THE COLLEGE SPORTS MONITOR

Recent Articles

1. OU defections = Lack of Institutional Control
   
2. Pat Summitt Got it Right = Knowing when to step aside
3. The real truth about the Big 12 television contract
4. College Football Playoff System = The Big 10 Plan
5. Texas A&M moves to SEC = The Aggies get it right
6. Scheduling 2012 Style – The Fix is in
7. Recruiting, It's in the Math
8. Recruiting, How Times Have Changed
9. Mike Stoops's Return to OU
10. BCS = Buying College Sports
11. Getting "Bowled Over"
12. Mike Leach's Tough Road Ahead at WSU
13. Be Careful What You Ask For (Boone Pickens's Money)

Scroll down to read these articles or click the "Past Articles" link above to read other recent articles.

OU defections = Lack of Institutional Control

What could OU have in common with Ohio State, Penn State, USC and the University of Miami? They're programs recently bitten by the "lack of institutional control" bug and OU may be catching the "bug," so to speak. The phrase, one the NCAA uses in those instances when the hammer comes down for an athletic program, can create instant fear in the hearts of athletic directors and head coaches. It simply means the university's athletic program is in big-time trouble. The NCAA has made it abundantly clear over the years that it expects school leaders to be in charge of their athletic programs. The NCAA takes a very dim view of universities where "the tail appears to be wagging the dog" or where universities are void of real leaders.
Miami and Ohio State with their paid players and Penn State with their sex scandal are prime examples of football programs that were allowed to spiral out of control by school leaders. The Miami program is currently on a downturn with the allegations already costing one coach his job. The same thing has happened as respected coaches at both Ohio State and Penn State were let go amid allegations. Even the powerful USC, who may be able to withstand the NCAA's assault better than most, was forced to stay home for the holidays last year. This leaves only the University of Oklahoma on the endangered list of great programs that may in trouble.

In the wake of the latest wave of defections, Sooner fans must wonder what is going on at OU. This latest bad news is on the heels of the announcement last December that Brandon Williams was leaving the team. While the standard "moving closer to family" reason was given, Houston is not that far away which made that one hard to buy. Heisman trophy type running backs don't leave programs to be closer to family. Over the past two years, 16 players have been either dismissed from the team or have transferred elsewhere. While the specifics of these cases are always sketchy, regardless of the reasons, this number is way out of line with what is to be considered normal. The concern is real that a deep seeded problem exists within the football program and Stoops has lost control of his program.

At a university that abdicates its institutional leadership to the football coach, OU fans should be concerned as well. The problems, to this point, do not include issues that will get OU into the NCAA doghouse, but as things continue to spiral out of control, who can know where the bad news will end. Even to the most diehard OU fan, it is obvious that something is amiss. The loss of 16 players over a two year period, many of whom were penciled in as starters and backups for the next year, is just crazy. There is no way that losing so many top line players will not have a negative impact both this upcoming season and beyond.
To put the matter into a clear perspective, without additional off season casualties, the Sooners will have lost no less than seven starters, including a couple possible super stars. Overnight a 2012 team projected to be a national championship contender by many inside the program, is now a shell of its former self. All of a sudden those games in Lubbock, Dallas, and Morgantown just got a lot tougher and the return game with the Oklahoma State Cowboys in Norman is no longer a gimme.

In this day of scholarship limitations, refilling the cupboard can take years. For a crash course on the impact that losing players can have on a program, one must only look to the OU men's basketball program. Not that long ago OU basketball was on top of the college basketball world with a national player of the year in Blake Griffin and an Elite 8 program. Seemingly overnight, the program fell off the college basketball map. In its current state, making it back to a NCAA tournament may take years. While football programs can absorb losses more readily, the current trend in the football department has to be troubling. This mass exodus from a major football program is simply unprecedented.

While most OU fans will be quick to give Stoops credit for his tough stance on disciplinary issues, loyalty aside, at some point, it will be important for him to be held accountable and possibly succumb to being questioned on the matter. Fortunately for many of OU's fair weather fans, who can be easily distracted by the latest flavor of the month, there is the Thunder. For the rest of the Sooner Nation, the thought of weathering another John Blake era cannot be attractive or acceptable. With the Pickens-backed Cowboys making noises about becoming "Oklahoma's team," the pressure becomes even greater to avoid a program spiraling out of control.

Given this situation, a return to glory this year may be too much to ask. At this point, Sooner fans must hope Stoops will right the ship in order to improve the long term outlook for the football program.

The Sports Proffesor, © 2012

Follow me on Twitter @Sports_Prof

Pat Summitt Got it Right = Knowing when to step aside...

The real truth about the Big 12 television contract…

College Football Playoff System = The Big 10 Plan...

04/02/2012

  

 Many football fans will suggest that changing an institution as old and as big as college football is impossible.  Fortunately for football fans, the changing landscape of the grand old game over the past few years has proved otherwise.  The BCS, as we have come to know it, is changing and the Big 10 is leading the way. 

The BCS was established in 1998, due in part to the outcry for a college football playoff system.   A few years later, the system was refined to give us what we have today.   This may have gone on forever had it not been for last year’s fiasco in New Orleans, the overwhelming need for additional revenue, and the ego of the Big 10 conference.    First off, last year’s reenactment of the mid-season 9-6 bore-fest betweenAlabamaand LSU was witnessed by a record low television audience.   At a time of unheralded popularity, this BCS finale was not what college football purists had envisioned.   To make matters worse, the event became a regional affair further raising concerns that the Southeastern Conference was cornering the market on college football.   The Big 10 could see its football power passing before its very eyes.  Something had to be done and fast.       

With the NCAA ultimately responsible for any major changes to the system, it was essential for college presidents and academic power conferences to get on board.  This is exactly what happened.  The Big 10, on the verge of being beaten to the punch with a less attractive (at least to the Big 10) plan, were quick to act.   The conference, which along with the Ivy League, founded the game back in the late 1800’s, acted in a manner unlike any Big 10 conference in the past.   The traditionally academically snooty Big 10 realized that a pre-emptive strike in the playoff discussion was in order.   What had seemed impossible only a few years earlier, now became a certainty.  Ironically, the conference most opposed to a playoff system over the years, is in line to forge ahead with the format for the first Division I playoff in college football history.  Buoyed by the belief that their proposal would be agreed to by their sister conference, the Pac 12, and thereby creating an insurmountable force, Big 10 athletic directors presented their plan.  Not wanting to appear to be the spoiled kid on the block, the Southeastern Conference quickly got on board.  

What caused the amazing change of events?   First off, a major hang-up for the Big 10/Pac 12 consortium has always been the impact that a playoff would have on the academic integrity of the universities and the game.  Creating a system that would allow for a format that would minimize games played, as well as create a bono fide national champion within the academic calendar year was paramount.   The Plus One system does just that.  Under the Plus One playoff system, the first playoff game will be staged in mid-December with the final game around the first of the year.   With the impetus provided by the Big 10, a football playoff system can be in effect as early as 2014.       

While ego and money played a big role in the change, in the final analysis tradition should not be overlooked.   In the book, the Rites of Autumn, it underscores the deep seeded tradition of the Big 10 and sister conference, the Pac 12.   Other than the Ivy battles of earlier times, the first major regional contest known as the “Big Game” played between Stanford and California, occurred in 1892.  The first Big 10 game was played between the University of Chicago and the University of Michigan in 1898.  Adding to regional flavor of these games, was the first national game played between Michigan and Stanford in the 1902 Rose Bowl.   Even then, the Big 10/Pac 12 had formed a football and academic collation that would dominate the football world for years.  

In addition to the positives presented earlier, the Big 10 and the rest of college football will realize a huge payday from an authentic playoff system.  Television ratings will sky rocket sending millions of additional dollars into the athletic department tills.  With BCS teams and conferences getting additional shares, the money for BCS conferences escalate as well.  Realizing that the fix was in, the SEC quickly got on board with the Big 10 proposal.  The seconding of the motion by the SEC made the Plus One playoff system a slam-dunk and created a solid Big 3 conference buy-in. Out of respect to the ACC and Big 12, an unofficial vote was taken allowing these conferences to get on board with the plan as well.  

With the threesome of academic integrity, money and tradition, the Big 10/Pac 12 had

achieved the trifecta.   Sweetening the pot and drawing the discussion to a final conclusion was the possibility of hosting a first round playoff game.  Finally, less viable Big 10 teams also received a bonus.  TheIndianas,Minnesotas, and Northwesterns of the world will continue to vie for end of season bowl trips that will provide monetary incentives and more importantly morale boosts for second tier Big10/Pac 12 teams.

While the final plans are yet to be worked out, fans can rest assured that a college football playoff system will happen sooner rather than later.   While not perfect, the Big 10 Plus One playoff system is a major step forward.   

Let the games begin…

Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof 

 The Sports Professor, © 2012

Texas A&M moves to SEC = The Aggies get it right...

03/21/2012

 Many view Texas A&M’s move to the SEC as the ultimate Aggie joke.  Why would A&M trade one mediocre football existence for another one?   More importantly, why play a death march in football including the likes of Alabama and Auburn on a yearly basis?   Any move that has the appearance of being this insane deserves a second look.  

As everyone knows, A&M has been treated like the University of Texas’ stepchild.  What had been missing in the past was the right set of circumstances to justify and facilitate a move.   A&M officials were presented with the proverbial “last straw” as Texas first negotiated itself an extra portion of the Big 12 money pie and then a contract with ESPN that would make their financial empire even bigger.   Not only were the rich getting richer, the rich were creating a statewide recruiting network that could leave other state schools in the dust, all with the permission of the Big 12.   Big 12 officials were essentially caving to the big dog in order to keep the Longhorns from striking out on their own.  All of this was seen by Aggie hardliners as one more slap in the face.  As a result secessionist talk that had been just that, talk, began to take flight.    With Nebraska and Colorado showing the way, A&M was ready to make the move from the Big 12.  Everything supporting a move to the SEC had fallen perfectly into place.    All that was needed now were sound financial arguments for the move to happen quickly.   As luck would have it this opportunity fell right into their laps.  .

Not one to dawdle, the SEC was quick to respond to rumors that A&M was looking to break away from the Big 12.    With visions of an additional 28 million televisions dancing in their heads, SEC officials were thinking Christmas.  Like a animal to a blood scent, the SEC pounced on its Big 12 prey and snatched the Aggies away before league officials knew what had hit them.  The SEC saw A&M as a solid football program that would fit in nicely into its expanded regional package. With a location less than 400 miles from Baton Rouge, the move seemed perfect.    In addition to an instant football bonanza, the league also saw an overall athletic program that would fit in nicely with others in the conference.  A&M’s steps in past years to build its non-revenue sports base had born fruit. It is recognized as the best in America and by far the best in the Big 12.  Winners of the Directors Cup as the number one athletic program nationally and 9 of 14 non-revenue conference championships presented a strong case for the Aggies.    

Additionally SEC conference presidents, who ultimately call the shots, realized that adding A&M would be a huge boost to the academic standing of the conference.    Ranked as the 57^th best private/public university in America by U.S. News and World Report,  the addition of Texas A&M to the league would be a huge academic coup for the SEC.   With the addition of A&M, from top to bottom, the SEC now ranks only behind the Big 10 in this area.   To a layman these rankings may not mean much, but to financial interests they are huge.   Academic rankings encourage endowment donations and public and private funding for research.  By reviewing the Wikipedia and Top American Research Universities, lists A&M comes in as the # 3 and & # 7 public university nationally in these two areas.   With an endowment of $350 billion and yearly research budget of over $500 billion, billions of dollars formerly flowing to the north to the Big 12 is now headed east.  

It did not take long for SEC officials to realize that they had a gold mine on their hands in A&M. Realizing that these type deals do not come along every day, SEC struck while the metal was hot.   For A&M turning its back on Big 12 was no big deal, but the final dismantling of the old Southwest Conference, a union that dated back to 1914 was somewhat harder.  Being disrespected by Texas was not enough to justify the move.  Once the money crunchers were finished however, the move became inevitable.  

With the financial state of today’s athletic departments being stretched precariously thin, additional revenue has become the number one priority of university athletic departments.  Paying for team sports that cannot pay for themselves is not just a choice, it is a requirement of all NCAA Division I universities that must field a minimum of 16 teams, 8 of which must be women’s teams due to Title IX regulations.   This is the state of athletic programs today. They are being bled dry by Title IX women’s sports and non-revenue men’s sports.    Playing in a regional conference can go a long way in alleviating cost overrides for these teams.    As for A&M, its athletic department goes the extra mile by sponsoring 10 women’s teams and 8 men’s teams, only two of which break even.  Fuel costs alone, particularly in the day of rising costs in this area, can break the back of an athletic department budget.    According to Distance Between Cities.com mileage and subsequent travel costs to Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi conference schools will be half of a trip to Ames, Iowa.  A&M officials may look even smarter embracing the regionally SEC trips as these trips will replace 3000 mile round trips to Morgantown, West Virginia and possibly Provo, Utah over the next decade.  These trips will become a necessity as the Big 12 hopes to survive as a conference. 

In addition to keeping the bleeding caused by non-revenue sports to a minimum, A&M officials also sought from a move to the SEC funding sources to pay for cost over-runs created by these sports.   It appears that they were successful in this venture.   According to Business of College Sports, as well as College Football Poll, A&M is set to make money in its first year of SEC membership in spite of being levied a fine by the Big 12 for leaving the conference.  More importantly, the long term financial prognosis for the program is incredibly bright.   With the addition of A&M to the SEC, the television contract must now be renegotiated.   All conference teams included A&M is set to realize what Bleacher Reports.com  reports to be a windfall of $30-34 million additional dollars per year.  This estimate was made prior to Missouri joining the party.    With the addition of the Kansas City and St. Louis markets, an additional 10 million viewers and $10 million dollars to the $30-34 million dollar mark may be possible. 

The good news for A&M does not stop there.    Because fans of SEC teams follow their teams to visiting venues so well, 7,000 tickets are automatically reserved for visiting teams.  Insiders indicate that visiting contingents can easily swell to 10,000 fans.   Added to A&M’s 45,000 student base which has created an ever increasing alumni base, A&M officials are set to revise its Kyle Field expansion from 90,000 to 110,000 seats.    The additional seating capacity will add $15 million dollars per season to the till.  Because SEC schools travel better than Big 12 programs, Business of College Sports reports that the local College Station’s local economy is set to realize an additional $29 million per year. 

Aggies fans should feel good about the move.  With a new coaching staff, an expanding recruiting base, and its new SEC swagger, the Aggies will find themselves in the homes of athletes nationally that they had only dreamed about in the Big 12.  Regardless of the football team’s win-loss record in its first year, the silver lining will be A&M’s ability to pay the bills.  Landing in one of America’s premier conferences will look better and better as Big 12 teams continue to scramble to fit in somewhere.  The Texas arrogance is not going away.  This fact matched up with the cost prohibitive Conference USA look of the Big 12 will eventually cause the conference to fail with teams scrambling once again for a home.   Oklahoma could learn a lot from these Aggies.   No Aggie joke here, A&M got it right...

Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof 

 The Sports Professor, © 2012

Scheduling 2012 Style – The Fix is in…

 

03/03/2012

With the advent of the 2012 Big 12 schedule, there is both good news and bad news for OU fans.  The good news -- OU will not have to make the trek up the road toStillwaterfor a third year in a row and another possible beat down by the Cowboys.  The bad news -- that good news came at a price.   In a year when OU returns with its quarterback and 17 starters to a team that has developed outstanding depth with top 10 recruiting classes, Sooner fans were envisioning a trip toMiaminext January for the National Championship game.   The Big 12 office with the blessing of OU officials has put the kibosh to those plans.   The 2012 OU schedule is full of meaningless early season open dates, consecutive weekend forays intoTexasand an end of season death march. 

By reviewing the rest of the Big 12 schedule, particularly the OklahomaStateschedule at FBSchedules.com, one has to ask “how did Big 12 schedule makers get this one past OU?” The dichotomy between the OU and OSU 2012 schedules serves to reinforce previous blogged concerns that OU officials are quietly allowingTexas’ DeLoss Dodds and OSU’s T. Boone Pickens to runs things.  With the conference realignment fiasco that had OU leaders cow-towing toTexas andOklahomaState officials, the 2012 schedule is latest episode of “gotcha” by these universities.  OU’s chances at a run for another National Championship has become increasingly difficult while, anOklahomaState team facing a rebuilding year in 2012 is presented with a schedule that assures the Cowboys of a minimum nine win season.    

Don’t get me wrong, I understand the desire of league officials to create conference parity and the intention of the Governor’s office to create two strongOklahomabased teams.   What I don’t understand is David Boren and Joe Castiglione appearing to go along with these plans.   It would appear, in this day of political correctness and conference and state unity, OU and OU fans are being thrown under the bus.   As stated in a previous article, can anyone imagineAlabamaand Nick Saban agreeing to this nonsense. 

By simply utilizing the resources at their disposal, OU officials could have easily projected the strengths of 2012 opponents and created a plausible schedule for OU.   This three step process, that includes coaching stability, recruiting success over a three year period, and returning starters for the 2012 season, makes the scheduling process a simple one.  By using this scheduling formula, Castiglione could have created a manageable OU schedule.  Even after being presented with required opponents and necessary off campus venues, arranging a schedule that would place OU in a situation to win these contests could have been easily accomplished.    OU officials could have accessed this information free of charge on websites provided by Rivals, Phil Steele, and College Football Poll.   There are three possibilities that best describe this oversight -- ignorance, arrogance, and avoidance. 

While in any situation, ignorance must be given its due, in this case, this possibility appears to be the least likely of the candidates.  Castiglione knows his stuff.  I doubt he was caught off guard by the recently released schedule.  A second possibility, arrogance, has merit.   As anyone associated with OU over the past few years will tell you, arrogance at OU, particularly on a Bob Stoops staff is never in short supply.   Only Stoops would believe the Sooners could negotiate this scheduling mine field without suffering major casualties.   With OU’s recent track record of suffering multiple injuries to key players and suffering mental meltdowns against inferior opponents, only an arrogant Stoops would believe maneuvering through this schedule would be an easy task.    The third possibility -- avoidance.  It could be that Castiglione and Stoops want no part of any National Championship showdown with a SEC opponent.  With the juggernauts this conference has been putting out lately and the performance of Stoops teams in title games in recent years, avoiding such a match-up makes perfect sense.  With Castiglione and Stoops making their millions each year regardless of who the last game is against, why rock the boat?  

While the three possible answers to this question all have merit, a fourth may be the most likely culprit,    complicity. With Castiglione being the consummate businessman and Boren, a politician turned college president, complicity on the part of these two OU officials appears to be a serious candidate for this schedule.   Both Boren and Castiglione are first and foremost pragmatists.   They understand the big picture presented by today’s ever changing college football world.   Due to bad decision-making on the part of OU officials last summer during the conference realignment phase, OU now finds itself in desperate straits.  The mega conferences of the SEC, Pac 12 and Big 10, along with the quickly expanding ACC have moved well ahead of the fledgling Big 12.   Television markets in each of these areas far exceed those in the sparsely populated midlands, where a majority of Big 12 teams are located.   Population centers that drive television revenue have become paramount in today’s world of college football.   The one issue that can overcome the lack of population centers is a national following.  A redesigned Big 12 looking more and more like the Conference USA, must find ways to make the conference relevant with national markets again.    Backed into a corner, OU officials have few options these days.   Abdicating its authority toTexasandOklahomaStatepower brokers appears to be its only option.  WithTexasandOklahomaStatecalling the shots, OU leaders have resigned themselves to picking up the scheduling crumbs.  

To that end, schedule makers have taken pointers from their NFL counterparts by using a computer program to create conference parity and to create attractive marketable teams at the top of conference.    Essentially, the computer produced schedules create wins for certain teams and losses for others.   All in all, the hope of schedule makers and conference officials was to create four teams at top of the conference, four teams in the middle and two teams bringing up the rear.   West VirginiaandOklahomaStatewere seated at the head of the table along withOklahomaandTexas.   The plan was to create a foursome that can be presented to television producers and contract writers as teams that can produce a national audience.   West Virginia, with its east coast location, andOklahomaStatewere given nine win seasons with a possibility of ten. OklahomaandTexas, with their national reputations and built-in traditions, were given tougher schedules, but ones that can produce 10 win seasons.  With the venerable Bill Snyder leading the way,KansasStatewas awarded a nine, possibly ten win season. KansasStatedid not make the top four because of their lack of fan appeal and staying power.  Teams in outlying areas and/or no built in advantages such as TCU, Texas Tech,Missouriand Baylor were awarded seven win seasons.   Finally with every conference needing bottom feeder teams, easy wins for the other teams,KansasandIowaStateappear more than capable to fulfill this need.   

Once again, OU has decided to take one for the conference, a move that may be good for business.  At the same time, a 12 win season and another National Championship would have been better for most OU fans.  Of course, these are desperate times for the conference.   Short of changes to the schedule by ESPN, a 12 win season and a National Championship run for the Sooners in 2012 appears unlikely.  

Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof 

The Sports Professor, © 2012

Recruiting, It’s All in the Math

02/22/2012

With recruiting being the very life blood of any college football program, identifying the teams that stand out in this area is paramount for any serious football fan.    By simply using the various recruiting services available to today’s fan, a Who’s Who among college programs can be easily established.    Invariably, these teams will appear at the top of the end-of-year BCS standings with two of the teams playing for the national championship.  With each succeeding year, the importance of this fact becomes more and more obvious.  

For teams, it a simple equation –Recruiting Coordinator  + Players + Depth = WINS AND CHAMPIONSHIPS!

The primary importance to the recruiting process is the selection of the recruiting coordinator. The recruiting coordinator must evaluate prospective players.    A successful recruiting coordinator must comb through thousands of prospects.  From blue chips players to the “sleepers,” a recruiting coordinator has to conduct the most extensive evaluations to find the right candidates to fill the roster.  Added to the complexity of the evaluation and recruitment process is the “three and done” scenario that has become common place in the game over the past twenty years.   Players playing for lesser known programs, where they must start playing from day one, lose out on critical red shirt years, years that can be used to allow these players to mature mentally and physically.  (That’s why you need depth, but we will get to that.)  In every part of the equation, the recruiting coordinator plays a key role in getting to the end result – wins! 

Next in the equation are the players.   There are various degrees of players.  There are the so-called blue chip prima donnas. These players spend too much time reading press clippings and not enough time staying in shape prior to reporting to campus in the fall, which can kill a program from a morale and leadership standpoint.   Far too often, a five star athlete who has played at the local high school as a man among boys, may not have developed the work ethic of a four star athlete who had to earn his way operating on a team with other great athletes.   Then you have the “under the radar” player. He’s not quite at the level as a highly recruited blue chip player, but he has talent and with enough coaching and mentoring can be a star.  This is why a good recruiting coordinator is key to a successful football team.  Their expertise and insight can make the difference.

Add to that, depth.  Depth is important, not only in order to allow coaches to insert top notch athletes into the lineup when starters go down with injuries, depth also enables top line players to get better through competition.   In the current BCS world, dominated by athletic SEC teams, depth becomes even more critical.  When SEC teams lose a player, coaches simply insert another blue chip athlete and the beat goes on.  Blue chip athletes that end up on teams that may recruit well on occasion are also in danger of becoming complacent due to the lack of depth-induced competition for their position.   As mentioned above, without depth you have players who begin playing their freshman year and lose the crucial time to develop their talents on the fields.  

Regardless of which comes first, the chicken or the egg, the results are the same.  Blue chip players create winning seasons that in turn create even better recruiting. That in turn creates even more winning seasons.  

Simply put, recruiting is All in the Math. 

The Sports Professor, © 2012

Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof 

Recruiting -- How Times Have Changed

02/08/2012

The first Wednesday of February is the premier day for all college football programs.  It is the official end of recruiting season.  This year will be no different.  I remember fondly the early days of national letter of intent signing days as the recruiting season that would go on for months would finally reach a conclusion.  For avid football fans, it was like Christmas.   Fans would envision what these future stars would do for their favorite football team.   Unlike the ESPN world of today, signing day was full of surprises, some good and some bad.   More importantly, I fully realized the importance of signing day and how the impact of that day could turn the fortunes of a football program.    While casual football fans and less informed media personalities, who down-play the proceedings, the proof is in the pudding in terms of what signatures can mean for future wins and losses.   With today’s three and done rule, the importance of evaluation and recruitment are exponentially raised.  The pressure to find and secure the best football talent available in a given year has never been more important than it is today.  

Realizing the importance of the recruiting process, I relied early on the information presented by early recruiting gurus like Joe Terranova and Dave Campbell.  While their recruiting information did at times provide a regional bias, with Terranova headquartered in Michigan and Campbell in Texas, the information was still extremely reliable and provided much desired information for the serious college football fan.  Terranova, who produced recruiting newsletters as early as the 60’s, was way ahead of his time as he meticulously analyzed the recruiting classes across the country.  Each year, a fan could set their clock for future football prominence by using his top 25 list as a barometer for future success.  As I would find by keeping track of his lists and future success rates of college teams, he was seldom off base.    Same goes for Campbell and his Texas Football Magazine.  Unabashedly regional in his orientation, one could easily maneuver around that issue for an authentic view of what teams in the southwest region of the country would be on top for the next several years.    

Over time, encouraged by the success of these two writers, as well as the desire of college coaches to have their evaluation work done for them, recruiting magazines began to spring up everywhere.  Today, there is no shortage of recruiting magazines and online news outlets to satisfy the college football junky with their recruiting fix.   In today’s media driven world, there are few surprises on signing day.   That was not the case in the old days.  With no limit on how many players a school could sign in February and with NCAA watchdogs simply outnumbered, the sky was the limit in terms of steps a recruiter would go to in order to entice a high school player to sign a letter.    It was simply a free-for-all time in the 60’s and 70’s.  Adding to the spice of the times was the policy known as “dual signing” periods that would allow an athlete to sign letters for teams in more than one conference in January before signing a national letter of intent with one of his suitors in February.   This policy led to essentially, a no-holds-barred fight between teams and recruiters for the three week period between signing periods.  The local hotels would be booked for weeks as recruiters would set up camp in the hometowns of the bluest of the blue chip athlete.  In the days prior to visitation limits, a player would see his recruiter more often than he would his teacher or preacher.   Of course recruiters became best buds with the high school coaches, as they would use any possible angle to influence an impressionable young player to attend their school.    Tricks of the trade were rampant and creative.   Cutting phone lines, kidnapping players or even rummaging through trash cans to find out the favorite beer of the recruits’ father were common occurrences.  Of course, when push came to shove, a sack full of cash was never out of the question.   

Regardless of the shenanigans, it worked.  Simply put, recruiting success translated into wins which translated into more recruiting success.   For proof of the importance of recruiting, one must simply examine the OU juggernaut of the 70’s and 80’s to see a direct correlation between recruiting success in February with wins in the fall.  Barry Switzer single-handedly brought OU football back from the dead on the backs of players he personally recruited.   Armed with his down home personality and a second to none work ethic, Barry lost very few players that he set out to sign in those days.   Bringing top notch classes of athletes became common place at OU during this time.  He made it his mission in life to come out on top in the recruiting wars.  Closed-minded coaches like Darrel Royal and Bear Bryant found themselves on the outside looking in for athletes.  While Royal and Bryant were shining their trophies, Barry was building trophy cases. Similar stories could be spun with Bill McCartney at Colorado and Jimmy Johnson at Oklahoma State and Miami.  In both cases, national championships at previously down-trodden programs (Miami in 1987 and Colorado in 1991) were the result of their recruiting prowess.   

While today’s recruiting seasons are no where nearly as eventful, the long term results will be the same.  Like it or not, college football’s umbilical cord is tied to recruiting.  With this in mind, I will break down the winners and losers for this class from the Class of 2012 in upcoming posts. 

The Sports Professor, © 2012

Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof

Mike Stoops= Happy Times Are Here Again...

01/27/2012

OU fans are salivating over the news that the prodigal son is returning to Norman.   Visions of how Mike Stoops will singlehandedly retool the OU defense has many OU fans at a fever pitch as they reminisce about the good old days of sooner football.   Travel agencies are already making plans to book 2012 National Championship trips for confident OU fans...OU loyalists, convinced that Mike Stoops will right the sinking Bob Stoops ship are singing that famous tune “happy days are here again.”   This could be the case, and OU fans may be right, but before hoisting the gold ball, a number of items must fall into place first.    

It has always been the nature of OU fans to live conveniently in the past.   OU fans love to live in the days of Bud and Barry or in the greatest time of them all, the “good old wishbone” days.  The mere mention of OU wishbone teams hanging half a hundred on unsuspected and unprepared OU opponents brings joy to faces of many in the Sooner Nation.  These fans conveniently dismiss the part about ball-hawking defenses catching up with the one dimensional offense and rendering it impotent there at the end.   Same goes for OU fans and their selective memories of the Mike Stoops era. 

Back in the day, Mike Stoops was the new sheriff in town; he was viewed by OU fans as bigger than life.   With Brent Venables there to work his defensive magic, Mike Stoops was allowed to pace the sidelines in style.  Mike Stoops was more than happy to take credit for outstanding performances by the OU defenses.   Mike Stoops was a god send for OU fans who had suffered for years under the Schnellenberger/Blake regime.   The blond hair superstar filled the bill for a starved Sooner Nation.   With sideline cameras fixated on Mike Stoops and his antics, Brent Venables and his staff were allowed to create X’s and O’s that made the defenses work.   The unassuming Brent Venables had no problem allowing Mike Stoops to get most of the credit believing that his day would come soon enough.    The unexpected National Championship in 2000 only served to add to the Mike Stoops image, that he was already bigger than life.                 

Realizing that it is always good to strike while the rod is hot, Mike Stoops parlayed his OU stardom into a head coaching gig in Arizona.   Even in Arizona, the Mike Stoops show was well received for a while.   Unfortunately, Stoops made the trek to Arizona without Venables and as they say the rest is history.    Finding himself on an island, the sideline show that was so intriguing back in Norman began to wear thin.  In spite of promising recruiting classes, the wins never materialized due in part to his lack of defensive support.  The X’s and O’s part of the game that was done for him in Norman was not there for him in Tucson.    More importantly, his antics that were so amusing in Norman when his teams were winning became less entertaining in Arizona as the losses piled up.   Eventually, University of Arizona fans who had had visions of  Rose Bowl appearances and National Championships were left with simple hopes of periodic winning seasons, minor bowl bids and the occasional victory over in-state rival, Arizona State. 

Finally, after years of underachieving in a lackluster conference, Arizona officials had had enough and sent Mike Stoops packing.   OU fans will have to rely on their selective memories once again as they salve over the Mike Stoops Arizona record, two recent bowl games blowouts and a 600 yard beat-down by Oklahoma State.   Similar to the Schnellenberger/Blake era, OU fans are ready to welcome back their prodigal son given the late season drubbings heaped on OU last year.  The return of Mike Stoops is close to perfect.   A late season OU melt-down created by a rash of catastrophic injuries and an impotent offense made the Mike Stoops return a far gone conclusion.  The only question left to be answered was how it would be done and the amount of fall-out that would occur on the current staff.  

The OU defense was inordinately credited with the late season melt-down.   In typical Brent Venables fashion, he absorbed the abuse for the melt-down, accepting early on what was coming next.   In typical, Mike Stoops fashion, his return to Norman was announced by Mike Stoops on Tucson television which was in turn sent to national media outlets and to the homes of OU recruits.   To the average OU fan, this sort of break in protocol is not that big a deal, but for OU officials, the latest Mike Stoops fopaux should confirm that the stay in the desert had done little to mature Mike Stoops.   While arrogance is not necessarily a bad thing for a coach to have, arrogance on a Bob Stoops staff will never be in short supply.   Too much of that virtue on one staff can be a problem.  While OU officials and local media outlets were quick to excuse the

mismanagement of this situation, Mike Stoops had essentially conducted a coup d’état that would make a Bolivian war lord proud.   Without firing a single shot, he had removed Willie Martinez and Brent Venables and replaced these coaches with himself. To make matters worse, he used the alleged bidding war to give himself a sizeable pay raise. 

Martinez was mere fodder for this process.   Given the end of year issues at OU, someone had to go…Martinez seems the likely candidate.   Losing the highly regarded, Brent Venables is a different matter.  Adding salt to the wound is the manner in which it was done.  The football gods realizing that this was the case made sure that Venables landed on his feet.   With a simple phone call to Clemson, South Carolina, Venables was quickly on his way to the up and coming ACC School to be named their defensive coordinator for a sizeable increase in salary.    

Good news for Brent Venables and if OU officials act responsibly what appeared to be a bad situation for OU can be turned into a positive.  Essentially, OU is stuck with the less talented Mike Stoops.  That is okay…. With 17 returning starters, the return of a Heisman Trophy-type quarterback, and another top 10 recruiting class, putting retreads on the old Chevy can work and work well. To make it work Bob Stoops and Joe Castiglione must hire the best defensive mind available.  Realizing that Mike Stoops is no Brent Venables and realizing that it will not be easy to find a first line coach willing to live in the shadow of the Mike Stoops will not be an easy task.    All, the more reason for OU officials to take the OSU/T. Boone Pickens approach to hiring football staff members.   Finding and hiring the best person money can buy should become priority one for this staff.  For Bob Stoops, his next hire may be his biggest.     Because this hire will impact in a major way the success rate of OU football over the next decade, the Bob Stoops legend, that is still a work in progress, will be determined.  Whether or not he joins Bud and Barry as legendary coaches will be decided in large part by his next hire.     

The 2^nd coming of Mike Stoops at OU will work if steps are put in place to make it work…Desperate times deserve desperate measures...This is one of those times for OU football.  

 The Sports Professor, © 2012

 Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof

BCS= Buying College Sports

Today, college football faces its latest attack on civility as boosters are again forcing the issue for the game.   In some way, today’s BCS environment can be better described as “Buying College Sports” instead of its intended Bowl Championship Series moniker.  BCS conference teams, not big enough to provide for their own television network or not attractive enough, either athletically or academically to be included in SEC or Big 10 discussions are looking for other ways, less savory, to compete financially.    

With each passing day, college football becomes more and more driven by the almighty dollar.  From the recent rash of teams jumping conference in pursuit of multi-million dollar television contracts to huge payouts for BCS bowl games, the race is on as universities seek new and better ways to compete financially.   The astronomical costs associated with college athletics today are well-documented.  What are not as well-known are the lengths universities are going in today’s “dog eat dog” world of college football to not only pay the bills, but to create an advantage.   The football money cow is alive and well and appears to be prospering in spite of hard economic times.  

The “win at all cost" mentality appears to be thriving in today’s market as universities realize winning not only looks good on the score board, but it also bolsters the college’s pocket book.  Studies have shown that a winning football season can go a long way in ensuring a sizeable enrollment increase the next fall, all the more reason for college presidents to look the other way when “booster-mania” rears its ugly head.   

This is deja vu all over again, like when college football was in its infancy stage went through the same thing.   As far back as the early 1900’s, over-zealous boosters searched for ways to create an advantage for their favorite schools.   Supporters of pristine Ivy League schools, Harvard, Yale and Princeton were caught smack in the middle of using every advantage to lure the top athletes to their universities.  Once there, the star players seldom went to class because pursuing a degree was seen as unnecessary.   Unsuspecting athletes from impoverished areas essentially became pawns for football programs as they worked to beat their rivals.  Getting a leg up on the competition by whatever means necessary was no different then than it is today.   

It was during this time and under these conditions that the NCAA was founded.  First known as the Intercollegiate Athletic Association (ICAA), the organization eventually became the NCAA and was petitioned by college presidents to govern the sport.  Creating a healthy environment which meant cutting down on injuries and even deaths that had become common place within the sport and curbing the influence of influential donors became priority one for the new organization.   From the very beginning, the NCAA found itself swimming upstream against the booster-driven tide.   Eventually, however with the support of college presidents, the NCAA found its footing and restored a semblance of order to the sport.   

It was not until the 1970’s and 1980’s that things began to get interesting again as a new wave of booster mania got a second head of steam.  Possibly driven by the convenience of air travel or the increased popularity from televised games, boosters had greater access to star athletes.  Using agents to provide cash outlays, players were snatched by college football programs without ever visiting the campus. Cheating became a way of life at colleges. In order to avoid a permanent black eye, college presidents again stepped in to restore order and provide the NCAA the necessary tools to clean up college football.   Eventually, booster-mania relaxed its grip and things returned to a state at least resembling normalcy, until recently.     

Similar to the turn of the century and the 70’s and 80’s, boosters are leading the way in providing their football programs built-in advantages.    Universities wanting to join the elite of college football are turning to ego-driven billionaires to lend a hand financially.   Unfortunately, far too often, giving these boosters the keys to the hen house can be a very bad idea, not only for these universities, but also for college football at large.   University officials, realizing that winning football games not only sells tickets, it also increases enrollment have been quick to succumb to the latest Ponzi scheme.   

Be careful what you ask for...

As stated earlier, selling out to boosters is not uncommon, but selling out wholesale to one or two mega-boosters appears to be a new phenomenon in college football.  On the surface, it appears that school officials at Oregon and Oklahoma State have found the goose that laid the golden egg, but as someone once said, “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”   

According to USA Today, Oregon and Oklahoma State with their billionaire sponsors, Phil Knight and T. Boone Pickens are leading the charge with this newest "get rich quick” scheme.   In 2009-10 alone the booster/donor dollar amounts for these two schools was $74 million and $51 million dollars.   Specifically, the increase in athletic department revenue during a five year span for these two schools was 205% and 108% respectively.   No other schools come close to Oregon and Oklahoma State in these two questionable areas during this time period.  Not unlike over-zealous boosters of old, this new wave of mega-donor boosters will spell trouble for their respective schools and more importantly imperil the game of college football.   With its short term impact, other universities obsessed with winning will realize that selling out is not hard to do. Billionaire donors with egos the size of Texas and a need to leave a legacy will be quick to use this formula for instant success.  Again, the NCAA will have its hands full as they monitor this new wave of influence pedaling.   Stay tuned for updates.

The Sports Professor, © 2012
Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof


Getting “Bowl”-ed Over

12/28/2011

There was a time when bowl games actually meant something.   Today’s bowl games played in empty stadiums begs the question… “What has happened to the American icon?”   

Two of my favorite college football stories, ironically involving the same university, underscore the difference between bowl games then and now.  In 1939, Duke officials used monies they received from a trip to the Rose Bowl in Pasadena to build the now famous Cameron Indoor Stadium.   While other basketball venues have come and gone, Cameron Indoor Stadium continues to reign supreme among basketball arenas.   Then, just three years later, the world changed.   Following the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, the Rose Bowl was cancelled.   Duke, once again the visiting team for that year, petitioned for the game to be moved to Durham, North Carolina.  The Rose Bowl agreed and the game was moved.   In a span of three weeks, thousands of bleachers from all over North Carolina were moved to Duke’s campus and set up for the January 1^st game.  In spite of the obstacles, a crowd of almost 60,000 viewed the first and only east coast Rose Bowl game.  

Even as recently as the 1970’s, bowl games surrounding the first of the year were a mainstay of the diets of avid college football fans.    Highlighted by the New Year’s day favorites of Sugar, Cotton, Rose and Orange, fans would overdose each year on the best that college football had to offer.   With legitimate conference ties from each of the major conferences, fans were treated to college football teams from all points of America.   Even for those teams finishing runner-up in these elite conferences, an opportunity to play in a meaningful second-tier bowl served as a real reward.   How times have changed. 

To put the bowl picture in more vivid terms, this year there will be 35 bowl games represented by 60% of all Division I teams.  Teams with 6-6 and even 6-7 team records will play games in cavernous stadiums full of empty seats.   Bowls aptly name Potato, Poinsettia, Meinke, Ticket City and Belk will beckon die-hard college football fans.   For some reason, they just don’t have quite the ring to them as Sugar, Cotton, Orange or Rose. 

Given this backdrop, it is hard to imagine how far the college football and bowl landscape has slipped in recent years.   Don’t get me wrong, I am grateful for an opportunity to extend the college season an additional month, but watching a Western Michigan mix it up with a Purdue in the “Little Caesar’s Pizza Bowl” was not what I had in mind.   There was a time that self-respecting college football programs would not be caught dead in a Pizza Bowl.  Universities with dignity would do the right thing and opt out.   Keep the players in school, work on recruiting and begin anew the next year.   Of course with conferences contracting with so many bowls, self-respect appears to be out of the question.    Mediocre football portrayed by bowl and school officials as the real deal is now played in front of thousands of fans disguised as empty seats.   Athletic programs, already financially strapped, must now agree to buy back unused tickets.  Ticket allotments in the 10-15 thousand range that commonly create  $300,000 to $500,000 deficits for athletic departments already swimming in red ink has become part of the schools’ operating budgets.    Universities see this expense as part of doing business in the world of big time college football.  Universities many times will soften the public relations blow by donating thousands of unused tickets to local armed service and veterans groups, asking these fans to move to the center of the field in order to hide the emptiness.    Nice gesture, but not one that absolves the university of the expense factor.   The college football stage has moved from a “standing room only” setting for the 1942 east coast Rose Bowl to today’s “ticket giveaway” scene at the 2011 Insight Bowl.  

While the demise of the college bowl game stage is complicated, one reason can be placed squarely at the feet of the NCAA. That is the increased pressure placed on universities to play in a bowl, any bowl, regardless of its stature and the NCAA’s unwillingness to get a handle on the bowls themselves. 

To make matters worse, football fans will not take solace in the fact that the restoring sanity to the subject will be even more problematic given the sell-out of college football to the BCS championship series.  Unless changes are made quickly, the BCS championship series is in jeopardy of being renamed the BCS/SEC championship series.  Adding insult to injury is the fact that the scholarship limitations originally meant to protect college football from the select few by creating parity, may in fact make the parity among conferences increasingly more difficult.   Scholarship limitations for non-SEC teams will  essentially guarantee that at least one SEC team will appear in the final BCS rodeo each year, with it becoming more and more likely that the winner will come from the SEC.  With a $20-25M dollar guaranteed payday for each team with the possibility of $40-50M SEC conference payday for one day’s work. Catching up to this conference will be a struggle for all non-SEC teams.   

College bowl games that for years served as viable rewards for student-athletes in a tangible, meaningful way can serve as a catalyst for returning the game to its former glory.   A genuineness that came from an east coast Rose Bowl experience may be more than we can hope for, but a return to sanity must be our hope.  

 The Sports Professor, © 2012

 Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof

Good News/Bad News for Mike Leach and Washington State...

12-26-11

It is refreshing to see Mike Leach back in the coaching saddle again.  He brings an irreverent and unpredictable style to college football that is badly needed.  Don’t get me wrong, the stuffy style of Bob Stoops and Nick Sabin will probably wear better in Norman and Tuscaloosa, but having Leach at the Lubbock or Pullman weigh station can be a good thing.  At the same time, while his hiring at Washington State is a good hire for the Cougars, patience and financial commitment should be the order of the day there.  

  
Pullman, Washington is your basic Outback when it comes to college football. Pullman is located 300 miles east of Seattle and 1200 miles north of southern California.  Finding Division I players in eastern Washington is similar to finding a recruiting nugget in Alaska or Canada.   A college football recruiter can find more players in a three block area of Los Angeles than all of eastern Washington.  Leach must find the money to build a recruiting bridge to California to compete in this league. Yes, it is true that Leach won at Texas Tech with 2nd tier players and 2nd tier quarterbacks that meshed well with his wide-open system, but the fact that Lubbock is located in the fertile recruiting area known as west Texas should not be overlooked. In terms of high school football talent eastern Washington and west Texas are miles apart, both figuratively and literally.

     
Adding to the Leach challenge will be the funding disparity found in today’s college football world.  This fact actually provides Leach with a good news/bad news situation.  The bad news for Leach is that when comparing Washington State to Oregon, one is talking apples to oranges.  As reported by USA Today, Oregon, with Phil Knight (Nike) footing the bill, generates over $120 million per year to fund athletics.   Donor contributions at Oregon generated $73 million in 2009-10 alone.   The donor amount dwarfs the entire athletic department budget of $37 million at Washington State. With Pullman’s  location and the cost of air travel today, there is no way WSU can compete with Oregon for prize athletes without an adequate recruiting budget.   Yes, Leach is a great coach, but you still must have the horses to compete in big time football.  Add to this the difference seen between the facilities at Oregon and the ones at Washington State.  Estimates are that Knight contributed over $500 million dollars during a 10 year period creating a state of the art program at Oregon.   Washington State, on the other hand, used its minimal booster money to pay the light bill.    In other words, Leach must find a Phil Knight or T. Boone Pickens of his own to make the WSU program relevant again.   Hopefully, for his sake, a billionaire donor was part of the process of bringing Mike Leach to WSU in the first place.  Of course, keeping a rebel like Mike Leach happy and compliant may be a bigger issue than one might imagine.   Unlike Oregon and Ok. State where mega-donors appointed their own coach, Washington State will not have this luxury.   Finding a WSU alumnus mega-donor immediately will be critical for the success of the program.

  
The good news for Mike Leach is that if all of this can be worked out and the financial road can be paved, Leach will be off to a good start and WSU and Cougar fans could be instant  beneficiaries.  While woefully behind Oregon, WSU is still within striking distance of the rest of the Pac 12.   With commitment on the part of the university officials to sell out to a prominent booster, competing against the rest of the Pac 12 becomes a real possibility. To put it succinctly, when Leach arrives in Pullman, he will find himself in a billion dollar hole to Oregon and its mega-booster, but within striking distance of the rest of the league.   Only Oregon, with its mega-donor and USC with its unknown financial holdings (due to privacy laws) appear outside the immediate reach of Leach and Washington State.   Leach will excite his fan base and give himself a fighting chance against the rest of the league from the outset.  Possibly over the next decade, competing against the two conference behemoths, Oregon and USC  may become a possibility as well.  He did it at Tech against Texas so doing the same at WSU against Oregon could happen over time.   

Priority one for Leach upon his arrival in Pullman will be recruiting. That is recruiting a deep pocket donor willing to subsidize the football program similar Knight at Oregon.  Given the gamesmanship and savvy of Mike Leach, this donor may already be in place and the transformation for Washington State may already be in motion.  While these tactics may be troubling to college football purists, the changing landscape of 21st century college football requires this.   While only time will tell if Mike Leach and Washington State can get it done against impossible odds, I put my money on Mike Leach.  He will find a way for the football gods to look fondly on the college game at WSU again....

 The Sports Professor, © 2011

Be Careful What You Ask For

12/20/2011

It goes without saying that gaffes on both the offensive and defensive sides of the ball, as well as special teams breakdowns against OSU played major roles in what turned out to be one of the ugliest performances in recent OU history.  As the same time, I suggest that the deck was stacked against OU going in and while the final score was worse than anyone could have anticipated, the outcome should have been expected.  

For OU fans, the unfortunate truth of the matter is that the leadership team at OU has done a marvelous job for years of laying the groundwork for OU to lose to OSU this year.  First off, Joe Castiglione schemed years ago with then OSU athletic director, Terry Don Phillips to move the OU/OSU game permanently to the end of the season.  Secondly, the two AD’s set out to inundate the airways with the “bedlam” message in order to market the game to a fever pitch.  The final nail in the OU coffin was moving the game to Stillwater for a second year in a row.  OU officials believed they could sneak this one past OU fans because of the arrogance of Bob Stoops and the smugness of OU fans.  With the local media coveting an end of year rivalry, the switch-a-roo went off without a hitch. 

As part of this OU/OSU marketing scheme, the stacked deck inStillwaterwas seen as a way to elevate OSU’s standing in the conference.   Moving the OU-Texas game from its State Fair date to the end of the year was out of the question, making the OU /OSU end of season game more relevant became the game-plan for conference officials with OU expected to adhere to their wishes.   Raising the status of OSU as a football program also fulfills the conference and OU plan to make OSU a more attractive piece to the conference realignment puzzle.   Playing Russian roulette with OU’s future is much less an issue for OU officials than it is for die-hard OU fans.   OU leaders have literally allowed the fox to take up residency in the hen house by allowing T. Boone Pickens to call the shots for OU.  It is possible that in the long run the recent humiliating loss to OSU may be only the tip of the iceberg.  Given OU’s history of embracing complacency, this move of appeasement is playing right into the hands of OSU and T. Boone Pickens.   A simple review of this past fall when we saw the Big 12 implode before our very eyes should tell OU fans what can come from tying the future to OSU. 

On the OSU home-front, OSU regents, tired of playing second fiddle to OU in football, finalized the master plan ten years ago by turning the keys to the University, including the football program, over to T. Boone Pickens.  In essence, T. Boone has become the President and CEO at OSU.   Drawing from his experience as a corporate raider, T. Boone lost no time exerting his will over the university by moving out the “old guard” and moving in his own people.   Essentially, both the university president and athletic director were hand selected by T. Boone and they take their cues from him.  As the new general manager of the football program, T. Boone moved long-time favorite, Mike Gundy into the position as head coach.   With money to burn, T. Boone then successfully secured the best college coaching staff money could buy.   As they say, the proof is in the pudding.  After making names for themselves in Stillwater, these assistant coaches become hot items on the head coaching circuit.   This assistant coaching carousel actually creates a win-win situation for OSU.  With each succeeding assistant coach making it big somewhere else, assistant coaches with outstanding pedigrees line up for an OSU opportunity.     When an opening occurs, T. Boone simply checks his list of viable candidates and goes after the best with his open check book.    Unlike OU with its in-house hiring and on-job-training plan, T. Boone hires only proven talent for his organization.   His plan has worked beautifully.   In addition to Gundy, T. Boone appointees also include last year’s head coaches at Toledo, Southern Miss., West Virginia, and LSU.  The Toledo and Southern Miss. coaches have since moved to even better jobs at Illinois, and North Carolina respectively.   Last season, former Pickens regime coaches combined for a 52-10 record.   All but one of these teams was listed in the final BCS top 25 poll with two of the schools finishing in the top 3.  

In an attempt to cut OU’s leadership team some slack, I would suggest that neither Joe Castiglione nor David Boren are football guys, nor are they street fighters.  Dealing with someone like T. Boone Pickens is simply out of their league.   They are not cut from the same competitive cloth as T. Boone Pickens.  Castiglione is a marketing expert and Boren is an academician.   More importantly to OU fans, neither Castiglione nor Boren have crimson flowing through their veins.  With 10 thousand fans on the season ticket waiting list, these guys look at losing to OSU from time to time as par for the course and for that matter, simply good for business.   What these guys don’t seem to get is that they are dealing with a different animal in T. Boone Pickens.  Pickens made his fortune as a corporate raider by dismantling working class families.   He would not hesitate to dismantle the OU nation in the same cold, callous manner.   T. Boone is a tough hombre whose loyalty is squarely with OSU.   Allowing T. Boone Pickens to call the shots for OU football in any shape or form is simply insane.  This is a slippery slope.  As OU fans have seen in the past, losing can become contagious and once it takes hold, it is hard to stop.   OU fans should be careful what OU officials ask for.  OU fans may just get it...

The Sports Professor, © 2011

Follow me on Twitter @sports_prof

Who We Are

What We Do