Emails on Thunder details and OU behavior
An off week for the Sooners and Cowboys meant a week’s vacation for me, so the emails are a little light. But still interesting. Starting with the Thunder and the extracurricular activities in the OU-Washington game.
Roger writes, “I have been pondering what kind of graphics would work with the nickname Thunder. Suddenly it dawned on me: There is more to Thunder than meets the sky. What about the thunder of a cattle stampede? Or the thunder of a herd of buffalo rumbling over a ridge?”
I think Thor’s the frontrunner for mascot, but I’ve got no problem with a buffalo.
James wrote, “Well, Mr. Tramel, Thunderbirds has ‘Thunder’ in it, so it is not a total loss.”
Nothing against the Thunder name, but I vote total loss.
Gabe also has the Thunder on his mind. “I read the article where you wrote about the Ford Center and Thunderdome as the new nickname, which I thought was cool. What really struck me was the part about chanting ‘Two Men Enter, One Man Leaves.’ I was thinking how great this could be as a t-shirt and was looking into getting the copyright and cost of production. Was wondering, since you were the inspiration, if that’s something you’d want to be a part of or if you’d have a problem with that.”
Well, since it wasn’t my idea in the first place, I’d say full steam ahead.
Now, on to the Sooners. Jack wrote, “On a minor point that I have seen no reference to in print, the broadcast TV crews dutifully showed the OU team blocking the entrance ramp preventing the Washington team from coming on the field until they were finally able to force their way past them. I know trash talk is the norm now, but in my day (1943), I don’t remember any of that. To me, that was a bush league attempt at intimidation and can do no good for our state and my team’s reputation as the West Coast and Eastern writers love to promote anything that will denigrate Oklahomans as being Okies, hillbillies, farmers, or tobacco road characters. You may fill in your own descriptions.”
I really think we’d all be better off if we cared a little less about the coastal press. But I do think OU’s stunt at the ramp was bush league.
Dave was upset by the injury to OU’s DeMarcus Granger. “What is your take on the roughing up of Granger? Will the NCAA penalize the players involved or what? I mean, it was quite obvious that they were retaliating for the previous play. Will Stoop or the OU athletic department file an official complaint with the NCAA? Just curious. I know that if it were a pro game, suspensions, fines would be levied. How about in college? To me, at the very least, they should be disciplined by the Washington coach.”
What goes around comes around. Granger took a cheap shot at the UW lineman the previous play. Sometimes you have to live with frontier justice.
West Virginia’s loss to Colorado brought some dispatches. David wrote, “Rich Rodriguez may be hated in West Virginia, but his game tactical skills are missed. Bill Stewart may be a good guy and a good coach, but his game management skills are LIMITED.”
I thought Stewart was a little shaky myself, but seems to me they miss Rodriguez’s game planning more than his game management.
Jo, that constant critic of Bob Stoops, asks, “Besides a victory over West Virginia, what do you think Colorado has that is missing on OU?”
Thin air.
Southern Cal is on the mind of a couple of readers. Jason writes, “When USC started the season with a 52-7 whipping of Virginia, it seemed that a lot of talking heads were thoroughly impressed. In fact, they vaulted USC to No. 1 after that game. Well, UConn just whipped Virginia 45-10 and the statistics were close to the same for both games. UConn got a big boost to 34th and 35th in the polls. I know you can’t judge by head-to-head-to-head, but don’t you think there should at least be some mention that the Virginia win was no big deal.”
No. I don’t think that. USC won at Virginia. Winning on the road - dominating on the road - is a big deal. Just like OU’s rout of Washington.
Shannon, always a thinking man, offered this conspiracy theory. “Jim Tressel secretly knew he wasn’t going to win at USC, so if at all possible it would be best to keep out Beanie Wells. Now if they can run through the Big 10, they will have that ‘we were without our best player’ card in their back pocket.”
Sometimes you can do a little too much thinking. Jim Tressel is fighting for his life in big games. It’s all hands on deck.
Bill lamented all the attention given to the last game at Yankee Stadium. “I guess I am too old. I just don’t get how the passing of Yankee Stadium brings teardrops. For me, they came about 30 years ago, when the Yankee Stadium of The Babe, Lou, Joe, Yogi and Mickey was redone. It simply did not look like the old ballyard that the Damn Yankees played in. They even decreased The Stadium’s seating capacity, from about 62,000 down to about 56,000. How was that an improvement? The Bronx will not be the same without old Yankees ghost somewhere. Coogan’s Bluff is not without the Polo Grounds and Brooklyn will never be Brooklyn without Ebbets Field. Times change. That does not mean they improve, necessarily.”
Well, I’ll say this for the Yankees. They didn’t desert the Bronx. The new Yankee Stadium is right next to the old Yankee Stadium. And so far, Yankee Stadium hasn’t been called Microsoft Field or some such thing.
And finally, Andy addressed a totally different subject. Cheerleading. “I am writing to point out an inequity in sports journalism. This week is the regional competition for high school cheer. Now before you dismiss this, I want you to understand where I am coming from. I have two daughters; one was a softball player and one is a cheerleader. I believe the cheerleader has had to work just as hard as the softball player did. The softball player will tell you the same thing. Competitive cheer is a real sport; it isn’t the stand on the sidelines and look pretty kind of thing that it used to be. Why doesn’t the Oklahoman cover the cheer regional competition and the state competition. They are a sport just like everyone else.”
Andy, you have some good points. The hard work argument doesn’t wash, though. Everyone works hard. High school musicals. Homecoming committees. Trig students. It all comes down to this for me. I recognize cheerleading as a difficult and laudable activity. I just don’t see it as a sport. The OSSAA sponsors cheerleading competition, but it also regulates music, acting and speech.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Cheerleading is hard work, but it is not a sport. Here’s why: any activity that is based on the opinion of one person or a panel cannot be considered a sport. In football, a team gets six points when they reach the endzone regardless of how they do it. No one scores them on the style or effectiveness of the score. Cheerleading is based on the opinion of judges, and is therefore not a sport.
I realize you have been committing your collum for quite a while.Its too bad,you didn’t stir my intrest prior to today. However it didn’t take long to decide you didn’t intrest me. Your insite is rather sophmoric. the Granger bit deserved a deeper insite. As for the cheerleading topic. The judgeing is subjective, as in football. Any sport that has a striped shirt in it ,is such. Most often the outcome of these classic wars is determend by the yellow flag. Like a court of law(instead of stripes, a black robe) What is lacking is responcebility. A real penility needs to be ascessed.
“Cheer” has become disconnected from its origins, and from reality.
What started out as a way to get students rooting for their team on the field, has become an entity unto itself, almost as if the on-field happenings are irrelevant.
The classic example of cheerleaders being disconnected from the real sports is the video clip of the USC cheerleader going into her routine just as Vince Young scores the game-winning TD in the national championship game.
Go away, “Cheer.” Come back, cheerleading.
GO OKC THUNDER!!!
P.S. - Beat you Ed!