OU or pee-yew!?

Well, it's been an interesting year. I've never been around so many Sooners in my life... and you don't go through a year with OU fans without having some residual effects. So I listened all year to some belly-aching, bashing and "but at least"s. So here's: OU the Real Story (actually, it should really be called "the Norman/Lubbock Paradigm").

The facts:
OU finished 7-4 overall, 6-2 in the Big 12 and 3rd place in the Big 12 South.
The will be facing a top 10 team from the Pac-10 in a bowl game... just not USC in the Rose Bowl.

But can you complain with a shot at a 10-1 Oregon team in the Holiday Bowl? I mean aside from FSU, is there another 4 loss team in such a good bowl?

Sure, Oklahoma has been a powerhouse over the past few years... Championships, title games, Big 12 Championships, Red River Routs, Heismans, a bunch of NFL players and even more wins. In fact, over the Stoops era OU is 74-16 (82.2%). Oh, to wear the Crimson and Cream for the past few years or so!

Hey, remember when FSU was really good? What about Nebraska? Notre Dame? (not just this year, but back B.P.- Before Powlus) Football is cyclical, just ask Solomon.
To think that any team, OU included could maintain a top 5, or even top 10 profile for a long period of time without a hiccup is to not think rationally.

But was OU bad this year? That's the question I'll look at.

First the bad:
1. 4 losses (the worst since Stoops first year '99: 7-5)
2. Unranked at the end of the regular season (AP & USA Today)
3. Whipped by Texas (33 points)
4. Beat soundly by UCLA
5. 1-2 in Non-conference play
6. Rhett Bomar

Now the good:
1. #4 run defense in the country
2. #16 overall defense in the country
3. Stomped Oklahoma State
4. Beat Nebraska
5. You aren't Colorado

The rub:
1. Serious props for playing a tough non-conference schedule. OU's first 3 opponents (TCU, Tulsa, UCLA) had a record of 27-7 compared to Texas Tech who played 2 I-AA teams (one of which was 0-11!) and Division 1 newcomer Florida International. The Red Raiders opponents were 8-24. A quick look at the Big 12 shows that OU and Texas were the only teams willing to take on legitimate opponents outside the Big 12. Tulsa won the Conference USA title, TCU won the Mountain West and UCLA finished 3rd in the Pac-10.
2. OU lost, but they lost to good teams. The four teams that beat OU were 40-5, that's pretty darn good. And all of them were ranked in the top 25. At least OU didn't slip up and lose to OSU like Texas Tech. The Texas Tech and TCU were close games.
3. Rhett Bomar bested Drew Weatherford for the worst QB leading a major program this year. He was okay at times, but bad more often. He didn't get a lot of help from the offensive line and Peterson was dinged up at times. But he was young and with time could get better.

Conclusion:
Oklahoma was a far cry from the dominant standard they set over the past 5 years, but not as bad as they were in the 10 years proceeding that span. In a "rebuilding year" Oklahoma came up short too many times. They beat the teams less talented teams and lost to quality teams. If Oklahoma scheduled a powder-puff schedule like Texas Tech, we'd be looking at a 11-1 or 10-2 Sooner squad (that probably wasn't as good as their record).
A win against the "posterboys for whining this year", Oregon, would go a long way in legitimizing this team as a good, but not very good team (it would also take the legs from under the Pac 10, which I believe is overrated).
So does that make this year's team "bad"? I don't know that I'd say bad, just poorly timed.

boomer sooner.