2024-25 Schedule News

[WichitaSooner]

And if teams like Arkansas and usc ended year ranked as expected our sos would have been in the 30’s as well. There is a point to not as many lower teams, but our supposed to be good teams hurt last years sos as well.

But it's tempting fate to assume that three teams like that will all end up being good. Those teams and Iowa are not at the level where you can just pencil them in as top 15, or even top 25, teams. We also benefited from UNC being much better than anticipated, so it works both ways. Those things are somewhat out of your control. Scheduling 6 or 7 teams that will definitely be in the 300s is very much controllable and avoidable.

 

[snydrosooner]

But it's tempting fate to assume that three teams like that will all end up being good. Those teams and Iowa are not at the level where you can just pencil them in as top 15, or even top 25, teams. We also benefited from UNC being much better than anticipated, so it works both ways. Those things are somewhat out of your control. Scheduling 6 or 7 teams that will definitely be in the 300s is very much controllable and avoidable.

Do you think we have a payout problem for home games? Do we not pay visitors enough to get better competition at home? You have to still get a certain smou t of home games, last few years our good competition games are neutral or tournaments.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Do you think we have a payout problem for home games? Do we not pay visitors enough to get better competition at home? You have to still get a certain smou t of home games, last few years our good competition games are neutral or tournaments.

I don’t specially know the answer, but I can’t imagine that it’s a money issue. If anything, we probably are spending more money by virtue of playing so many awful, low major teams. Those tend to be the schools that rely on buyout games to fund their program. I bet there are plenty of teams from better conferences that would be willing to come to Norman without demanding a big payday. It just feels like a philosophical decision by Moser as far how he wants to schedule.

Just to throw out a couple random schools, couldn’t we get St. Louis or Drake to come to Norman? Those are teams likely to be in the 100-125 range. Sure, there is a chance we lose to a team like that, but there is also a chance to pick up a better win and a SOS boost. And you also learn a lot more about your team. I’ve seen comments about wanting to play cupcakes to iron things out, but how did that work for us last year? We looked like world beaters the first several weeks last season, and it obviously did us no good once we got in big boy games. Beating up on bad teams didn’t help guys like McCollum or Oweh at all once the competition stiffened.

Sorry for the long rant. This topic may be the one that gets me more frustrated than any other. There are a lot of things that may not be controllable, but a scheduling philosophy is not one of those things.

 

[Boom Soon]

I don’t specially know the answer, but I can’t imagine that it’s a money issue. If anything, we probably are spending more money by virtue of playing so many awful, low major teams. Those tend to be the schools that rely on buyout games to fund their program. I bet there are plenty of teams from better conferences that would be willing to come to Norman without demanding a big payday. It just feels like a philosophical decision by Moser as far how he wants to schedule.

Just to throw out a couple random schools, couldn’t we get St. Louis or Drake to come to Norman? Those are teams likely to be in the 100-125 range. Sure, there is a chance we lose to a team like that, but there is also a chance to pick up a better win and a SOS boost. And you also learn a lot more about your team. I’ve seen comments about wanting to play cupcakes to iron things out, but how did that work for us last year? We looked like world beaters the first several weeks last season, and it obviously did us no good once we got in big boy games. Beating up on bad teams didn’t help guys like McCollum or Oweh at all once the competition stiffened.

Sorry for the long rant. This topic may be the one that gets me more frustrated than any other. There are a lot of things that may not be controllable, but a scheduling philosophy is not one of those things.

Spot on

 

[CoachTalk]

Basically Whole new team team. Sec games will make or break the resume. Why lose the resume in the non conference. Jumpman Atlantis will
Pull the weight till
Conf season.

Gel and play your tournaments vs good folks and youll be fine.

 

[cbertus6]

Basically Whole new team team. Sec games will make or break the resume. Why lose the resume in the non conference. Jumpman Atlantis will
Pull the weight till
Conf season.

Gel and play your tournaments vs good folks and youll be fine.

See, I think this just isn’t true. Beating teams with no pulse does nothing for the resume and does nothing for challenging the team. What you’ve presented is the exact logic people had going into last season and it cost us. Sure, if we win our conference games none of this will matter, but we’ve given ourselves next to no room for error if we do falter in conference play.

I think that’s the whole point of this conversation. We aren’t even giving ourselves a shot if we don’t do well in conference with the way we’ve scheduled.

 

[CoachTalk]

See, I think this just isn’t true. Beating teams with no pulse does nothing for the resume and does nothing for challenging the team. What you’ve presented is the exact logic people had going into last season and it cost us. Sure, if we win our conference games none of this will matter, but we’ve given ourselves next to no room for error if we do falter in conference play.

I think that’s the whole point of this conversation. We aren’t even giving ourselves a shot if we don’t do well in conference with the way we’ve scheduled.

But if you 5-5 you don’t have a chance if you don’t do really well vs sec schools

no such thing as a good loss. Win all
These and be .500 and you’re in.

Go 5-5 in non conf and .500 and you’re out

 

[Boom Soon]

But if you 5-5 you don’t have a chance if you don’t do really well vs sec schools

no such thing as a good loss. Win all
These and be .500 and you’re in.

Go 5-5 in non conf and .500 and you’re out

Last August I would 100% agree with you. But after what happened in March I just have a hard time believing that .500 in conference will get you in with a weaker noncon schedule.

 

[Boom Soon]

See, I think this just isn’t true. Beating teams with no pulse does nothing for the resume and does nothing for challenging the team. What you’ve presented is the exact logic people had going into last season and it cost us. Sure, if we win our conference games none of this will matter, but we’ve given ourselves next to no room for error if we do falter in conference play.

I think that’s the whole point of this conversation. We aren’t even giving ourselves a shot if we don’t do well in conference with the way we’ve scheduled.

I don’t understand why the coaching staff doesn’t schedule teams in the 100-150 range. Why do they gotta be the worst teams in all of college basketball? There’s plenty of decent mid major teams OU could schedule.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Basically Whole new team team. Sec games will make or break the resume. Why lose the resume in the non conference. Jumpman Atlantis will
Pull the weight till
Conf season.

Gel and play your tournaments vs good folks and youll be fine.

We all saw exactly how it played out last year. Beating terrible teams did absolutely nothing to help us gel. As soon as the competition started, we got shoved in a locker despite all the good vibes and alley oops against a collection of miserable teams.

Bottom line for me: if you play a terrible schedule, nothing good can come of it. Win or lose, you have accomplished nothing that will help your resume. On the other hand, if you play a solid schedule, sure you MAY lose an extra game or two. But there is at least the potential to build a good resume. One scenario has nothing but downside, while the other at least gives you a shot to accomplish something.

And the “whole new team” rationale just doesn’t cut it for me. That applies to a ton of teams this day and age, and it will seemingly apply to us every year under Moser because he has not been able to retain players. And we already know for sure our roster will almost completely turn over yet again because we have so many old guys this season.

And if Moser schedules this way because he is worried about going .500 in a hypothetical noncon schedule including a few teams in the 125-175 range, then it speaks volumes about where our program is. That kind of would get slaughtered in conference play and miss the tourney by a mile regardless.

 

[CoachTalk]

We all saw exactly how it played out last year. Beating terrible teams did absolutely nothing to help us gel. As soon as the competition started, we got shoved in a locker despite all the good vibes and alley oops against a collection of miserable teams.

Bottom line for me: if you play a terrible schedule, nothing good can come of it. Win or lose, you have accomplished nothing that will help your resume. On the other hand, if you play a solid schedule, sure you MAY lose an extra game or two. But there is at least the potential to build a good resume. One scenario has nothing but downside, while the other at least gives you a shot to accomplish something.

And the “whole new team” rationale just doesn’t cut it for me. That applies to a ton of teams this day and age, and it will seemingly apply to us every year under Moser because he has not been able to retain players. And we already know for sure our roster will almost completely turn over yet again because we have so many old guys this season.

And if Moser schedules this way because he is worried about going .500 in a hypothetical noncon schedule including a few teams in the 125-175 range, then it speaks volumes about where our program is. That kind of would get slaughtered in conference play and miss the tourney by a mile regardless.

Ill
Agree with that: I think we need a couple more 125-150 range. Not all:

Maybe we aren’t far apart.

 

[cbertus6]

But if you 5-5 you don’t have a chance if you don’t do really well vs sec schools

no such thing as a good loss. Win all
These and be .500 and you’re in.

Go 5-5 in non conf and .500 and you’re out

If you go 5-5 against teams in the 100-200 range then you don’t deserve to be in the tourney.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

If you go 5-5 against teams in the 100-200 range then you don’t deserve to be in the tourney.

Not entirely true. Depends how you do against tourney teams as well. Some teams gel late

 

[Eielson]

Haven't read the thread, but let me guess --- is Wichita still pretending OU didn't win any games after conference play started?

 

[soonertrash77]

Haven't read the thread, but let me guess --- is Wichita still pretending OU didn't win any games after conference play started?

Come on man….don't kick the freaking bear

 

[steverocks35]

Haven't read the thread, but let me guess --- is Wichita still pretending OU didn't win any games after conference play started?

We won 2 games against teams in the tournament from January through the end of the season.

 

[Eielson]

We won 2 games against teams in the tournament from January through the end of the season.

One of our best conference records in a decade.

 

[WichitaSooner]

One of our best conference records in a decade.

To be precise, it bested four of our previous ten … including both of Moser’s previous seasons. So he crawled over the bar that he himself had set approximately five inches off the ground.

 

[Eielson]

To be precise, it bested four of our previous ten … including both of Moser’s previous seasons. So he crawled over the bar that he himself had set approximately five inches off the ground.

Lon never won more than 9 conference games without Buddy and Capel only did once (thanks to Blake). But yes, I agree with where the bar was set. And thanks for verifying my guess about what your babbling about.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Lon never won more than 9 conference games without Buddy and Capel only did once (thanks to Blake). But yes, I agree with where the bar was set. And thanks for verifying my guess about what your babbling about.

That’s right, Lon was so “lucky” that he recruited, signed, and helped develop Buddy into the best player in the county. Pure good luck there. Or maybe Buddy was considered the best player in the nation when he was in high school? Someone will have to remind me. Either way, total luck on Lon’s part.