Grant McCasland

[IndySooner]

Yep.

All three of those schools you mentioned were desperate for some sort of success in a revenue sport. While OU was trying to compete for a national championship in the most high-profile sport of football, those three schools were competing for relevance as have-nots competing against the big boys. All of them found a way to be moderately successful in football while being very good in hoops...Tech got to a national championship game and Baylor won one. ISU has had rotten luck in the tournament, but has been very good in the regular season. Baylor has had three major athletic scandals in the last thirty years, but has also built a football stadium and a basketball arena (replacing one newer than Lloyd Noble). What Scott Drew has done there is truly a miracle. Baylor has had some very good years in football, but they're not consistent 10 game winners.

OU, thankfully, isn't willing to pay the price of a Baylor-level scandal. In turn, OU isn't willing to pay the price of consistent 7/8/9 win seasons in football in order to be great in basketball. OU's athletic department and donors have made the calculation to attempt to be great in football and above average in basketball. Especially in the age of NIL, I don't know if it's possible to be a consistent national championship contender in both sports. There may be no more than five schools with the resources to pull that off. Michigan and Ohio State can do that, possibly Florida (and they've slipped in both sports). Alabama is trying.

Again, you can't include ISU in this bucket. I'd be more willing to put KSU in this bucket.

 

[AnotherSoonerInTX]

Again, you can't include ISU in this bucket. I'd be more willing to put KSU in this bucket.

I can agree with that. ISU has been consistently good most seasons. At some point in the last 10 years, they got to be better than us.

K-State has had our number up until this year. They've also had a couple of good tournament runs that have stopped short of the Final Four.

The original question is summed up as: How did Tech and Baylor, politician-ordered throw-ins to the original Big 12, pass us up? That's hard for a lot of folks to accept. It's one thing for us to go more than 30 years without winning in Lawrence, and another thing to see Tech and Baylor play for national championships.

 

[inoref]

How far will any team from Big 12 make it in the tourney? I think Sweet 16 about it

 

[SoonerDutch]

You can't put ISU in the same bucket as BU and Tech. And really, Baylor was the only dead program of the three.

But ISU was winning games at a high clip back in the Johnny Orr days. They weren't as consistent, but they've always been around.

You’re getting very granular but regardless I would strongly disagree on the ISU specific aspect. ISU is not a relevant basketball power despite a nice run in the late 80s/90s. KSU & (IMO) Oklahoma State are in the same boat. They are secondary programs in relatively small states. Having a good run in the 50s/70s/80s is completely irrelevant to being a player in today’s game.

But if you really want to throw out ISU, I still think Tech/BU (and TCU with alum Dixon esp) are worthy case studies. As others have explicitly said, they are athletic programs with varying degrees of middling success who got serious about men’s basketball at an institutional level just as OU lost a pretty good coach in KS and rested on their laurels.

 

[TEvans4Three]

How far will any team from Big 12 make it in the tourney? I think Sweet 16 about it

 

[IndySooner]

How far will any team from Big 12 make it in the tourney? I think Sweet 16 about it

I completely disagree. I think when we get out of beating each other up in conference, you’ll see the teams get going. I’m not sure we have a champion, but I think we have a couple elite 8 teams at minimum.

Iowa State might be best suited for a run.

 

[IndySooner]

You’re getting very granular but regardless I would strongly disagree on the ISU specific aspect. ISU is not a relevant basketball power despite a nice run in the late 80s/90s. KSU & (IMO) Oklahoma State are in the same boat. They are secondary programs in relatively small states. Having a good run in the 50s/70s/80s is completely irrelevant to being a player in today’s game.

But if you really want to throw out ISU, I still think Tech/BU (and TCU) are worthy case studies. As others have explicitly said, they are athletic programs with varying degrees of middling success who got serious about men’s basketball at an institutional level just as OU lost a pretty good coach in KS and rested on their laurels.

I assume you’re a bit younger. Iowa State was super competitive under Johnny Orr, one of the best in the conference under Tim Floyd and Larry Eustacy and then again under Fred Hoiberg.

They slid a bit after Hoiberg, but they’ve been a solid-to-good program since the mid-80s.

Now those Texas schools, I 100% agree with.

 

[SoonerDutch]

I assume you’re a bit younger. Iowa State was super competitive under Johnny Orr, one of the best in the conference under Tim Floyd and Larry Eustacy and then again under Fred Hoiberg.

They slid a bit after Hoiberg, but they’ve been a solid-to-good program since the mid-80s.

Now those Texas schools, I 100% agree with.

Yeah, as mentioned earlier I grew up in the 90s but they were largely mediocre in the 90s and 2000s (outside of 01-02) but program prestige is largely irrelevant in the recruiting/transfer landscape.

A solid run the past 10-15 years (Hoiberg & onward) for sure due to better coaching & better institutional support (definitely better fan support than OU).

 

[WTSooner]

How far will any team from Big 12 make it in the tourney? I think Sweet 16 about it

I feel like if you measure it by playing to seed, we haven't been great the last 2 years (edit: 2021 was kind of the same way, we just had the NC, but only 1 Elite 8 team).

That said, we had one and two Elite 8 teams during that time.

Unless something crazy happens, Houston should make the Elite 8. That would give them 3 Elite 8's or better in the last four seasons. Crazy.

 

[AnotherSoonerInTX]

You’re getting very granular but regardless I would strongly disagree on the ISU specific aspect. ISU is not a relevant basketball power despite a nice run in the late 80s/90s. KSU & (IMO) Oklahoma State are in the same boat. They are secondary programs in relatively small states. Having a good run in the 50s/70s/80s is completely irrelevant to being a player in today’s game.

But if you really want to throw out ISU, I still think Tech/BU (and TCU with alum Dixon esp) are worthy case studies. As others have explicitly said, they are athletic programs with varying degrees of middling success who got serious about men’s basketball at an institutional level just as OU lost a pretty good coach in KS and rested on their laurels.

Everything is relative. Again, if these schools win 8 football games in a season, it's considered a great season (OSU's bar has been raised higher than that in recent years). At OU, it can get a coach fired if it happens too often. The OU athletic budget is predicated upon donations, TV rights, and ticket sales generated by football at the highest possible level. Football funds those national championship softball and gymnastics teams that we all like. The OU AD and donors have chosen to prioritize football.

The schools named above are trying to be relevant in big-time college athletics. They have big money donors like the rest of us do..perhaps not as many, but they have them. They can get more bang for the buck by going for greatness in hoops. They are driven by fear of being left further behind. Half of the original Big 12 will have already left. It already happened before to TCU...hence their rebuilt facilities and commitment to revenue sports.

The post-OU/Texas Big 12 is making the same calculation as a conference: be good and entertaining enough in football to get a reasonable TV deal while striving to be at or near the top in basketball.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Some our fans:

"Porter's HS recruiting is some of the best we've seen in decades. Love the transfers too. Uzan might be in the NBA next year. JM will definitely be in the NBA. Did you see what Hugely did as a sophomore? Not sure how they'll be able to keep Cooper out of the starting lineup all season."

Same fans:

"NIL kills us. We don't have anywhere near the talent we need to compete with 2/3's of the Big 12."


Make it stop. Please!

Give it a rest. Listing false statements is a sign you lost

 

[WTSooner]

Give it a rest. Listing false statements is a sign you lost

100% true and you know that.

Will you stay off the board for a year if I go find a post since last June 1st that says each of those things? I didn't make them up, multiple knuckleheads said each and every one of them.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

100% true and you know that.

Will you stay off the board for a year if I go find a post since last June 1st that says each of those things? I didn't make them up, multiple knuckleheads said each and every one of them.

Lol no deal

You are acting like these were common wide held beliefs of sooner fans. You couldn’t be further from the truth.

And I highly doubt anyone said JM was for sure an NBA player lol

 

[WTSooner]

Lol no deal

You are acting like these were common wide held beliefs of sooner fans. You couldn’t be further from the truth.

And I highly doubt anyone said JM was for sure an NBA player lol

Backtracked off that statement REAL quick, didn't you?

Future of Moser

If we would have shot better FTs against tech, we would have the same conference record as kansas while playing a harder conference schedule so far

oklahomahoops.com

And unless I misread something, there is a post where some "Prospect Specialist" (whatever that means), Rayford Young (Trae's father), and our very own coachtalk all suggest JM will play in the NBA. Even some references to being a 1st round draft pick.

Edit: You can look at who liked the post and deduce that they agreed as well.

I don't make stuff up. Apologize or stfu.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Backtracked off that statement REAL quick, didn't you?

Future of Moser

If we would have shot better FTs against tech, we would have the same conference record as kansas while playing a harder conference schedule so far

oklahomahoops.com

And unless I misread something, there is a post where some "Prospect Specialist" (whatever that means), Rayford Young (Trae's father), and our very own coachtalk all suggest JM will play in the NBA. Even some references to being a 1st round draft pick.

Edit: You can look at who liked the post and deduce that they agreed as well.

I don't make stuff up. Apologize or stfu.

Lol apologize or stfu? What is this?

And your link proves nothing. There were more people thinking he could be NBA than I remember but it was far from the consensus. And I didn’t see anyone go as far to say he will for sure be in the NBA

Once again, using hyperbole and exaggeration just shows you are losing

 

[WTSooner]

Lol apologize or stfu? What is this?

And your link proves nothing. There were more people thinking he could be NBA than I remember but it was far from the consensus. And I didn’t see anyone go as far to say he will for sure be in the NBA

Once again, using hyperbole and exaggeration just shows you are losing

 

[SoonerBounce13]

 

[skyvue]

Once again, using hyperbole and exaggeration just shows you are losing

We're all losing because of these pissing matches that should be continued via DM (if at all).

 

[SoonerDutch]

The schools named above are trying to be relevant in big-time college athletics. They have big money donors like the rest of us do..perhaps not as many, but they have them. They can get more bang for the buck by going for greatness in hoops. They are driven by fear of being left further behind. Half of the original Big 12 will have already left. It already happened before to TCU...hence their rebuilt facilities and commitment to revenue sports.

Oh absolutely, I guess I’m at the point where if that’s the reality OU basketball is facing not sure a coach is going to dramatically raise/lower the floor.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Oh absolutely, I guess I’m at the point where if that’s the reality OU basketball is facing not sure a coach is going to dramatically raise/lower the floor.

I think the opposite. In college sports, good (or bad) coaching can make a huge difference. I read a long profile in The Athletic the other day about Lance Leipold, the KU football coach. You talk about an impossible situation for a coach to inherit. The worst program in the country for almost 15 years. Horrible facilities (so bad that they are going to play next season at two different locations while their stadium is renovated). And if you think they have significant NIL money coming in, you’re kidding yourself. The only thing that changed was the coach. He runs the program the right way, lets his coordinators do their jobs, and gets the absolute most of his players. I realize that’s an extreme example, but it shows what coaching can do.