Oklahoma State University admission rate: 68.4%
University of Oklahoma admission rate: 85.2%

So yeah, half the country could be nuked and OSU would really be awful still. The ONLY reason OSU doesn't have higher national rankings is simply because of the set up of the medical school plus that it's still very new in terms of medical schools and the fact OSU doesn't have a law school and some additional graduate level programs pulls does rankings by Newsweek and other publications significantly. Almost every major degree program OSU has ranks in the top 50 nationally with many in the top 10. Agriculture research is also completely discounted by AAU.

Frankly both OSU and OU should be AAU if universities like Arizona State are AAU. It's purely a means to discount rural based schools or schools who locate their medical schools in areas of a metro or urban center that actual need it like OU's. You can't tell me that where OU's medical school is located is a detractor to it being a good medical school and should count against OU being able to qualify for AAU status - let alone if OSU's medical school is located in Tulsa, an area that needs a major medical center and research areas.

Frankly, I hope that OSU opens a law school and other programs and goes straight at OU. For decades the two schools have had a solid partnership and allowed each to focus on areas and had a 'none compete' understanding. I say screw that now that OU leadership did what they did. Good luck to them. OSU is a way better managed university system and I hope OSU plays the same way OU does going forward, with no concern for anyone else but their own interest. OU has a massive amount of debt at their own doing and the state legislature and taxpayers better never bail them out either.

There’s no market for new law schools. Already way too many as it is.

Oklahoma State University admission rate: 68.4%
University of Oklahoma admission rate: 85.2%

So yeah, half the country could be nuked and OSU would really be awful still. The ONLY reason OSU doesn't have higher national rankings is simply because of the set up of the medical school plus that it's still very new in terms of medical schools and the fact OSU doesn't have a law school and some additional graduate level programs pulls does rankings by Newsweek and other publications significantly. Almost every major degree program OSU has ranks in the top 50 nationally with many in the top 10. Agriculture research is also completely discounted by AAU.

Frankly both OSU and OU should be AAU if universities like Arizona State are AAU. It's purely a means to discount rural based schools or schools who locate their medical schools in areas of a metro or urban center that actual need it like OU's. You can't tell me that where OU's medical school is located is a detractor to it being a good medical school and should count against OU being able to qualify for AAU status - let alone if OSU's medical school is located in Tulsa, an area that needs a major medical center and research areas.

Frankly, I hope that OSU opens a law school and other programs and goes straight at OU. For decades the two schools have had a solid partnership and allowed each to focus on areas and had a 'none compete' understanding. I say screw that now that OU leadership did what they did. Good luck to them. OSU is a way better managed university system and I hope OSU plays the same way OU does going forward, with no concern for anyone else but their own interest. OU has a massive amount of debt at their own doing and the state legislature and taxpayers better never bail them out either.
I think you got a bunch of stats from the OSU pr office. I’ll not try to degrade OSU as it is a good public uni for a poor state school. But it isn’t rated 3rd in the world in anything. And the acceptance rate is almost identical to OU’s. The school is rated lower overall by virtually every service that rates universities and colleges.

Btw, the med school at OU doesn’t get excluded because it is in OKC and somehow they are biased against being city vs rural, but because it isn’t part of the main campus and all their research dollars are excluded from aggregation for consideration of membership.

I get it that you are a proud OSU fan, but finding info isn’t hard. Hyperbole isn’t fact.

I think you got a bunch of stats from the OSU pr office. I’ll not try to degrade OSU as it is a good public uni for a poor state school. But it isn’t rated 3rd in the world in anything. And the acceptance rate is almost identical to OU’s. The school is rated lower overall by virtually every service that rates universities and colleges.

Btw, the med school at OU doesn’t get excluded because it is in OKC and somehow they are biased against being city vs rural, but because it isn’t part of the main campus and all their research dollars are excluded from aggregation for consideration of membership.

I get it that you are a proud OSU fan, but finding info isn’t hard. Hyperbole isn’t fact.

Oh yeah, OSU definitely doesn't have a top agriculture school. OU fans love to talk down to OSU people about being an 'Ag School' until the idea that it's actually an incredible asset to OSU and our state. There's is a ton of research dollars that flows through that school as well. None of that gets counted by AAU - why? There is an implicit bias by many publications about rural versus urban colleges and certainly Heartland colleges versus coastal colleges. A lot of those 'elite' schools also rig those rankings - there's a lot of stories about that out there in the last few years. For example, University of Oregon and Washington - you can't tell me they are vastly superior to OU. It's a bunch of BS. Certainly Arizona or Arizona state where all you have to have is a pulse and you can get admitted, yet they are AAU and ranked higher. Give me a break. Oregon has an admittance rate of 92% - yet OSU at 68% is bad... right. Yes, I think the idea that discounted medical research because it's not on a main campus is in fact dumb and is proving my point or rural versus urban. There is nothing about the set up, structure, or location of OU Medical that should count against OU in AAU admittance.

Hate to break it to OU people too... OSU is far, far better ran. OSU has a AA rating from Fitch while OU is only an A rating. Debt to cash flow for OSU is ~18% while OU is nearly 50%. OU is going to be drowning in debt payments for a long time unless they do some serious overhauls. They really need to take a step back from the stupid real estate investments.

There’s no market for new law schools. Already way too many as it is.

Not even remotely the point of that post. I'm well aware of the market of law schools... you can make the same conclusions for many degree programs and in the broader sense of the university/college market overall.

The point is that OSU never established a law school and many programs because there has been a decades long understanding between leadership and political leaders of how programs would be split between the schools because the state didn't want to fund duplicated programs. OU got a lot of shiny things like a law program that does now help their rankings in publications. Why not open it up to competition and see who can produce a better product, I bet OSU could if they tried. OU gets a ton of law students from OSU undergrad, many who would love to not have to go there. You typically want to go to law school in the state you want to practice so if you want to stay in Oklahoma long-term your options are OU or TU pretty much. Good law schools, not great. Eastern Oklahoma probably could use a law program focused on tribal/federal law issues - why not partner with the tribes similar to what OSU is doing with Cherokee Nation on the medical side. Just saying, OSU should do what is in their own self interest long-term now, because the partnership between the institutions was broken by OU. Law program is just one example, but architecture is another of many. OU has been the school who got a lot of the graduate level programs, while OSU is focused on undergrad. OSU architecture school is better than OU's so why not start more graduate/PhD options for architecture, urban planning, landscape architecture, etc. in either Stillwater or Tulsa. Who cares if it damages OU's programs at this point.

Interesting to see how the divisions are broken out for B12 in ‘24 and beyond. Here is an SI take.

https://www.si.com/college/westvirginia/big-12/what-the-big-12-could-look-like-with-two-divisions

I didn't realize there was still this much bitterness at OSU over the conference change. It took OU and Texas leaving for the Big 12 to wake up and see the future, but they have since at least stabilized the conference. OSU should be way more competitive in football now, or at least probably win more than one conference title in 26 years and make the playoffs in the 12 team format. OU won more than half of the Big 12 football titles in that time. Objectively, this should be a good thing for OSU, right?

It also would seem very strange, or at least misguided, to use this bitterness to guide academic decisions at the state level. I'm all for anything that improves academics in Oklahoma, and maybe some of these changes could help, but conference realignment has had everything to do with TV contracts and has nothing to do with academics. I'm not even saying that any of this is a good idea from an athletic standpoint, but no one was considering academics when they decided to pay OU and Texas more to play sports in the SEC.

I didn't realize there was still this much bitterness at OSU over the conference change. It took OU and Texas leaving for the Big 12 to wake up and see the future, but they have since at least stabilized the conference. OSU should be way more competitive in football now, or at least probably win more than one conference title in 26 years and make the playoffs in the 12 team format. OU won more than half of the Big 12 football titles in that time. Objectively, this should be a good thing for OSU, right?

It also would seem very strange, or at least misguided, to use this bitterness to guide academic decisions at the state level. I'm all for anything that improves academics in Oklahoma, and maybe some of these changes could help, but conference realignment has had everything to do with TV contracts and has nothing to do with academics. I'm not even saying that any of this is a good idea from an athletic standpoint, but no one was considering academics when they decided to pay OU and Texas more to play sports in the SEC.

OU’s president literally put out a statement claiming that part of the consideration of joining the SEC was based on academics. Many people took it seriously for some reason.

I didn't realize there was still this much bitterness at OSU over the conference change. It took OU and Texas leaving for the Big 12 to wake up and see the future, but they have since at least stabilized the conference. OSU should be way more competitive in football now, or at least probably win more than one conference title in 26 years and make the playoffs in the 12 team format. OU won more than half of the Big 12 football titles in that time. Objectively, this should be a good thing for OSU, right?

It also would seem very strange, or at least misguided, to use this bitterness to guide academic decisions at the state level. I'm all for anything that improves academics in Oklahoma, and maybe some of these changes could help, but conference realignment has had everything to do with TV contracts and has nothing to do with academics. I'm not even saying that any of this is a good idea from an athletic standpoint, but no one was considering academics when they decided to pay OU and Texas more to play sports in the SEC.

Athletics drive academics mainly through brand power amongst potential students and also drive alumni/donor engagement. OSU was stagnant for decades until Boone changed the course of the university. The demand for people wanting to go to OSU is night/day different now versus 20 years ago. 20 years ago OSU's acceptance rate was in the 90% range, compare that today. The engagement of people via football and athletics has driven over $1.5 billion in new gifts to academic programs at OSU over the past 15 years (between new buildings/capital improvements to endowment fund). OSU's endowment has more than doubled since then too. None of that would have happened without that investment from Boone into our athletic programs.

Most OSU people understand why OU made the decision. I personally don't think OU/OSU should be tied together as much as they have been. I have an issue with the manner in which OU leadership did it and then expect OSU to be ok with it all. No thanks... if OU plays like that after decades of coordinated cooperation between both academically and athletic then goodbye. OSU should no longer hold back on expanding or doing anything they want either just because it might not be beneficial to OU. OU better never expect a tax payer bail out over their dumb and irresponsible uses of money either. Ultimately I blame U of Texas - they're the ones who have blown up every conference they've ever been in, good luck to the SEC long-term. UT has already requested that the SEC make it a penalty to do horns down, like they aren't even in the SEC yet and demanding things of them. OU hitching their wagon to UT long-term is a dumb move in my opinion. The PAC used to have the richest TV contract and look where they are now, All it'd take is Alabama to be down again for a bit and Georgia and SEC rating could plummet, it's happened before and can happen again. That's why it seems so dumb to give up on regional conferences. The Big 12 with Mizzou, Nebraska, Colorado, and A&M was just as good if not better than the SEC and Texas was who destroyed that. Just wait until the next SEC TV contract is up for negotiations and UT starts their usual BS. Given the Big 12 has stabilized and that the ACC is likely to be the next conference to fall apart, OSU's athletic potential is probably greater now than is was before. Conference is very solid and competitive and will have a better chance of making it into the playoffs regularly than OU or Texas will in the SEC. I'd rather be top 3 programs in the Big 12 regularly than middle road regularly in the SEC that doesn't make it into the playoffs. I don't know if the extra TV money between the conferences will really make that big of a difference - it really seems the main driver going forward is what schools can put together for NIL deals to get players. So, that is more of a how engaged is your donor/alumni base in comparison to other schools and I'd argue OSU has the ability to be competitive against just about everyone expect a small handful of very large schools like UT, Ohio State, etc. that have alumni and donor bases more than 2x the size of schools like OSU or OU.

I didn't realize there was still this much bitterness at OSU over the conference change. It took OU and Texas leaving for the Big 12 to wake up and see the future, but they have since at least stabilized the conference.

No, you don't get it at all. Texas leaving stabilizes the conference, it was Texas blocking expansion. It was Texas with the Longhorn Network that led to the conference splintering in the first place. It was Texas effectively running everything that drove away Nebraska and A&M. It's going to be Texas that starts to destabilize the SEC. I'm a KU alum and I wish OU had stayed, but I can't blame them for leaving. I think it's stupid to just follow Texas, but I understand it.

In five to ten years I predict the Big-12 payout will rival the SEC's. The next bucket of cash for the schools and conferences to get at is the $2 billion a year generated by the NCAA basketball tournament. The Big-12 already is by far the best basketball conference and just added Arizona. When the ACC flies apart and FSU and Clemson go to the SEC and North Carolina and Notre Dame go to the Big10 look for the Big-12 to pick up Duke, Syracuse, Louisville and UConn. If it wasn't for Texas, Louisville and BYU would have joined with WVU and TCU years ago.

Interesting to see how the divisions are broken out for B12 in ‘24 and beyond. Here is an SI take.

https://www.si.com/college/westvirginia/big-12/what-the-big-12-could-look-like-with-two-divisions

I think the pod system makes a lot of sense in the new Big 12:

West: BYU, Utah, Arizona, ASU

Central: Colorado, KU, KSU, OSU

Texas: TCU, Baylor, Tech, Houston

East: Iowa State, Cincy, WVU, UCF

In football, schools play pod teams every year and play non-pod teams on a rotation basis of 2 years on and 2 years off (like the old Big 12 North/South).

^Yes in light of the geography that would be a good way to go.

Good way to endear yourself to a team in your new conference. :)

Arizona State AD Ray Anderson discussing move to Big 12: "I promise I'm not going to Morgantown. I'm going to sign that to (deputy AD) Jean Boyd. He can go to Morgantown. But send me to Texas & the rivalry w/Arizona & starting a new one w/BYU, Utah & Colorado"

No, you don't get it at all. Texas leaving stabilizes the conference, it was Texas blocking expansion. It was Texas with the Longhorn Network that led to the conference splintering in the first place. It was Texas effectively running everything that drove away Nebraska and A&M. It's going to be Texas that starts to destabilize the SEC. I'm a KU alum and I wish OU had stayed, but I can't blame them for leaving. I think it's stupid to just follow Texas, but I understand it.

Lol. Okay, fine. I'm perfectly fine with pinning it on Texas, but it was always about the money, specifically TV money based on football. All the other stuff is just hand wringing. There was a lot of talk about all the early kickoff for marquee games, but that's about money, too, because of course they're going to put the teams they've invested the most money in on at the times when they have the best return.

And If any of this was about academics, Stanford and Cal would not have been left in the lurch.


In five to ten years I predict the Big-12 payout will rival the SEC's. The next bucket of cash for the schools and conferences to get at is the $2 billion a year generated by the NCAA basketball tournament. The Big-12 already is by far the best basketball conference and just added Arizona. When the ACC flies apart and FSU and Clemson go to the SEC and North Carolina and Notre Dame go to the Big10 look for the Big-12 to pick up Duke, Syracuse, Louisville and UConn. If it wasn't for Texas, Louisville and BYU would have joined with WVU and TCU years ago.

If these payouts are tenable over the long haul, you could be right. Considering basketball was / is a very good move for the Big 12, especially when it lost its football blue bloods. I don't know how the NCAA splits the NCAA tournament proceeds or how the grant of rights works in that context with regards to conferences, but there is definitely something to be had there. I think the Big 12 has ultimately done a good job of righting itself. It certainly did better than the Pac 12.

OU’s president literally put out a statement claiming that part of the consideration of joining the SEC was based on academics. Many people took it seriously for some reason.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/aau08052d.jpg

Athletics drive academics mainly through brand power amongst potential students and also drive alumni/donor engagement. OSU was stagnant for decades until Boone changed the course of the university. The demand for people wanting to go to OSU is night/day different now versus 20 years ago. 20 years ago OSU's acceptance rate was in the 90% range, compare that today. The engagement of people via football and athletics has driven over $1.5 billion in new gifts to academic programs at OSU over the past 15 years (between new buildings/capital improvements to endowment fund). OSU's endowment has more than doubled since then too. None of that would have happened without that investment from Boone into our athletic programs.

I wasn't trying to say that investment in athletics doesn't lead to increased fundraising or that success in athletics doesn't motivate boosters and alumni to open their wallets for both athletics and academics. In fact, that's exactly why university presidents love to associate them. It's easier to ask for a check the Sunday after you win homecoming than it is after a loss. In the grand scheme of things that's kinda sad, but I get that's how it works.

I just meant that ESPN and Fox are not basing these contracts on whether these schools have committed money to research or what their acceptance rate is or their AAU status, and that I don't think the state of Oklahoma should be basing their higher education strategy on how conference realignment plays out.

No, you don't get it at all. Texas leaving stabilizes the conference, it was Texas blocking expansion. It was Texas with the Longhorn Network that led to the conference splintering in the first place. It was Texas effectively running everything that drove away Nebraska and A&M. It's going to be Texas that starts to destabilize the SEC. I'm a KU alum and I wish OU had stayed, but I can't blame them for leaving. I think it's stupid to just follow Texas, but I understand it.

In five to ten years I predict the Big-12 payout will rival the SEC's. The next bucket of cash for the schools and conferences to get at is the $2 billion a year generated by the NCAA basketball tournament. The Big-12 already is by far the best basketball conference and just added Arizona. When the ACC flies apart and FSU and Clemson go to the SEC and North Carolina and Notre Dame go to the Big10 look for the Big-12 to pick up Duke, Syracuse, Louisville and UConn. If it wasn't for Texas, Louisville and BYU would have joined with WVU and TCU years ago.

Making the B12 a WAC on steroids won’t catapult it into SEC territory for value. Just wishful thinking by OSU loyalists still bitter over OU leaving. OSU would have left in a minute if had been asked.

Making the B12 a WAC on steroids

:rolleyes:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/aau08052d.jpg

Lmao yea that’s a pretty moronic statement no one with half a brain would agree with. It is also the exact statement from the University of Oklahoma’s president.

That’s literally my point.

Lmao yea that’s a pretty moronic statement no one with half a brain would agree with. It is also the exact statement from the University of Oklahoma’s president.

That’s literally my point.

Please post the original statement in its full context. I know you are just trying to make an anti OU statement, so post it and let’s move on. It’s a moronic argument to keep going on. It won’t change reality or make hyperbolic statements true.

Making the B12 a WAC on steroids won’t catapult it into SEC territory for value. Just wishful thinking by OSU loyalists still bitter over OU leaving. OSU would have left in a minute if had been asked.

Even if it is wishful thinking on the future of the conference what in the world does it have to do with OSU fans being bitter over OU leaving? I think you are reading and hoping the bitterness is in there for some strange reason, but it’s just not.

Please post the original statement in its full context. I know you are just trying to make an anti OU statement, so post it and let’s move on. It’s a moronic argument to keep going on. It won’t change reality or make hyperbolic statements true.

7-31-22
OU President Joe Harroz just included the following in an email blast.




While this decision most obviously affects OU Athletics, it’s not just about our sports programs. We know this decision will benefit our entire university, advancing our purpose and important work. This move positions OU for success in fulfilling our Strategic Plan. Much of our plan speaks to our aspiration to become an AAU-caliber institution, with benchmarks based on the criteria by which AAU institutions are judged. A move into a conference with more AAU institutions provides us the chance to align OU further and more closely to the standards we will need to meet to reach our goal. Our Strategic Plan is ambitious and certainly requires a conference alignment that affords us the opportunity to aggressively invest in our academic mission.

Even if it is wishful thinking on the future of the conference what in the world does it have to do with OSU fans being bitter over OU leaving? I think you are reading and hoping the bitterness is in there for some strange reason, but it’s just not.

Rover is accusing me of being an "OSU loyalist" in a post where I said I was a KU alum. I'm not bitter over OU leaving. KU is the best basketball school in the country in the best basketball conference in the country with a drastically improving football team. Pre-season ranked #1. Again. Just yesterday KU beat Buddy Hield and the Bahamian National Team in an exhibition in Puerto Rico. And now the Big-12 is adding Arizona in place of Texas and OU. Big net positive. Good times.

Rover most certainly is hoping for OSU fans bitterness. He probably listens to the idiots on the Sports Animal every day, He may well be in for some long seasons coming up. I don't care about OSU.

Personally, I don't fully understand OU's leaving the Big-12. They have ruled football in the Big-12 the last decade with most years a conference championship and a BCS berth. Now OU will be the at best the 4th best program in the SEC, and that's only if Venables works out. He's looking like a bad bet so far and OU is much closer to becoming Nebraska right now than Georgia. Sad.

Lmao yea that’s a pretty moronic statement no one with half a brain would agree with. It is also the exact statement from the University of Oklahoma’s president.

That’s literally my point.

I was just playing along with the gag. I assumed since you said no one would take that seriously, that you wouldn’t.

Personally, I don't fully understand OU's leaving the Big-12. They have ruled football in the Big-12 the last decade with most years a conference championship and a BCS berth. Now OU will be the at best the 4th best program in the SEC, and that's only if Venables works out. He's looking like a bad bet so far and OU is much closer to becoming Nebraska right now than Georgia. Sad.
Yeah, I don’t understand why anyone would go to New York City or London to work in finance when they could get a job in Tulsa at a bank. What possibly could there motivation be?

Personally, I don't fully understand OU's leaving the Big-12. They have ruled football in the Big-12 the last decade with most years a conference championship and a BCS berth. Now OU will be the at best the 4th best program in the SEC, and that's only if Venables works out. He's looking like a bad bet so far and OU is much closer to becoming Nebraska right now than Georgia. Sad.

This statement is uninformed and sad. It's millions of dollars more, better recruiting, and a higher level of football to be in the SEC. Positives outweigh the negatives 100 percent. They will compete in the SEC. They are going to have their highest rated recruiting class ever this '24 cycle. It will be in the top 5 of all schools. And it's because the elite athletes want to play in the best conference.

This statement is uninformed and sad. It's millions of dollars more, better recruiting, and a higher level of football to be in the SEC. Positives outweigh the negatives 100 percent. They will compete in the SEC. They are going to have their highest rated recruiting class ever this '24 cycle. It will be in the top 5 of all schools. And it's because the elite athletes want to play in the best conference.

No, actually OU's 2024 class is ranked 15th, seventh highest in the SEC. Seventh.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Lincoln Riley understood all of this, it's why he left.

No, actually OU's 2024 class is ranked 15th, seventh highest in the SEC. Seventh.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Lincoln Riley understood all of this, it's why he left.
Why don't you wait til end of recruiting to make such statements. That's like declaring you've read the book when you are half way through.
Also, OU out-recruited last year finishing 4th in the country. This year, USC and OU are virtually tied with many 5* OU leans left to go while SC has been losing commitments. As it turns out, LR can't consistently recruit better anywhere than OU can.

Why don't you wait til end of recruiting to make such statements. That's like declaring you've read the book when you are half way through.
Also, OU out-recruited last year finishing 4th in the country. This year, USC and OU are virtually tied with many 5* OU leans left to go while SC has been losing commitments. As it turns out, LR can't consistently recruit better anywhere than OU can.

Wait until when to make statements like what? You mean statements like this?

They are going to have their highest rated recruiting class ever this '24 cycle. It will be in the top 5 of all schools.

:rolleyes:

Wait until when to make statements like what? You mean statements like this?


:rolleyes:

Quoting one premature statement doesn't make another any less dumb. That's just called deflection.

No, actually OU's 2024 class is ranked 15th, seventh highest in the SEC. Seventh.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Lincoln Riley understood all of this, it's why he left.

Using your same link, OU was #4 in the nation last year, the first full year after announcing the SEC start date. USC was #8. The best Big XII school other than OU & Texas was TCU at #21. OSU was #54.

OU will finish way up in the ranks this season as well once it is finalized and has been rising rapidly in recent weeks. The strategy of Brent Venables is to only take commitments from players who stop taking other visits, which results in a late flurry -- as it did last year.

I think OU will do alright on the field in the SEC, but they definitely need to solve the tailgating situation. The current experience is lightyears behind Ole Miss and LSU.

As for OSU, i like the idea of both schools being able to “host” SEC and Big 12 tournaments in OKC from time to time. Especially with a new arena.

Quoting one premature statement doesn't make another any less dumb. That's just called deflection.

As opposed to your statement, that you made up in your own head. Now which is more dumb, using actual data from a recruiting site or just making up a ranking based on hope?

I really don't care what OU or OSU's recruiting ranking is. Trying to rate and rank high school basketball players is near impossible and they play each other almost year round in the AAU circuits. Football player rankings are pure fantasy based more on who is recruiting the players than the players themselves. These are kids, they are often not even done growing. It's all just garbage for the idiot talking heads on sports radio to argue about in the off-season.

Anyway recruiting itself in the modern world of NIL and instant transfers is fading in importance.

No, actually OU's 2024 class is ranked 15th, seventh highest in the SEC. Seventh.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Lincoln Riley understood all of this, it's why he left.

You really don’t understand recruiting, do you? They were ranked around 15 this time last year and finished 4th, OU’s highest ranked class in over 15 years and that came after a 6-7 season which OU lost the heisman winning QB beforehand. Venables encourages recruits to take all the visits they wish to take prior to committing and will recruit over any verbal commits that make visits after commuting so things don’t usually start picking up until midway through the season. This class will finish in the top 10 and if they get the three 5 star defensive lineman that are all predicted to commit, it will be top 3.

Using your same link, OU was #4 in the nation last year, the first full year after announcing the SEC start date. USC was #8. The best Big XII school other than OU & Texas was TCU at #21. OSU was #54.

OU will finish way up in the ranks this season as well once it is finalized and has been rising rapidly in recent weeks. The strategy of Brent Venables is to only take commitments from players who stop taking other visits, which results in a late flurry -- as it did last year.

beat me to it

Using your same link, OU was #4 in the nation last year, the first full year after announcing the SEC start date. USC was #8. The best Big XII school other than OU & Texas was TCU at #21. OSU was #54.

OU will finish way up in the ranks this season as well once it is finalized and has been rising rapidly in recent weeks. The strategy of Brent Venables is to only take commitments from players who stop taking other visits, which results in a late flurry -- as it did last year.

And looking at the current rankings posted above, the highest ranked Big 12 class is Arizona. At #30. As pointed out, these current rankings are far from indicative of how it will finish, but that's with AU having 20 commits. The next 3 are Tech (32), then some other newcomers Cincinnati (37) and UCF (39). OSU is currently 57th with 13 committed.

It's interesting how many OG Big 12 teams have some catching up to do just with the teams being added.

As opposed to your statement, that you made up in your own head. Now which is more dumb, using actual data from a recruiting site or just making up a ranking based on hope?

I really don't care what OU or OSU's recruiting ranking is. Trying to rate and rank high school basketball players is near impossible and they play each other almost year round in the AAU circuits. Football player rankings are pure fantasy based more on who is recruiting the players than the players themselves. These are kids, they are often not even done growing. It's all just garbage for the idiot talking heads on sports radio to argue about in the off-season.

Anyway recruiting itself in the modern world of NIL and instant transfers is fading in importance.

All I can say is WOW

As opposed to your statement, that you made up in your own head. Now which is more dumb, using actual data from a recruiting site or just making up a ranking based on hope?

I really don't care what OU or OSU's recruiting ranking is. Trying to rate and rank high school basketball players is near impossible and they play each other almost year round in the AAU circuits. Football player rankings are pure fantasy based more on who is recruiting the players than the players themselves. These are kids, they are often not even done growing. It's all just garbage for the idiot talking heads on sports radio to argue about in the off-season.

Anyway recruiting itself in the modern world of NIL and instant transfers is fading in importance.

it isn’t based on hope…it’s based on track record and who the recruiting experts are predicting will sign with OU.

Player rankings are not based on fantasy…they are based on the most stringent evals by the most evaluators in the history of college football. Given the massive field of people evaluating them, I’d argue that player rankings have never been more accurate. Some pan out at the next level and for a number of reasons, some don’t. It’s no different than players when they move from college to the NFL. While there are exceptions, more often than not, the teams signing the best classes, are the best teams year in and year out.

Recruiting is not losing importance. More players stay than transfer and that will only prove to be the case more often as players start to realize that way more players in the transfer portal are left without a team by the deadline than sign with a new one in a better situation than the one they left.

No, actually OU's 2024 class is ranked 15th, seventh highest in the SEC. Seventh.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Lincoln Riley understood all of this, it's why he left.

Obviously you are quite the recruiting guru. That is probably why you have taken into account that the #3 & 6 player in the country based on that service, are favored to pick OU in the next month. (One being a kid born and raised in okc area and a OU family).

Now which is more dumb, using actual data from a recruiting site or just making up a ranking based on hope?


Football player rankings are pure fantasy based more on who is recruiting the players than the players themselves.

Soooooo, can we use the actual data or not?

As someone who works in higher education, I want to share that in over a decade as a professor interacting with academics from all over the country at conferences, through organizations, applying for grants, and working on projects, I've never heard a single person mention conferences in any capacity as holding any meaning. Literally not even a single sentence. University president's may mention it for political purposes, but it's irrelevant to academia.

Yes, it is always funny to hear academics and AAU status when conferences realignment talks happen. Athletic conferences really have no concern for academics, whether they say so or not. Its such a dumb side thing to argue about when its just about revenue.

No, actually OU's 2024 class is ranked 15th, seventh highest in the SEC. Seventh.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Lincoln Riley understood all of this, it's why he left.

Lincoln Riley didn't leave because of the SEC, he left because he got more money and more resources from USC and gets to live on the beach in SoCal. As Rover said, its not hard to understand why someone would go to Los Angeles to work in the entertainment industry instead of getting a job in Norman at a movie theatre.

Fact is Lincoln left because he had very little say in regards to the SEC move and didn't have the resources BV now has (in regards to staffing, facility improvements etc.). BV made sure he had commitments from Joe C. on having those in place before inking the deal to come to Norman. LR probably believed the pathway to a title was easier in the PAC 12 which will no longer be the case when they move to the Big 10. Expect him to jump ship to the NFL sooner than later, than have to play 10 am mid-November games in Piscataway, NJ.

How could the 10 remaining PAC teams not get a decent network offer if these same networks are now willing to pay the vast majority of PAC teams over 30 million a year in other conferences. That makes no sense to me.

How could the 10 remaining PAC teams not get a decent network offer if these same networks are now willing to pay the vast majority of PAC teams over 30 million a year in other conferences. That makes no sense to me.

I think it's because they'll now being playing more games against teams that draw better ratings, rather than playing each other every week in lower rated games. Also, at least as of now, I don't think they're getting equal share. Whatever they're getting just had to be higher than what was in the Apple streaming deal to make it work.

I think that's why what doesn't makes logistical geographic sense to conference members is actually a plus for the networks. They can now put an OSU or Michigan v Washington or Oregon on in the late slot and draw more than just going with a Washington v Cal or Oregon vs the other OSU. I don't know if that will actually work out for them, but I think they see it as adding the Pacific Time Zone to the Big 10 for half of what they're paying current big Ten schools individually.

it isn’t based on hope…it’s based on track record and who the recruiting experts are predicting will sign with OU.

Player rankings are not based on fantasy…they are based on the most stringent evals by the most evaluators in the history of college football. Given the massive field of people evaluating them, I’d argue that player rankings have never been more accurate. Some pan out at the next level and for a number of reasons, some don’t. It’s no different than players when they move from college to the NFL. While there are exceptions, more often than not, the teams signing the best classes, are the best teams year in and year out.

Recruiting is not losing importance. More players stay than transfer and that will only prove to be the case more often as players start to realize that way more players in the transfer portal are left without a team by the deadline than sign with a new one in a better situation than the one they left.

Swake isn't wrong... there's valid points about recruiting with NIL and the transfer portal that is going to really challenge a lot of teams. I don't know if it will impact teams like OU/A&M/Texas/Bama more or teams like OSU. I do fear a bit for OSU because Gundy has never built recruiting classes to be in the top 20 just for stats. Just like Kansas State and some others have been incredibly successful with finding hidden gems. OSU has knocked on the door of winning the Big12 and having a shot at getting into national championship games (still bitter about Iowa State) with recruiting classes that were sub top 25, stats on kids in high school don't always tell you a lot.

With NIL and the portal though, that could be hard on teams like OSU if someone goes there for 2 years and is the top receiver, top rusher, etc. - then Bama comes in with a $5 million NIL deal and picks off all the good players from places like OSU, who would pass that up? It could be a disadvantage to teams long-term like OU too. Question is if OU isn't consistently beating Bama, Georgia, etc. and those teams have a much larger and way more engaged ($$$) donor base that can throw money at players from places like OU too that turn out to be stars. If you become a rockstar at OU and they can't beat Bama to even play in the SEC championship how well will that help keeping players or recruiting players. OU is opening a pandora's box with the SEC. They could very, very likely turn out to be the next A&M in the SEC.

Let's look at Texas though and OU to an extent.. when things don't go well, you have players who many have never lost a game in high school and there is a diva complex that comes along with that which is very challenging to manage as coaches. Both teams have had seasons of implosions because the players gave up after running into difficulty. If star rankings were the only thing that mattered in how good a team will be then Texas should have been winning the Big12 every year just about for the last two decades and it's been a very long time since that's been the case.

Swake isn't wrong... there's valid points about recruiting with NIL and the transfer portal that is going to really challenge a lot of teams. I don't know if it will impact teams like OU/A&M/Texas/Bama more or teams like OSU. I do fear a bit for OSU because Gundy has never built recruiting classes to be in the top 20 just for stats. Just like Kansas State and some others have been incredibly successful with finding hidden gems. OSU has knocked on the door of winning the Big12 and having a shot at getting into national championship games (still bitter about Iowa State) with recruiting classes that were sub top 25, stats on kids in high school don't always tell you a lot.

With NIL and the portal though, that could be hard on teams like OSU if someone goes there for 2 years and is the top receiver, top rusher, etc. - then Bama comes in with a $5 million NIL deal and picks off all the good players from places like OSU, who would pass that up? It could be a disadvantage to teams long-term like OU too. Question is if OU isn't consistently beating Bama, Georgia, etc. and those teams have a much larger and way more engaged ($$$) donor base that can throw money at players from places like OU too that turn out to be stars. If you become a rockstar at OU and they can't beat Bama to even play in the SEC championship how well will that help keeping players or recruiting players. OU is opening a pandora's box with the SEC. They could very, very likely turn out to be the next A&M in the SEC.

Let's look at Texas though and OU to an extent.. when things don't go well, you have players who many have never lost a game in high school and there is a diva complex that comes along with that which is very challenging to manage as coaches. Both teams have had seasons of implosions because the players gave up after running into difficulty. If star rankings were the only thing that mattered in how good a team will be then Texas should have been winning the Big12 every year just about for the last two decades and it's been a very long time since that's been the case.

People always throw that out there along with Nebraska despite the fact that they are wildly poor comparisons. Nebraska destroyed it's entire recruiting base when it moved to the Big 10 and there is literally no comparison between Texas A&M and OU's football programs aside from recruiting class strength since they joined the SEC, wealthy alumni and nice facilities. It's almost like comparing Alabama to Ole Miss, Washington or Arizona St if those schools had richer donors. Comparing A&M to Tennessee would be extremely generous.

Despite all that, you do realize that Texas A&M has been as good or better in the SEC than they were in the BIg XII..where OU routinely beat them, right?

In 16 seasons in the Big XII, A&M won:
- 11 games: 1 season
- 9 games: 3
- 8 games: 2
- 7 games: 4
- 6 games: 3
- 5 games: 1
- 4 games: 2

11 seasons in the SEC:
- 11 games: 1
- 9 games: 3
- 8 games: 5
- 7 games: 1
- 5 games: 1

They won the Big 12 conference once and have finished second in the SEC twice. They've also beaten the best teams multiple times but similar to their time in the Big XII, couldn't turn that into a conference (other than once in the Big XII) or national title.

OU - 27 seasons in the Big XII

- 13 games: 1
- 12 games: 8
- 11 games: 7
- 10 games: 2
- 9 games: 1 (Covid shortened schedule - 2020)
- 8 games: 3
- 7 games: 1
- 6 games: 1
- 5 games: 1
- 4 games: 1
- 3 games: 1

OU has won the Big XII 14 out of 27 seasons. Of the seasons it shared the conference with A&M, it won the conference 7 of 16 seasons.

Historically against the SEC, OU is:

All games: 15-10-2
Regular Season: 8-0-2
Bowl/Playoff: 7-10 (4 losses to the National Champion, 2 losses to the runner up)
Including Mizzou and A&M: 101-46-7

So far all indications are that OU is throwing out as much NIL money as the top tier of football programs are.

Star rankings aren't everything, evaluation and development are also important, but the teams that win the National Championship frequently are finishing in the top 5 of recruiting classes and getting a bunch of high 4 and 5 star guys. The transfer portal will have an effect (and so far it's been extremely beneficial to OU other than losing Caleb Williams) and will help a contributor here or there, but it will never outweigh recruiting as the most important factor to building a team. For as much as Texas has continued to be a disappointment since the current transfer system was put in place, there hasn't been a mass exodus from the program nor was there one from OU after their worst season in decades. It would take a prolonged period of repeated failure and instability for it to truly start having a negative effect on OU. OU lost several players when the coaching staff left but has been able to rebuild using the portal and recruiting since then.

it isn’t based on hope…it’s based on track record and who the recruiting experts are predicting will sign with OU.

Player rankings are not based on fantasy…they are based on the most stringent evals by the most evaluators in the history of college football. Given the massive field of people evaluating them, I’d argue that player rankings have never been more accurate. Some pan out at the next level and for a number of reasons, some don’t. It’s no different than players when they move from college to the NFL. While there are exceptions, more often than not, the teams signing the best classes, are the best teams year in and year out.

Recruiting is not losing importance. More players stay than transfer and that will only prove to be the case more often as players start to realize that way more players in the transfer portal are left without a team by the deadline than sign with a new one in a better situation than the one they left.

What is the qualitative difference between the 14th and 21st ranked linebackers this year? How did the services come to the fact that one player should be ranked 5th and another 6th? Why do 247Sports, Rivals and ESPN never agree on the rankings?

Recruiting isn't garbage, but media reporting on recruiting and the media rankings of those recruits is. Most of the rankings are based on who is recruiting a particular player, not really on the player themselves. Unless their name is Manning or James, and that's a whole other problem. The rankings are a meaningless distinction that is only intended to drive clicks.

And I'm not sure how you can disagree that recruiting, while important, isn't much less important than in the past when 7 of the 14 starting Big 12 QBs this year are transfers. Including the QBs at both Texas and OU.

People always throw that out there along with Nebraska despite the fact that they are wildly poor comparisons. Nebraska destroyed it's entire recruiting base when it moved to the Big 10 and there is literally no comparison between Texas A&M and OU's football programs aside from recruiting class strength since they joined the SEC, wealthy alumni and nice facilities. It's almost like comparing Alabama to Ole Miss, Washington or Arizona St if those schools had richer donors. Comparing A&M to Tennessee would be extremely generous.



You can narrow the comparison to just recruiting class strength since they joined the SEC and nice facilities. Those donors in College Station play with monopoly money down there and the university has an 18 billion dollar endowment. Comparing the donor wealth surrounding A&M and OU is apples to oranges. It hasn't really ever helped put A&M over the top though. They did win a recruiting national championship in 2022 for whatever that's worth.

You can narrow the comparison to just recruiting class strength since they joined the SEC and nice facilities. Those donors in College Station play with monopoly money down there and the university has an 18 billion dollar endowment. Comparing the donor wealth surrounding A&M and OU is apples to oranges. It hasn't really ever helped put A&M over the top though. They did win a recruiting national championship in 2022 for whatever that's worth.

Yeah it just goes to show you that money alone doesn’t buy success. And you’re right, Texas and Texas A&M are always in the running for the off season national championship lol. Which makes it really satisfying every year when they do things like lose to Kansas or App St. At home.

My point in the comparison was that both have wealthy alumni who are willing to dump exorbitant sums of money into NIL deals and facilities. Yes A&M’s alumni have more, but at some threshold the amount you have isn’t as important as how you spent it or the effect it had on the field.

What is the qualitative difference between the 14th and 21st ranked linebackers this year? How did the services come to the fact that one player should be ranked 5th and another 6th? Why do 247Sports, Rivals and ESPN never agree on the rankings?

Recruiting isn't garbage, but media reporting on recruiting and the media rankings of those recruits is. Most of the rankings are based on who is recruiting a particular player, not really on the player themselves. Unless their name is Manning or James, and that's a whole other problem. The rankings are a meaningless distinction that is only intended to drive clicks.

And I'm not sure how you can disagree that recruiting, while important, isn't much less important than in the past when 7 of the 14 starting Big 12 QBs this year are transfers. Including the QBs at both Texas and OU.

They do look at who’s recruiting them but often rank them highly for the same reason those coaches do…they use measurables, stats from their high school seasons (taking into account the level of competition), and the eye test when they watch them at camps and high school games. Just following what the Soonerscoop and OU insider guys do…these recruiting analysts go to a ton of highschool games, camps, watch a bunch of film and talk to a ton of highschool and college coaches. There are a bunch of analysts opinions that go into each players’ rankings. I tend to look more at the composite rankings that combine numbers for all the services over any individual service. It’s certainly not an exact science and just like scouts in the NFL, sometimes they miss on evals and a player is way better or worse than they thought. The recruiting rankings aren’t perfect but they aren’t wild guesses, hope and garbage either.

The QB is important but is only one player. Also those are 7 quarterbacks that for the most part couldn't win the starting job at their former school (in Quinn Ewers’ case, couldn’t even crack the 4 deep) or spent the first few years of their career playing against lesser completion. You’re not going to build a great team only with a bunch of guys that in most cases weren’t good enough to start for the school that recruited them. The super stars that go through the portal are the exception, not the rule. Just using OU transfer quarterbacks as an example: for every Baker Mayfield, Kyler Murray, or Jalen Hurts, there are 10 General Bootys, Davis Bevilles, and Micah Bowens with a few solid serviceable guys like Dillon Gabriel mixed in. Getting the best 20-30 guys on your team the first time through every recruiting cycle is still way more important. Coaches would be crazy not to supplement their rosters with portal guys that fit (every once and awhile you’ll get lucky with a great player that just made a deal for the money and isn’t happy or is a great player that just didn’t have an opportunity in a crowded field or developed into a solid player later in their career) but relying too heavily on that is not a sustainable way to build a successful program long term.

Obviously you are quite the recruiting guru. That is probably why you have taken into account that the #3 & 6 player in the country based on that service, are favored to pick OU in the next month. (One being a kid born and raised in okc area and a OU family).

Also Nigel Smith from Melissa Tx, a highly rated 4 star, is favored and shut down his recruitment. Will commit the first week of school.

Williams Nwaneri Commitment is scheduled this coming Monday the 14th.

The whole transfer portal concept of allowing players to up and leave from one year to the next. Are there any limits on how many times a player can transfer?

It adds to the instability of programs when players can just leave from one program to another. Players need to be limited to a one-time transfer and live with their decisions.

Noticed changes: NCAA Transfer Portal Changes! https://gridironheroics.com/ncaa-transfer-portal-changes/

The whole transfer portal concept of allowing players to up and leave from one year to the next. Are there any limits on how many times a player can transfer?

It adds to the instability of programs when players can just leave from one program to another. Players need to be limited to a one-time transfer and live with their decisions.

Noticed changes: NCAA Transfer Portal Changes! https://gridironheroics.com/ncaa-transfer-portal-changes/

Why? Are you limited on the number of times you can change jobs?

Same question about academic and player scholarships. We're talking about limitation averages of four-five years.

We take into account that we're dealing with 18-21 year olds on the average. Again. limit them to one transfer with few extenuating circumstances.

Are Universities allowed to revoke a player's scholarship based on his/her performance. And yes, academic performance is built in whether you're on a scholarship or not.

Are Universities allowed to revoke a player's scholarship based on his/her performance. And yes, academic performance is built in whether you're on a scholarship or not.

I think schools can offer whatever they want within the limits, but most are going to offer guarantees to be competitive. Partials are a thing, too, but I'm not sure how much that applies to big time college football

Same question about academic and player scholarships. We're talking about limitation averages of four-five years.

We take into account that we're dealing with 18-21 year olds on the average. Again. limit them to one transfer with few extenuating circumstances.

Are Universities allowed to revoke a player's scholarship based on his/her performance. And yes, academic performance is built in whether you're on a scholarship or not.

I believe that scholarships are a year to year deal. Suicide for the school to not renew one though.

Unless you’re Nick Saban and the elite of elites. Alabama processes players frequently and it doesn’t hurt them. The cream of the crop can get away with it.

Unless you’re Nick Saban and the elite of elites. Alabama processes players frequently and it doesn’t hurt them. The cream of the crop can get away with it.

Happens a lot in college basketball too. Kansas and Kentucky, for example, are constantly shoving underperforming players out the door.

I believe that scholarships are a year to year deal. Suicide for the school to not renew one though.

they have been 4 year scholarships in the major confs for almost a decade now

Unless you’re Nick Saban and the elite of elites. Alabama processes players frequently and it doesn’t hurt them. The cream of the crop can get away with it.


Happens a lot in college basketball too. Kansas and Kentucky, for example, are constantly shoving underperforming players out the door.

While players can be told their playing time will be diminished their scholarships are not revoked. There is a difference.

https://informedathlete.com/the-facts-about-guaranteed-multi-year-ncaa-di-scholarships/

In 2015, the NCAA Division I “Power 5” Schools implemented a rule that has the effect of “protecting” Division I student-athletes from having their athletic scholarship cancelled or not renewed for any athletics reason. Quite simply, a coach cannot take away a scholarship for poor athletic performance.

Cancellation or non-renewal IS possible if an athlete:

Is ruled to be ineligible for competition;
Provides fraudulent information on an application, letter of intent, or financial aid agreement;
Engages in serious misconduct that rises to the level of being disciplined by the university’s regular student disciplinary board;
Voluntarily quits their team; or
Violates a university policy or rule which is not related to athletic conditions or ability (such as a university policy on class attendance, or an athletic department policy regarding proper conduct on a team trip)