Ah yes. That was an excellent Iowa team with Chuck Long. I remember vividly how they annhilated Texas in a bowl game in 84. Well not really but it did happen. In 85 Iowa had been number one at one point that season I believe, but I assume they lost one game before they got to the Rose Bowl, not sure who it would have been to. They played the #1 vs. #2 game that year versus Michigan which they won 12-10 which was Michigan's only loss of the season. UCLA had some real good teams during the early 80's as the USC dynasty declined and before scholarship cuts #2 brought true parity. IIRC Rick Neuheisal would have been playing for the Bruins around that era.
Avoiding scheduling it that way is understandeable (albeit weak), but to come out the next (business)day after nearly losing to a team and saying you want to back out of the game with them the next year is absolutely hilarious.
I highly doubt that the game had anything to do with the rescheduling decision. Oklahoma has been reworking their schedules ever since Stoops arrived. In fact this game against Alabama in 2003 was supposed to be played in 2001 IIRC but Oklahoma requested that it be moved to 2003 as they did not want to play North Carolina and Alabama in the same season. Lots of teams move the pieces around to manipulate each season. Note that that article does not include any direct comments from the Oklahoma AD, rather it is second hand from the Alabama AD and not even quotes at that. The Alabama AD probably just brought it up now so as to give that very impression, that Oklahoma was wussing out when in fact it had little to do with this game. That's not really a big surprise though, Mal Moore is a scumbag and that whole athletic dept/booster culture is one of the most corrupt in college athletics. It would be illogical to reschedule the game out of a fear of this particular set Alabama players based on yesterday anyway. Alabama is far more likely to be dangerour team in a few years when they are off probation and can recruit and develop better than they will be next year. You just cannot risk getting a third loss and thus not being BCS eligible with $11 million a game at stake.
<strong>Avoiding scheduling it that way is understandeable (albeit weak), but to come out the next (business)day after nearly losing to a team and saying you want to back out of the game with them the next year is absolutely hilarious.</strong><hr></blockquote>
these talks could have been going on far before this game was even played. why would this info be leaked out now and who do you think it benefits? alabama maybe?
I don't really see the difference. Either way OU is trying to get out of playing two decent teams OOC in the same year after already having scheduled the game.
I wonder what Bob "No Excuses" Stoops thinks about it.
The main point is that the suggestion that they were reacting to a close game by running scared for next year seems unlikely, though that was how it was framed earlier in the thread. We must always respect truch while ridiculing our rivals' fallacies young groverat. Such is the way of the Force.
The rescheduling is just an extension of hte same philosophy that many have. Perhaps they should feel obligated to play the game because there is a contract. On the other hand if Alabama agrees to alter the contract so that hte game takes place, just in a different year, then I don't see that as a problem. Now cancelling it altogether would be a bit weak. Perhaps it is incongruent with Stoop's bravado, however if the contract predates him, and most football games are scheduled 5-10 years in advance, then it is not like he made a choice, decided it was booty wack and then tried to remix it. It is just something that he likely inherited.
Auburn may have wimped out. They have a weak scheduling history. They went a decade without playing an OOC road game from 91-01 as they scheduled all chumps to be disposed of at home. They did play Syracuse last year and the had USC this year and I believe they may play Syracuse again in a few weeks so they are getting better in that regard.
Washington State will lose to OSU this weekend and join Washington in defeat to a Big 10 school. That leaves the NW with an Oregon team that just snuck by Fresno State and an Oregon State team that has yet to play anything resembling a decent team as they come off of a losing record last year. Oregon still looks to be a solid team though as do the two from WA, even if they are/will be bested by Big 10 teams.
Much as I hate the Huskies, they did cover the spread, and nearly won on the road. In fact, except for a stupid mistake at the end (which I will never let them forget) they would have won.
Oregon State might very well turn out to be the best defense in the Pac 10 as well, though I agree they haven't proven anything yet given the quality of their opponents.
Here's hoping UO whoops up on their own weak opponents the next two weeks, fine-tunes their offense a bit, and goes into the Pac 10 schedule
Just got home from Iowa City, ISU 36, Iowa 31-whooo, what a game!
Iowa just KILLED them in the first half, up 24-7 but had two fumbles deep in ISU territory and a saftey to start the 3rd quarter and get the 'Clones back in.
I was lucky to get out of the stadium without getting in any fights-my stupid friend got us tickets in the Hawkeye student section without realizing it. I stayed low-key so there were no problems during the game, but walking out my ISU hat drew some ire from drunken U of I kids!
I told one group yelling bad things from a distance,"Kicking my ass won't change the score!" and quickly ducked into a group of old ladies.
Most of the fans were real cool, though, and Kinnick is a great setting for a game, Tom Arnold notwithstanding!
I see Ohio State won-that cost me five bucks!
Look out, Irish Eyes seem to be smiling again! I think it's good for college football if Notre Dame is good, they really are a lot of the game's history, plus it gives everyone else someone to hate!
Comments
The 97 bowl was a win in the Cotton Bowl against Texas A&M.
[ 09-10-2002: Message edited by: Shanny ]</p>
[ 09-10-2002: Message edited by: ColanderOfDeath ]</p>
<strong>Avoiding scheduling it that way is understandeable (albeit weak), but to come out the next (business)day after nearly losing to a team and saying you want to back out of the game with them the next year is absolutely hilarious.</strong><hr></blockquote>
these talks could have been going on far before this game was even played. why would this info be leaked out now and who do you think it benefits? alabama maybe?
I wonder what Bob "No Excuses" Stoops thinks about it.
The rescheduling is just an extension of hte same philosophy that many have. Perhaps they should feel obligated to play the game because there is a contract. On the other hand if Alabama agrees to alter the contract so that hte game takes place, just in a different year, then I don't see that as a problem. Now cancelling it altogether would be a bit weak. Perhaps it is incongruent with Stoop's bravado, however if the contract predates him, and most football games are scheduled 5-10 years in advance, then it is not like he made a choice, decided it was booty wack and then tried to remix it. It is just something that he likely inherited.
I am sure you be just as diplomatic if OU in this situation was replaced by UT.
Jeff
Prepare to be dominated by northwest teams, all you wimps (except Miami -- I'm a-scared of you guys)!
Washington State will lose to OSU this weekend and join Washington in defeat to a Big 10 school. That leaves the NW with an Oregon team that just snuck by Fresno State and an Oregon State team that has yet to play anything resembling a decent team as they come off of a losing record last year. Oregon still looks to be a solid team though as do the two from WA, even if they are/will be bested by Big 10 teams.
Oregon State might very well turn out to be the best defense in the Pac 10 as well, though I agree they haven't proven anything yet given the quality of their opponents.
Here's hoping UO whoops up on their own weak opponents the next two weeks, fine-tunes their offense a bit, and goes into the Pac 10 schedule
on a roll.
<strong>prediction: Notre Dame 27
Michigan 24
Let the Flames heat up!!!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>
groverat :
Fumble recoveries? Interceptions returned for touchdowns?
That offense is going to lay a fat goose-egg, your sights are set way too high.
hmmm....looks like the magic goes beyond the fingers,huh?
Anybody disagree?
The Bear will not die.
Go Bears!
Iowa just KILLED them in the first half, up 24-7 but had two fumbles deep in ISU territory and a saftey to start the 3rd quarter and get the 'Clones back in.
I was lucky to get out of the stadium without getting in any fights-my stupid friend got us tickets in the Hawkeye student section without realizing it. I stayed low-key so there were no problems during the game, but walking out my ISU hat drew some ire from drunken U of I kids!
I told one group yelling bad things from a distance,"Kicking my ass won't change the score!" and quickly ducked into a group of old ladies.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Most of the fans were real cool, though, and Kinnick is a great setting for a game, Tom Arnold notwithstanding!
I see Ohio State won-that cost me five bucks!
Look out, Irish Eyes seem to be smiling again! I think it's good for college football if Notre Dame is good, they really are a lot of the game's history, plus it gives everyone else someone to hate!
Jeff