Football question

[WTSooner]

Early 2027 NFL mock draft: Arch Manning, Dante Moore top potentially elite QB class

“Just wait until the 2027 draft class.” Well, with the '26 draft completed, we can turn our attention to that highly talented group.

www.nytimes.com

An Oklahoma QB going to early in next year’s first round in some projections! Alas …

I would be shocked if Stone didn't go in the first half of the first round.

 

[Eielson]

He won't have to. We'll start getting back to having some early rounders next year.

That said, OU's path to the top isn't to out-recruit everybody. We don't have the money or the resources to do that with any consistency. It's to build around culture and development.

No doubt. BV produced plenty of first rounders his first time here and Clemson. The drought likely breaks next year with Stone. And several other guys up front have a chance if things go well. I'm very excited to see if Okoye puts it together this year. We saw glimpses filling in for RMT.

But mid-round guys like Stutsman, Bowman, Halton, Daniels, etc will always be the backbone of this elite defense. We'll have dudes like that at every position to hold our defense together when the stars like RMT go down.

Elite defense is elite. Simple as that. Dorks can cry about draft night all they want.

 

[WichitaSooner]

It's funny that one of our posters consistently wants to brag about our defense in his praise of Brent as if Brent is simply our DC. It's also amusing that he throws around teams like Indiana and Ohio State in comparison to OU. Let's see, one just pulled off the greatest turnaround in college sports history and is the reigning champion, another won the title two years ago and is always in the playoff, and the third has . . . one top 10 finish, no playoff wins, and two sub-.500 seasons in four years. Yet people who point out that we need more high-end draft picks are "dorks."

It is simply beyond any (rational) debate that we need more first round and second day talent on our roster if we are going to compete for titles, or, at the very least, playoff wins, which should be the expectation. Now, if the goal is simply to have a highly rated defense that can help us win nine or 10 games and produce a day two pick (or two) plus a few Saturday picks, that's a different question. But last I checked, OU doesn't hang banners to celebrate top 5 defenses.

This year was a step in the right direction, given how anemic our drafts had been the previous couple years. And I am not arguing that there isn't reason to think things will be even better in the next year or two. All I posted was that we need more early picks to be in the mix for a title, and somehow Brent's acolyte turned it into a manifesto about "elite defense."

 

[hoopsaustin]

It's funny that one of our posters consistently wants to brag about our defense in his praise of Brent as if Brent is simply our DC. It's also amusing that he throws around teams like Indiana and Ohio State in comparison to OU. Let's see, one just pulled off the greatest turnaround in college sports history and is the reigning champion, another won the title two years ago and is always in the playoff, and the third has . . . one top 10 finish, no playoff wins, and two sub-.500 seasons in four years. Yet people who point out that we need more high-end draft picks are "dorks."

It is simply beyond any (rational) debate that we need more first round and second day talent on our roster if we are going to compete for titles, or, at the very least, playoff wins, which should be the expectation. Now, if the goal is simply to have a highly rated defense that can help us win nine or 10 games and produce a day two pick (or two) plus a few Saturday picks, that's a different question. But last I checked, OU doesn't hang banners to celebrate top 5 defenses.

This year was a step in the right direction, given how anemic our drafts had been the previous couple years. And I am not arguing that there isn't reason to think things will be even better in the next year or two. All I posted was that we need more early picks to be in the mix for a title, and somehow Brent's acolyte turned it into a manifesto about "elite defense."

Is anyone saying they DON'T want more 1st rounders? You have some spare millions to get more of them?

 

[WichitaSooner]

Is anyone saying they DON'T want more 1st rounders? You have some spare millions to get more of them?

Arizona State (x2), Utah(x2), UCF, Georgia Tech, San Diego State are among the schools that had guys in the first round. I don't think it is unfair to expect us to get a guy in the first round every year or two. And maybe we will.

 

[TSSR]

He won't have to. We'll start getting back to having some early rounders next year.

That said, OU's path to the top isn't to out-recruit everybody. We don't have the money or the resources to do that with any consistency. It's to build around culture and development.

Similar to Indiana. As wild as that sounds.

 

[mict085]

Arizona State (x2), Utah(x2), UCF, Georgia Tech, San Diego State are among the schools that had guys in the first round. I don't think it is unfair to expect us to get a guy in the first round every year or two. And maybe we will.

You sure like to yell at clouds. A lot.

Brent is an elite defensive coach. He’s had trouble on the offensive side of the ball but he’s working like hell to fix it. I believe we are moving in the right direction but some criticism is warranted. Of course we need more talent but we have upgraded the talent and continue to do so.

 

[Eielson]

It's also amusing that he throws around teams like Indiana ... in comparison to OU. Let's see, one just pulled off the greatest turnaround in college sports history and is the reigning champion ... yet people who point out that we need more high-end draft picks are "dorks."

It's amazing that you somehow missed the fact that Indiana's top 5 defense only had two guys drafted -- a 2nd and 7th rounder.

No first rounders but they somehow held Ohio State to 10 points and Alabama to 3 in the postseason.

 

[Eielson]

Arizona State (x2), Utah(x2), UCF, Georgia Tech, San Diego State are among the schools that had guys in the first round.

Lmao yeah, we should strive to be more like these non-playoff teams. We should model our program after 5-7 UCF. You're one of a kind.

 

[CoachTalk]

It's amazing that you somehow missed the fact that Indiana's top 5 defense only had two guys drafted -- a 2nd and 7th rounder.

No first rounders but they somehow held Ohio State to 10 points and Alabama to 3 in the postseason.

IU turnaround was also aided by having 47 players bw the ages of 22-25. Helps they are older Grown men!

 

[WaymanFan]

I don't think it is unfair to expect us to get a guy in the first round every year or two. And maybe we will.

No argument, though that's not limited to BV. From 2011-2017 NFL Drafts, guess how many 1st round draft picks OU had? ONE (future HOFer Lane Johnson). I didn't mean to make it sound like we had to have high draft picks to be successful, but we all know it helps. There are two other primary factors, especially if we're not going to have as deep of pockets as some of the other blue bloods:

1) Identifying talent in the high school ranks. The last time we won the Natty in 2000, we got enormous contributions from our 1999 recruiting class. As an FYI, that was OU's lowest rated recruiting class in my lifetime. It was not ranked in the top-50...but it produced literally 6 years of starting QBs (Heupel, Hybl, White), Quentin Griffin, Derrick Strait, and Torrance Marshall, among others.

2) Great coaching. If you weren't born or too young to remember, those teams from 1984-1987 were phenomenal. There was talent up and down the roster at just about every position...yet it produced a grand total of ONE future NFL Pro Bowl player (Keith Jackson). We had great COLLEGE talent that received incredible coaching.

 

[Eielson]

No argument, though that's not limited to BV. From 2011-2017 NFL Drafts, guess how many 1st round draft picks OU had? ONE (future HOFer Lane Johnson). I didn't mean to make it sound like we had to have high draft picks to be successful, but we all know it helps. There are two other primary factors, especially if we're not going to have as deep of pockets as some of the other blue bloods:

1) Identifying talent in the high school ranks. The last time we won the Natty in 2000, we got enormous contributions from our 1999 recruiting class. As an FYI, that was OU's lowest rated recruiting class in my lifetime. It was not ranked in the top-50...but it produced literally 6 years of starting QBs (Heupel, Hybl, White), Quentin Griffin, Derrick Strait, and Torrance Marshall, among others.

2) Great coaching. If you weren't born or too young to remember, those teams from 1984-1987 were phenomenal. There was talent up and down the roster at just about every position...yet it produced a grand total of ONE future NFL Pro Bowl player (Keith Jackson). We had great COLLEGE talent that received incredible coaching.

First rounders are nice, but it's silly to measure a player's college career by their NFL career rather than their...uh...college career. I don't think that Heupel had to hand in his championship or White his Heisman. I'm also pretty confident Pavia still was at the Heisman ceremony and Chambliss in the CFP.