Football question

[Boom Soon]

Win or lose I start to lose interest in college football in general as November approaches.

 

[WichitaSooner]

I guarantee you if Riley played our schedule the last 2 years, he’d have a losing record. If BV had Riley schedule the last 2 years, he’d be winning 9-10 games per year.

I know that going to trigger Wichita because he hates BV.

Are we talking about the same Brent who went 10-8 in a watered down Biig 12? I don’t think he’d win 9 games playing Bixby’s schedule. Just make sure he doesn’t have to play a service academy. Or Kansas.

 

[Eielson]

Arbuckle has not been a huge upgrade.

He's coached for three meaningful games, two of which were with an injured QB1, and you're already calling him a bust.

Maybe he's not a star, but that's the definition of bedwetting. Just let it play out for a minute.

 

[WichitaSooner]

He's coached for three meaningful games, two of which were with an injured QB1, and you're already calling him a bust.

Maybe he's not a star, but that's the definition of bedwetting. Just let it play out for a minute.

Keep pumping those excuses. Mateer wasn’t injured. This is a loser mentality. Ask any pro or college athlete and they say the same thing: if someone is healthy enough to play, then you can’t use injuries as an excuse. His thumb had nothing to do with him making poor decisions. And he did the same thing in all the games leading up to the thumb surgery. He constantly puts the ball in jeopardy.

As for your other point, it’s the other three games that are just as worrisome. A team with a healthy line and five or more healthy running backs shouldn’t get their asses handed to them in the running game week after week by the three bad teams on the schedule. And our allegedly dynamic receivers shouldn’t be nothing but possession receivers.

I didn’t call him a bust. I said so far, it’s hard to see where the offense is actually better. Run game numbers are far worse in every meaningful category. Passing game is better but it would be almost impossible not to be since we are fully healthy at that position this year.

 

[mict085]

Keep pumping those excuses. Mateer wasn’t injured. This is a loser mentality. Ask any pro or college athlete and they say the same thing: if someone is healthy enough to play, then you can’t use injuries as an excuse. His thumb had nothing to do with him making poor decisions. And he did the same thing in all the games leading up to the thumb surgery. He constantly puts the ball in jeopardy.

As for your other point, it’s the other three games that are just as worrisome. A team with a healthy line and five or more healthy running backs shouldn’t get their asses handed to them in the running game week after week by the three bad teams on the schedule. And our allegedly dynamic receivers shouldn’t be nothing but possession receivers.

I didn’t call him a bust. I said so far, it’s hard to see where the offense is actually better. Run game numbers are far worse in every meaningful category. Passing game is better but it would be almost impossible not to be since we are fully healthy at that position this year.

Our OL isn’t healthy and hasn’t been healthy all season. The guys that are healthy were supposed to be backups and are either not good enough or freshman that are still learning how to play. I know injuries are a part of the game but we can’t keep counting on guys that are hurt all the time. We need to move on and find players that can stay healthy and contribute.

 

[Eielson]

Mateer wasn’t injured.

We know Mateer had surgery and that the injury happened in the first quarter. He played through it, but it's nonsensical to say it never happened or affected him in any way.

You would genuinely argue that the University of Oklahoma wasn't in Oklahoma if you thought it would make Venables or Moser look worse. Or anybody in the Kruger family look good.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Our OL isn’t healthy and hasn’t been healthy all season. The guys that are healthy were supposed to be backups and are either not good enough or freshman that are still learning how to play. I know injuries are a part of the game but we can’t keep counting on guys that are hurt all the time. We need to move on and find players that can stay healthy and contribute.

I don’t buy it. Every team deals with this. Offensive line is a brutal position. Guys are constantly fighting through stuff. You know which team was hit as hard as we were on the line last year? Notre Dame. Their season seemed to go ok. And if Taylor and Sexton are guys who you think would have been starting, do you really think we would be better off? We have seen multiple years of those guys. Mediocre would be the word that comes to mind.

Also, the inescapable fact is that whether our guys are healthy, hurt, banged up, dinged up, or whatever people want to say, we simply aren’t talented enough up front. We haven’t landed a big time transfer on the line in years. Brent pays for the defensive line but settles for nonpower conference offensive linemen. You bring in guys from Stanford and Western Carolina and other crappy programs, and this is what you get.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

No one bats 1.000. But Ott was a catastrophic miss. We could have obtained more OLs or WRs or some real TEs

One thing I will say is that it was great to let our bums/cancers leave from last year. For example, sharp and anderson. They combined for 2 catches tonight for 13 total yards..

Can you really count ott as a miss for Nagy when everyone in the country said it was an amazing get?

 

[WichitaSooner]

We know Mateer had surgery and that the injury happened in the first quarter. He played through it, but it's nonsensical to say it never happened or affected him in any way.

You would genuinely argue that the University of Oklahoma wasn't in Oklahoma if you thought it would make Venables or Moser look worse. Or anybody in the Kruger family look good.

Did I say it didn’t happen?

I don’t need to make Brent look bad. He takes care of that all by himself (well, he has some help from DeMarco, Bill, and Finley).

 

[Eielson]

Did I say it didn’t happen?

You literally said "He wasn't injured."

So yes, that's exactly what you said.

 

[WichitaSooner]

You literally said "He wasn't injured."

So yes, that's exactly what you said.

Nope, I said that if you are healthy enough to play, it can no longer be used as an excuse. He WAS injured. Past tense. By Saturday, he and the docs declared him healthy. All the fan boy media talked in pregame about how well he was throwing it. And all of his picks and other bad throws Saturday were the result of horrible decisions or not seeing the field well. Unless his brain is located in his thumb, I don’t think that has anything to do with the surgery he had.

 

[WaymanFan]

Our offensive line simply hasn't been good for most of this DECADE. The reason it's the biggest mystery to me is because no school has produced better NFL offensive linemen this century than OU. All things being equal, it should be as easy for us to recruit the best of the best as it is for Ohio State to sign the best WRs every year (which they do!).

We have two Canton locks (T Williams and L Johnson), one more on a Canton path (C Humphrey), three others who have / had been selected to multiple Pro Bowls (J Brown, D Joseph and O Brown Jr), and a bunch of others who were / are longtime starters. As long as OU is at least "competitive" with NIL money, this position group should be able to recruit themselves.

 

[BoulderSooner]

you don't win games against good teams (with great defenses) when you lose turnovers 3-0 ..

 

[Eielson]

Nope, I said that if you are healthy enough to play, it can no longer be used as an excuse.

Which again, is just an untreated personality disorder pretending to be clueless. He broke his hand in the first quarter and played through it. The fact that he toughed it out does not mean the hand was unbroken and didn't affect him at all.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Which again, is just an untreated personality disorder pretending to be clueless. He broke his hand in the first quarter and played through it. The fact that he toughed it out does not mean the hand was unbroken and didn't affect him at all.

I’m not talking about the Auburn game and don’t know why you are. It was three weeks ago and we just got humiliated by our rival. Again.

 

[WichitaSooner]

you don't win games against good teams (with great defenses) when you lose turnovers 3-0 ..

Also if you have the worst running game known to man, no receivers who can separate or make plays, and one of the worst schemes imaginable. We also now have lost the special team battle in two of the three real games we have played.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Nope, I said that if you are healthy enough to play, it can no longer be used as an excuse. He WAS injured. Past tense. By Saturday, he and the docs declared him healthy. All the fan boy media talked in pregame about how well he was throwing it. And all of his picks and other bad throws Saturday were the result of horrible decisions or not seeing the field well. Unless his brain is located in his thumb, I don’t think that has anything to do with the surgery he had.

That isn't necessarliy true.
You can be cleared to play but still not healthy.
Some of those INTs were just misses that COULD have been a result of his hand bothering him.

Especailly after it ripped open early in the game.

 

[Eielson]

I’m not talking about the Auburn game and don’t know why you are. It was three weeks ago and we just got humiliated by our rival. Again.

The quote you responded to me was saying that Arbuckle has only coached 3 meaningful games and that he had an injured QB1 in 2 of them. If you're not going to read the posts you're responding to, then we can't have a meaningful/worthwhile conversation.

Even if I hadn't mentioned the Auburn game, that illustration does completely debunk your notion that playing through injury at less than 100% doesn't exist. Which honestly wasn't worth the typing, as anybody who played beyond T-ball knows that.

 

[WichitaSooner]

The quote you responded to me was saying that Arbuckle has only coached 3 meaningful games and that he had an injured QB1 in 2 of them. If you're not going to read the posts you're responding to, then we can't have a meaningful/worthwhile conversation.

Even if I hadn't mentioned the Auburn game, that illustration does completely debunk your notion that playing through injury at less than 100% doesn't exist. Which honestly wasn't worth the typing, as anybody who played beyond T-ball knows that.

Again, I just don't care about the injury excuses. I honestly can't fathom how anyone could have watched us through six games and think that Mateer's thumb somehow means we can't evaluate the job Arbuckle and the staff have done. Seth was fired at this point last year, rightfully so. I am NOT suggesting that should happen. Let me repeat that for those who will blatantly misrepresent this post: I do NOT think Ben should be fired. I do think that half a season is enough to form conclusions about this season's offense. We are the worst running team I have ever seen. The line doesn't run block well, the backs can't make guys miss, and the tight ends can't block at all, yet the staff still asks them to block SEC edge defenders. The WRs don't ever make explosive plays. Some of that is scheme, but truly elite receivers can also just occasionally run by defenders, and/or jump up and make a play on a 50-50 ball. We can't do any of that stuff. Mateer makes at least five or six very poor decisions every game where he puts the ball in jeopardy. Back to the WRs -- all the talk through spring and summer was how many good athletes we have in that room, yet Thomas hasn't seen the field and Gibson may as well not even be out there since we don't throw to him. If our three starters were lighting it up, sure, that's fine. But none of them stretch the field or make contested plays. So if Thomas is close to being what he was hyped to be going up against our vaunted defense, why not throw him out there and see what he can do? WR is one position where freshmen throughout the country play all the time. His failure to see the field leads me to believe he is another guy who won't match the hype. It's just clear that the offensive talent under Brent is nowhere close to where it needs to be. A lot of you said all offseason that we don't need a great offense, just a solid one because our defense is so good. Well, we aren't solid. Not even close.

But back to what started this convo: I will again ask, in what ways has the offense shown meaningful strides this year? We have better health and a better, more experienced QB, but the results are hardly better. If you had fallen asleep for the past 12 months, would you even know we had a new OC?