record what separates him from that decent/great level? 

[The Hogfather]

There's another intelligent response.  Yeah, you really addressed those points, bubba.  Touche'!

Here you go:

Might as well be.  When I said dominate an inferior conference, I meant the majority of teams in the conference are inferior to his own team (apart from Texas some years).  It's the same as Boise State dominating the WAC.

[The Hogfather]

Sub "Pete Carroll" in for "Bob Stoops" in this argument, and your same points are made.  But I imagine you would call Carroll a great coach.  Is his one more NC and Bowl Game record what separates him from that decent/great level? 

Read my previous post.  He's borderline, because he loses games that he shouldn't in-conference, but dominates in bowl games and usually dominates out-of-conference.

[NWASooner]

Put Stoops at Oklahoma State, instead of Oklahoma, and he wouldn't have a 10 win season.

Then why didn't OU have many 10 win seasons before he got there?

Also:
Why didn't Bama win before Saban got there?
Why didn't Texas wn before Mack Brown?
Why didn't USC win before Pete Carroll?
Why didn't LSU win before Saban?
Why didn't Ohio State win big before Tressel?
Why didn't Florida win with Ron Zook?

If it's easy for coaches to win at big schools, why doesn't it happen more often?

[The Hogfather]

Sub "Pete Carroll" in for "Bob Stoops" in this argument, and your same points are made.  But I imagine you would call Carroll a great coach.  Is his one more NC and Bowl Game record what separates him from that decent/great level? 

Pete Carroll is 88-15 in college.  6-2 in bowl games at USC and 6-1 in BCS bowl games, including 2 National Championships.  He has taken his team to win 7 Pac 10 Championships out of his 8 years there.

[hogfan064]

Put Stoops at Oklahoma State, instead of Oklahoma, and he wouldn't have a 10 win season.  Go win a BCS game at Louisville, take North Carolina to prominence, take Wake Forest to a BCS game, get Vandy to a bowl game from the SEC East, take Cincinnati to a BCS game, do this at Florida State (a FSU that wasn't crap before you came), do this at Penn State, lead West Virginia to two BCS bowl games.  Sorry, but to me, taking Oklahoma to a bunch of BCS games and NC games and LOSING doesn't make him a great coach.  He's a decent coach.

How do you know Stoops couldn't?  How do you know Brian Kelly could go to Oklahoma and do what Stoops has done?  How do you know Grobe could win big at OU?  How do you know Petrino could? 

If Stoops supposed to do what Spurrier did?  Is he supposed to take a loser job?   He's won a National Championship and has won way more than the 3 coaches prior to him. 

[hogfan064]

'01 Nebraska:  Oklahoma #2, Nebraska #3
'01 Okla St:    Ok St. ended the season 4-7.  Oklahoma State was 3-7 when they beat Oklahoma.
'02 A&M:        A&M ended the season 6-6.
'02 Ok St:      Ok St. ended the season at 8-5, not with 9 wins.
'03 KSU:                  Oklahoma #1, KSU #13---they were only Big XII Champs because a Stoops led team choked and lost 35-7
'03 LSU:                    LSU was BCS #1, Oklahoma BCS #2 (only because Oklahoma choked against KSU, though)
'04 Southern Cal:         USC BCS #1, Oklahoma BCS #2
'05 TCU:                   TCU unranked, Oklahoma #7
'05 UCLA:              Oklahoma #21, UCLA unranked
'05 Texas:              Texas was favored and undefeated
'05 Texas Tech:         TT was ranked #21 and favored
'06 Oregon:    Oregon was #18, Oklahoma #15.  It was at Oregon, so it might have been close on favoritism.   Oklahoma was ranked higher.
'06 Texas:                Texas #7, Oklahoma #13
'06 Boise:                 #8 Oklahoma, #9 Boise.  Oklahoma was favored by more than a TD.
'07 Texas Tech:          TT unranked, Oklahoma #3
'07 West Virginia:        Oklahoma #3, WVU #9
'07 Colorado:              Colorado sucked.
'08 Texas:                 #1 OU, #5 Texas
'08 Florida:                 Florida was favored.

So, by my calculations 12-6-1 favored to win in the losses he had.  That's not good.

I didn't say it was impossible to lose at these programs.  I said that OU is set up for success.  You don't have to be a world-beater to put up good numbers there and get to BCS games/NC games (in the Big XII), with the advantages OU has over all the teams in their conference not named Texass.

So he's been upset 12 times this decade.  That's an average of 1 upset per season.  What coaches don't get upset once a year? 

[The Hogfather]

Then why didn't OU have many 10 win seasons before he got there?

Also:
Why didn't Bama win before Saban got there?
Why didn't Texas wn before Mack Brown?
Why didn't USC win before Pete Carroll?
Why didn't LSU win before Saban?
Why didn't Ohio State win big before Tressel?
Why didn't Florida win with Ron Zook?

If it's easy for coaches to win at big schools, why doesn't it happen more often?

As I said before, it isn't impossible to lose at schools like OU.  He deserves some credit for getting OU back to national prominence.  Like I said, he's decent.  If he was great, he'd win more games against comparable teams (i.e. Texas, BCS bowl games, bowl games, OOC games against decent opponents---TCU, Oregon).

[hogfan064]

Pete Carroll is 88-15 in college.  6-2 in bowl games at USC and 6-1 in BCS bowl games, including 2 National Championships.  He has taken his team to win 7 Pac 10 Championships out of his 8 years there.

Southern California also is the best job in college football.  OU has to rely on another state to get its talent.  Southern Cal doesn't have to leave its city.  Selling an 18 year old kid on LA is much easier than selling him to Norman, OK. 

Both are great programs, but Southern Cal is the easier of the 2 places to win.

The Big XII is a better conference than the PAC 10 IMO as well.

[The Hogfather]

So he's been upset 12 times this decade.  That's an average of 1 upset per season.  What coaches don't get upset once a year? 

When you play 1-2 teams with comparable talent to your own per year, you shouldn't be upset 12 times in a decade.

That basically means they're losing to all but a few teams with comparable talent to them.

[The Hogfather]

How do you know Stoops couldn't?  How do you know Brian Kelly could go to Oklahoma and do what Stoops has done?  How do you know Grobe could win big at OU?  How do you know Petrino could? 

If Stoops supposed to do what Spurrier did?  Is he supposed to take a loser job?   He's won a National Championship and has won way more than the 3 coaches prior to him. 

I imagine if he did leave for a lesser job, you'd see similar results to Spurrier and maybe worse, especially if he decided to move to the SEC or to a lesser team in the Big XII, like Texas A&M, etc.

[hogfan064]

When you play 1-2 teams with comparable talent to your own per year, you shouldn't be upset 12 times in a decade.

Southern Cal has been upset 9 times since 2002(I'll throw out Carrol's first 6-6 season).  That's basically the same as 12 times since 2000. 

[Oliver]

Pete Carroll is 88-15 in college.  6-2 in bowl games at USC and 6-1 in BCS bowl games, including 2 National Championships.  He has taken his team to win 7 Pac 10 Championships out of his 8 years there.

Bob Stoops is 109-24 in college.  4-6 in bowl games at OU and 2-5 in BCS bowl games, including 1 National Championship.  He has taken his team to win 6 Big 12 Championships out of his 10 years there and 7 Big 12 South Championships.  He has 4 National Championship appearances to Carroll's 2.

Now, I won't argue for a moment that Pete Carroll is a better coach than Stoops.  But comparing their accolades and considering that both of them have impressive resumes only at one college where it's fairly easy to win at both colleges, I still consider Stoops to be a great coach.

[The Hogfather]

Southern Cal has been upset 9 times since 2002(I'll throw out Carrol's first 6-6 season).  That's basically the same as 12 times since 2000. 

And?

They've also dominated some good teams out of conference and in bowl games.

Like I said, Carroll is borderline great in my opinion.  I would include him there because he seems to win when it counts.  Sure, he lets a few slip by (like Stoops has as well), but he makes up for it in the OOC and bowl games (which Stoops has not).

[hogfan064]

I imagine if he did leave for a lesser job, you'd see similar results to Spurrier and maybe worse, especially if he decided to move to the SEC or to a lesser team in the Big XII, like Texas A&M, etc.

But we don't know that for sure.  Spurrier is the winningest 4th year coach in USC history.  He looks mediocre because he is at a mediocre school.  Some schools you just can't win at, South Carolina is one of them.

A&M is a place you can win at.  If Stoops was there I think he would still win big.  I really don't see any difference in A&M and Oklahoma other than the fact OU has more tradition. A&M still has plenty of $$, a great facility, great fans, and is surrounded by great HS football talent.