2025-26 schedule information

[NickZepp]

I think our scheduling has reflected what Porter thinks of our talent. That shouldn't be an excuse this year. We need to schedule tougher if there is going to be more invested in the program.

 

[colston15]

I think our scheduling has reflected what Porter thinks of our talent. That shouldn't be an excuse this year. We need to schedule tougher if there is going to be more invested in the program.

I think the scheduling reflects that OU has played in the best conference in college basketball for the entirety of his tenure.

We beat Arizona, Louisville and Michigan last season. What more do people want out of the pre-conference slate?

You have to play a handful of good non-con games, but it’s rather pointless to play quality home games before January that will be attended by 8000 people, maximum, basically no matter who the opponent is.

The SEC and, before that the SEC the Big 12, give plenty of chances for resume wins.

 

[WichitaSooner]

I think the scheduling reflects that OU has played in the best conference in college basketball for the entirety of his tenure.

We beat Arizona, Louisville and Michigan last season. What more do people want out of the pre-conference slate?

You have to play a handful of good non-con games, but it’s rather pointless to play quality home games before January that will be attended by 8000 people, maximum, basically no matter who the opponent is.

The SEC and, before that the SEC the Big 12, give plenty of chances for resume wins.

To not play one of the worst 15 schedules in the country and automatically put us behind the eight ball when it comes to building a resume.

And I guess it depends on your definition of "pointless." If your goal is to make the tournament, it is anything but. If you just want to test out the lights and sound system in the arena, sure, go ahead and keep playing the dregs of D-1 while not getting your players ready for a January 4 game at Bama.

 

[AnotherSoonerInTX]

The bigger issue the crappy teams. Instead of scheduling from the very bottom of the pool, we need to be about 100 spots up from there in terms of the teams we are playing. Not saying we don't need a handful of solid teams on the OOC schedule, but the bigger issue has been our bad opponents have been REALLY bad when we'd be better off if they were just regular bad.

This. If you're going to buy wins, buy them from the 150-250 range instead of the 250+ range. They'll help your NET rankings when the time comes.

I know we've lost to teams like Sam Houston in the Porter era...there's no excuse for that. But we should be able to win these games without much issue, especially if the talent we have coming in is as good as we think.

 

[Sooner04]

If you're going to buy wins, buy them from the 150-250 range instead of the 250+ range. They'll help your NET rankings when the time comes.

Bingo!

 

[SoonerDutch]

Would agree it would be ideal for OU to bump up the scheduling dregs (move to 150-250 as opposed to 250+). Imagine the SEC will still be good but tough to bank on it being historically good again. Obviously the talent factor as well with OU’s offseason too.

Classic how OU goes out and schedules Nebraska on a neutral site and the immediate reaction is to talk shiť on Moser for not scheduling quality non-conference home games.

 

[CoachTalk]

Would agree it would be ideal for OU to bump up the scheduling dregs (move to 150-250 as opposed to 250+). Imagine the SEC will still be good but tough to bank on it being historically good again. Obviously the talent factor as well with OU’s offseason too.

Classic how OU goes out and schedules Nebraska on a neutral site and the immediate reaction is to talk shiť on Moser for not scheduling quality non-conference home games.

Rince wash repeat...

 

[sooner333]

Not defending it, but I'm sure it costs quite a bit more to schedule buy games vs. 150-200 teams.

 

[61sooner]

Is basketball scheduling year to year instead far out like some of what goes on in football?

 

[WTSooner]

Not defending it, but I'm sure it costs quite a bit more to schedule buy games vs. 150-200 teams.

I doubt it's much more. Just look at the teams that are in both of those buckets. Name/size wise, there isn't much of a difference. Some just have better bball teams.

 

[WTSooner]

Is basketball scheduling year to year instead far out like some of what goes on in football?

Some OOC games are scheduled a little in advance, but most are more year to year.

 

[WTSooner]

I think the scheduling reflects that OU has played in the best conference in college basketball for the entirety of his tenure.

We beat Arizona, Louisville and Michigan last season. What more do people want out of the pre-conference slate?

You have to play a handful of good non-con games, but it’s rather pointless to play quality home games before January that will be attended by 8000 people, maximum, basically no matter who the opponent is.

The SEC and, before that the SEC the Big 12, give plenty of chances for resume wins.

The Big 12 or SEC being tough doesn't excuse having the 317th toughest OOC schedule out of 364 teams. You named some solid/good teams we played and yet we still ranked that low. THAT IS WHAT I AND I THINK A FEW OTHERS WANT FIXED. AND YOU FIX IT BY NOT PLAYING A BUNCH OF TEAMS FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL.

 

[colston15]

To not play one of the worst 15 schedules in the country and automatically put us behind the eight ball when it comes to building a resume.

And I guess it depends on your definition of "pointless." If your goal is to make the tournament, it is anything but. If you just want to test out the lights and sound system in the arena, sure, go ahead and keep playing the dregs of D-1 while not getting your players ready for a January 4 game at Bama.

This wreaks of complaining just to complain.

We made the tournament — with plenty of quality wins — last season.

Now that we are spending some real NIL $$$, I wouldn’t mind seeing a couple more challenging non-con games, but the schedule to this point has made perfect sense, all things considered.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Not defending it, but I'm sure it costs quite a bit more to schedule buy games vs. 150-200 teams.

Doubtful. In fact, the teams at the bottom of the rankings are the ones that tend to rely on buy games to fund their program.

 

[IndySooner]

Is basketball scheduling year to year instead far out like some of what goes on in football?

Yes

 

[AnotherSoonerInTX]

I doubt it's much more. Just look at the teams that are in both of those buckets. Name/size wise, there isn't much of a difference. Some just have better bball teams.

Yep. You're buying games in the top half of low-major conferences instead of the bottom. Or, you're buying a game from a basement team in a better conference like the Missouri Valley.

 

[BoulderSooner]

I doubt it's much more. Just look at the teams that are in both of those buckets. Name/size wise, there isn't much of a difference. Some just have better bball teams.

this is correct .... the teams are just less bad ... they are still mostly bad

 

[mict085]

I don’t get the “pentagon”. It’s not a great venue and it’s in the wilderness.

 

[colston15]

I don’t get the “pentagon”. It’s not a great venue and it’s in the wilderness.

Good chance to play what will amount to a road game vs. a solid team early in the year. I like it.

 

[skyvue]

Good chance to play what will amount to a road game vs. a solid team early in the year. I like it.

Except we keep playing teams there that are from schools much closer to that arena than OU is. It was a Minnesota-heavy crowd, and I expect it'll be a Nebraska crowd too.