Uh - I didn't say Clem wasn't better than us that night. I made a very big point of saying that we were pretty BAD that night. So, by extension, that means they played better than we did.
Yea, you are Exactly RIGHT, and I'm every bit as guilty as anyone else of putting too much on the QB position. As they say, the QB gets too much blame for a loss and too much credit for a win - and I think that's true...... Even though I sometimes do just that.I don't think anyone is opposed to talking about the elephant in the room. I do find it ironic though that when we talk about Jalen's 24 wins it's a; "team sport and he was carried by his defense and special teams for his whole career." Meanwhile if we want to talk about the only two losses in his career the game turns into singles tennis and he's the only reason we lost. I don't say this to pick a fight. I'm not even a Jalen apologist, but there's a defined double standard when talking about his career. .
Otherwise I completely agree with your statement. Our offense couldn't keep their offense off the field which kept our defense in a state of exhaustion the whole second half. I remember defensive players on sideline begging Jalen to move the ball so they could get a rest. There was absolutely a strong element of blame on the QB's execution. Still, people forget that Jalen had multiple passes dropped that could have equated to first downs that were on the receivers moreso than him. I can remember at least 3 that were either on 2nd or 3rd down. We also got stuck with an OC who hadn't called a game in years. That was probably the biggest part of the reason that we fell apart when Bo went down. The playcalling was more bland, repetitive, and Sark couldn't figure out an alternate plan without Bo. That allowed for Clemson's D to close off the middle of the field and tee off on Jalen to make him uncomfortable. Most will never forget that the refs don't know an illegal pick from a hole in the ground, but somehow that's probably Jalen's fault too.
Either way whether it was 100% Jalen, 75% Jalen, or 5% Jalen doesn't matter. We lost, we got our revenge, we got another trophy, and we got another QB. That should cover making just about everyone happy on both sides of the QB camp.
They don’t have plenty of 60 point conference games now. Five over the last 10 years, two years they had 2 . Texas tech and Kansas both years and one year they won a shootout with Okie Lite 62-52. Funny strange, the last time they won 2 conference games by scoring 60, they also got curb stomped by LSU 63-28 in the playoffs. I‘m Willing to bet they give up 60 about as many times as they score 60 in conference.
If you score 60 it's 100 percent certain that someone gave up 60 . NO WAY I'm taking that bet !
Maybe. But OU only averaged 32.7 ppg this past season. Not sure that equates to the best offense in the SEC.
Crap what did I miss?Boy, this thread title takes on the form of irony now, doesn't it?
Lincoln Riley ran from the SEC after making these comments years earlier. Great times!
Well I was looking for something else and given what happened, it’s like when Bugs Bunny would play a girl bunny or something like that.
Well it is kinda funny, most of us believed that Riley would leave Oklahoma for the nfl, but leave the foundation in place like Stoops did for him So the question was valid at the time whether Oklahoma could compete. But Riley took everything to usc to include the ashes in the fireplace. So yeah it’s just proof that in 4 years a program can be in an entirely different set of circumstances that no one could ever predict other than the town drunk.
Riley unquestionably inherited a solid infrastructure that Stoops had put in place, and he deserves credit for keeping it going. At the same time, his "Defense Optional" approach to coaching - at a school famous for their defensive prowess via the Selmon Brothers of the 70s and Brian Bosworth (most notably) in the 80s - was ludicrous. OU is THE BLUE BLOOD of that conference, but they have largely been the Cosmo Kramer 8-year old karate class - and even then, they never went undefeated.
And he used OU money to recruit players to USC and hasn't been made to pay any consequence.
Kind of wishful thinking on the part of LR.Link
I see his statement as neither even if he claims he's complimenting his own conference. It's really highlighting the difference in styles among the conferences.
I'm gonna guess he means that he was still the head coach at OU out on the recruiting trail and getting guys to come to USC while using funding from Oklahoma.Just curious. How did he do that?
