2025-26 schedule information

[BoulderSooner]

I give them a pass on ORU. Always good to play Tulsa and ORU.

With that said, how did oru fall off? NIL I’m guessing. Historically never really high but I would think 150-250 range and jump up years like with Max.

I agree with that .. as a 1 off ..

 

[CoachTalk]

I give them a pass on ORU. Always good to play Tulsa and ORU.

With that said, how did oru fall off? NIL I’m guessing. Historically never really high but I would think 150-250 range and jump up years like with Max.

Oru nil is near the top of their conf.

Bad coaching lately and kids leaving for more NIL but they should be in the top of their conf yearly.

 

[CoachTalk]

Well, I take it back. It’s just not on the team page. I’ll put out all of it, even the known games

11/4 vs St. Francis
11/8 vs Gonzaga (neutral)
11/11 vs Arkansas Pine-Bluff
11/15 vs Nebraska (neutral)
11/20 vs Oral Roberts
11/28 vs Marquette (neutral)
12/2 at Wake Forest
12/6 vs Arizona State (neutral)
12/13 vs Oklahoma State (neutral)

I guess I only didn’t know about APB and ORU.

This schedule plus 7 cupcakes is FINE!

Sec top 2 conference. I get it for the season ticket holders. That’s about it

SEC

 

[Skeeter1]

7 P4 games and you're still complaining...?

she complains about everything. Typical. Boomer

 

[WichitaSooner]

This schedule plus 7 cupcakes is FINE!

Sec top 2 conference. I get it for the season ticket holders. That’s about it

SEC

It’s a good thing you aren’t a college coach if you actually think this. Also, is there a single thing you would actually criticize Moser for? It’s ok to think critically and objectively every now and then.

 

[skyvue]

This schedule plus 7 cupcakes is FINE!

Sec top 2 conference. I get it for the season ticket holders. That’s about it

SEC

But from your POV, what would be the problem with playing teams 150 spots higher instead? We'd still win those games and it would boost our schedule strength a bit, which never hurts. What possible upside is there to playing teams in the 300s?

 

[CoachTalk]

But from your POV, what would be the problem with playing teams 150 spots higher instead? We'd still win those games and it would boost our schedule strength a bit, which never hurts. What possible upside is there to playing teams in the 300s?

Guessing you gotta pay those team 3-4x as much to show up. I also feel it’s fine for new teams to gel
Vs bad teams.

If you remember correctly it worked last year. Our non conference wins got us In.
If we slip up vs 120-210 team we don’t get in.

Bad wins are better than good losses in non conf.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Guessing you gotta pay those team 3-4x as much to show up. I also feel it’s fine for new teams to gel
Vs bad teams.

If you remember correctly it worked last year. Our non conference wins got us In.
If we slip up vs 120-210 team we don’t get in.

Bad wins are better than good losses in non conf.

Wrong again. Wins against 300 teams have zero value. We made the tournament because of the wins against teams like Michigan and Arizona and Louisville. The rest of the noncon schedule has no value whatsoever as far as making the field. The only thing it did was shrink our margin of error because it meant we couldn’t afford any slip ups against the good teams.

And please stop with the “new teams need time to gel” argument. Every team in America is new every season in this era, but plenty of coaches avoid loading up on bottom 50 teams.

 

[skyvue]

Guessing you gotta pay those team 3-4x as much to show up. I also feel it’s fine for new teams to gel
Vs bad teams.

If you remember correctly it worked last year. Our non conference wins got us In.
If we slip up vs 120-210 team we don’t get in.

Bad wins are better than good losses in non conf.

I agree with the gel-ing aspect, but I think that can happen just as easily against #150-200. It might even happen more readily against those teams. I mean, we could (warning: ridiculous example follows) play high school teams and absolutely be assured of winning, but what would they gain from the experience? I think they gain more from playing mid-level teams--both in terms of growing as a team and for schedule strength.

 

[sooner333]

 

[WichitaSooner]

313 on Torvik.

 

[CoachTalk]

I agree with the gel-ing aspect, but I think that can happen just as easily against #150-200. It might even happen more readily against those teams. I mean, we could (warning: ridiculous example follows) play high school teams and absolutely be assured of winning, but what would they gain from the experience? I think they gain more from playing mid-level teams--both in terms of growing as a team and for schedule strength.

I dont disagee. I just dont get upset with the schedule. Win the important ones and be better in Conf than we have and will make some noise.

 

[TINY]

Guessing you gotta pay those team 3-4x as much to show up. I also feel it’s fine for new teams to gel
Vs bad teams.

If you remember correctly it worked last year. Our non conference wins got us In.
If we slip up vs 120-210 team we don’t get in.

Bad wins are better than good losses in non conf.

something that doesn’t get mentioned is what it costs to pay those top 200 teams. Maybe have to do 2 for 1 home- home with them. There are a lot of real life variables that impact the scheduling. I still believe there is room for improvement in noncon scheduling, although the schedule this year looks very tough on paper.

 

[WichitaSooner]

something that doesn’t get mentioned is what it costs to pay those top 200 teams. Maybe have to do 2 for 1 home- home with them. There are a lot of real life variables that impact the scheduling. I still believe there is room for improvement in noncon scheduling, although the schedule this year looks very tough on paper.

Do you have any data to back that up? And even if it’s true, we obviously managed to pay what it took to put together a reasonable home schedule under Lon

 

[SoonerBounce13]

lol at complaining about the schedule already

 

[hoopsaustin]

because there is no reason to play any sub 300 team EVER (really any sub 200 team) .. and OU has 3 of them that is TERRIBLE


playing a 175 team is also a lock win and doesn't kill you in the metrics ..

moser just doesn't get it..

 

[sooner333]

12/29/25 - vs. Mississippi Valley State (don't shoot the messenger!) per Bart.

 

[Boom Soon]

12/29/25 - vs. Mississippi Valley State (don't shoot the messenger!) per Bart.

Sounds like an NAIA school lol. The schedule is slightly better this year but far from great.

 

[WTSooner]

I've said it before, and others are saying it as well, improving the top of the schedule is nice, but the real improvement should have been driven by upgrading the bottom teams. Just less teams in the 300's, and get those up to the 200-250 range. Might not seem like much, but it makes a big difference in the metrics, and shouldn't change anything about our record or chances of winning those games.

Regardless of "cost" to acquire those games, that is the move that needs to happen.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

If there is a larger cost for those 200 range teams, I'd rather pay it on players