Can Jeff Capel win without Blake Griffin? >>> The Oklahoman

Can Capel win without Blake? That is as stupid as asking if Billy Tubbs could win without Tisdale in his first 5 seasons.Take WT wins out of Billys first 5 years and take wins out of Capels five seasons. Tubbs was 115-49 in his first 5 seasons with WT for 3 years().Without WT he is 31-29(15.5 wins a season). Capel is 95-67,with Blake for two years.In the three years without Blake(42-50),14 wins a season.Factor in Tubbs built in non D-1 wins ,it is pretty close to a dead heat.
 
If Capel is retained this year, then not giving an assitant coach a 2 year contract doesn't make much sense.
 
Can Capel win without Blake? That is as stupid as asking if Billy Tubbs could win without Tisdale in his first 5 seasons.Take WT wins out of Billys first 5 years and take wins out of Capels five seasons. Tubbs was 115-49 in his first 5 seasons with WT for 3 years().Without WT he is 31-29(15.5 wins a season). Capel is 95-67,with Blake for two years.In the three years without Blake(42-50),14 wins a season.Factor in Tubbs built in non D-1 wins ,it is pretty close to a dead heat.

Wow! Capel = Tubbs !?

Billy Tubbs created the very foundation of the program. And that said foundation lead to what OU basketball is today or once was. Longest post season streak in the nation, conference titles, conference tourney titles, etc... Capel has managed to return this program to where it was 30 years ago in 5 short years.
 
We really don't know!Can Mr.Trammel write an article for the DOA without criticizing OU!!!Go Sooners!!!!!!
 
Can Capel win without Blake? That is as stupid as asking if Billy Tubbs could win without Tisdale in his first 5 seasons.Take WT wins out of Billys first 5 years and take wins out of Capels five seasons. Tubbs was 115-49 in his first 5 seasons with WT for 3 years().Without WT he is 31-29(15.5 wins a season). Capel is 95-67,with Blake for two years.In the three years without Blake(42-50),14 wins a season.Factor in Tubbs built in non D-1 wins ,it is pretty close to a dead heat.

The difference is that Billy Tubbs actually inherited a much worse team that Capel. Notice the improvement from year to year. He didn't collapse in year 4 and year 5 to be worse than year 1. I remember in the first year, Billy said we would run and shoot and that next year we would run and score. That is exactly what happened. To compare Capel with Billy is a joke because he kept winning after Waymon left.

1980-1981 Oklahoma 9-18 4-10 7th
1981-1982 Oklahoma 22-11 8-6 3rd NIT Semifinal
1982-1983 Oklahoma 24-9 10-4 2nd NCAA 2nd Round
1983-1984 Oklahoma 29-5 13-1 1st NCAA 2nd Round
1984-1985 Oklahoma 31-6 13-1 1st NCAA Elite 8
1985-1986 Oklahoma 26-9 8-6 T-3rd NCAA 2nd Round
1986-1987 Oklahoma 24-10 9-5 2nd NCAA Sweet 16
1987-1988 Oklahoma 35-4 12-2 1st NCAA Runner Up
1988-1989 Oklahoma 30-6 12-2 1st NCAA Sweet 16
1989-1990 Oklahoma 27-5 11-3 T-2nd NCAA 2nd Round
1990-1991 Oklahoma 20-15 5-9 T-6th NIT 3rd Round
1991-1992 Oklahoma 21-9 8-6 T-2nd NCAA 1st Round
1992-1993 Oklahoma 20-12 7-7 T-5th NIT 2nd Round
1993-1994 Oklahoma 15-13 6-8 5th NIT 1st Round
 
To tell the whole truth, Capel didn't just have to convince high profile kids to stay at OU for someone who didn't recruit them. He had to convince them to come when it was uncertain if OU would have sanctions or penalties because of the coach who recruited them.

If your son signed for a big name coach somewhere, but he got fired and caught breaking NCAA rules, and penalties for the school were pending, wouldn't you tell your son to run if the option was still there? Unless it was your alma mater, who would want their kid to suffer punishment for things they didn't do, and sign their careers to a coach with whom they have no connection? Anyone who does stay in that situation does it for the school or because they have no better options, period.
 
Kelvin Sampson would have taken the 2007 squad (not even including the recruits who bailed) to the NIT, minimum, and quite possibly the NCAA tourney.

Kevin Bookout told me that Sampson would have gotten the 2007 team to the NCAA's not the NIT without the recruits. And if you remember Bookout and Sampson weren't buds either. He said the players like Capel infinitely better than Sampson because they didn't have to do much but that Capel wanted to play with them more than he wanted to coach them. I think Capel toughened up a lot more the next season though.
 
To tell the whole truth, Capel didn't just have to convince high profile kids to stay at OU for someone who didn't recruit them. He had to convince them to come when it was uncertain if OU would have sanctions or penalties because of the coach who recruited them.

If your son signed for a big name coach somewhere, but he got fired and caught breaking NCAA rules, and penalties for the school were pending, wouldn't you tell your son to run if the option was still there? Unless it was your alma mater, who would want their kid to suffer punishment for things they didn't do, and sign their careers to a coach with whom they have no connection? Anyone who does stay in that situation does it for the school or because they have no better options, period.

Good post.

A lot of you guys are passing off re-recruiting kids as an easy task. Whether you want to believe it or not, the coach is a primary reason why you choose a school. Take that variable out of the equation and it is a whole different scenario. Throw in the uncertainty of the entire situation at the time coupled with the fact both Reynolds and James were high profile recruits who had many options, it makes sense.

Nothing against Crocker, but it's not like he had the same offers Reynolds and James did. He had family in Lawton I believe, and was very familiar with OU. Mayfield ended up at UAB and never really did a whole lot. Clark had few options due to his eligibility concerns.
 
Back
Top