Thoughts from The Oklahoman Sports Columnist Berry Tramel | NewsOK.com

Archive for

OU football: Sleeping with the ESPNemy

I saw Bob Stoops on Thursday morning, a few hours before he took off for Bristol, Conn., along with Landry Jones and Ryan Broyles. They all were headed for a full day at ESPN, doing a variety of interviews.

I saw a few of the stops by Jones and Broyles, and it was mostly great PR for Sooner football. Jones and Broyles talking about the team, but also themselves, everything from faith to their trip to Haiti. It’s great exposure.

It also has to be hard to swallow, knowing this is the same company that just commited $300 million to your arch-rival. College football teams are in the crosshairs. Do they cooperate with ESPN, even though ESPN has become a literal partner with the University of Texas, or do they shun ESPN and risk the fallout of no exposure with the dominant media enterprise in sports?

At the Big 12 Media Days earlier this week, Texas A&M skipped the Longhorn Network, which was part of the rotation for national networks. OU did not; Stoops and his players made time to sit down and be interviewed by Bevo TV.

I asked Stoops on Thursday if he enjoyed his trips to ESPN, or did they become tiresome after awhile, regardless of the ties to the Longhorn Network. I have heard that even athletes making their first trip to Bristol get bored after the first couple of hours.

But Stoops said no. He always enjoys it and it never gets old. Then he smiled and said, “It’s almost like having your own network. For a day.”

That’s the trouble, you see. The Sooners, or the Aggies, or the Cowboys, or the Nittany Lions or Wolverines or Buckeyes or Cornhuskers or Trojans or Gators or Bayou Bengals or whoever, get the royal treatment on occasion. But the impression is Texas will get the royal treatment every day.

---

OSU football: New uniforms add gray to the school color list

I’ve learned a lot about OSU’s school colors this week. I did a video in which I talked about State’s new football uniforms, adding gray to the mix of orange and black.

My take: I like the concept of new-age uniforms and getting Nike all fired up about the Cowboys, but I don’t like adopting new colors. Duke and Nebraska and Oregon adding black, Colorado coming out in blue every once in awhile, Notre Dame vacillating between blue and green.

Anyway, I lauded everything about the new Cowboy duds except the advent of gray. And I heard from a Cowboy fan who reemed me out for not knowing that silver is considered an official OSU color.

I have to admit, I did not know. But there it is, on the official OSU logo page. A list of all the official Cowboy colors: OSU orange, OSU light orange, OSU silver and black. The silver appears to be used as a very thin border on a couple of OSU logos. I can’t find it anywhere else.

I’m not buying that gray and silver are the same. If they’re the same, why not call the color silver? Silver sounds cool and edgy. Gray sounds old. People who are trying to be complimentary call my hair silver. People who are cruel to the bone call it gray.

If silver and gray are the same, then why can you get both in the big Crayola box? Both have been Crayola staples since 1949 (it’s amazing the information on the Internet).

Oh well, gray, silver, who cares. My point is, I’m not crazy about adding colors to your primary scheme.

After years of wandering in the wilderness, OSU finally has settled on an orange. Bright, solid orange, as opposed to the burnt orange of about 30 years ago (what were they thinking?) and the light orange still has hung on as an official school color.

Tennessee orange is yakky and Texas orange is blah, but OSU orange is loud and proud.

The new uniforms don’t trample on tradition, because OSU’s uniform tradition is change. From black to orange. From white pants to orange pants. Different helmets seemingly every decade. So more change is no big deal.

I just wish gray wasn’t added to the color options. The Cowboys have plenty of colors as it is.

---

Texas football: Mack Brown to North Carolina?

The Mack Brown-back-to-North Carolina-as-athletic director theory has bubbled up over the years, but there always were two problems. 1) Mack had a dang good job at which he was very successful; and 2) the Tar Heels had an athletic director.

The problems are lessening. Mack has a dang good job (best in American college football, most say) but the success came to a crashing halt last season, and 2011 seems not much better. And Dick Baddour has announced he will step down as athletic director, in the same week in which Carolina fired football coach Butch Davis.

Talk about your timing.

Could/would/should Brown return to North Carolina? It’s a great question. Some have figured Brown eventually would become the Texas athletic director, but DeLoss Dodds just keeps going and going. No reason to think the Longhorn AD job will be open any time soon.

Now suddenly the AD job is open at Carolina, where Brown coached the Tar Heels for 10 seasons, 1988-97, including 10-win seasons his final two years. And the AD job is not only open, it’s open with the opportunity for the new AD to hire a new football coach. Baddour said he will stay on the job until a new AD is hired but that he wants the new AD to name the new coach.

Which means the upcoming football season could be interesting. If indeed Brown is tired of coaching football at Texas and is interested in returning to Chapel Hill, he would have to declare his intentions fairly quickly so that a new coach could be hired for the Tar Heels in December, to salvage recruiting. It’s possible Brown could coach the Longhorns and announce in late November he’s going to UNC.

I have no inside knowledge of Brown’s desire to go to Carolina or even his desire to be an administrator. But he would be an excellent fund-raiser and would bring groups of people together. That’s what he’s done at Texas, where the Longhorns, despite their 2010 troubles, restored luster to the program unseen since the Darrell Royal heydays.

Another season anything like 2010, and it’s easy to picture Mack ready to step aside. I don’t think he would ever be in any serious trouble. He’s done too much for the program. But another discouraging season, which led to massive staff overhaul, would make anyone question their stamina.

Carolina is in many ways an underachieving football program. The right leader could go in there and win in moderation and be hailed as a messiah. UNC has averaged 5.5 wins per year since Mack left.

Heck, I guess it’s not totally out of the question that Brown would consider going back as football coach. Sometimes building a program is funner than maintaining a program. But I doubt Brown would do that.

If he’s got any administrative aspirations, Carolina seems like a logical place. And the time seems now, in 2011.

---

Big 12 football: Coaches who fit at OU, OSU

It’s time to come clean. I came away from the Big 12 Football Media Days completely impressed by Iowa State coach Paul Rhoads. He’s got an incredibly tough job. He also might be just the man who can get the job done.

He’s sharp. Confident yet realistic. Passionate. I like him. I like him a lot.

“He’s a stud,” a long-time football man told me down in Dallas.

Rhoads grew up in Ankeny, Iowa, the son of a well-respected coach, and played defensive back at Missouri Western, though looking at him now, you’d swear Rhoads was a tight end or defensive end. Rhoads then coached at Utah State, Ohio State, Pitt and Auburn. He was defensive coordinator at the latter two spots. When Auburn fired Tommy Tuberville and hired ISU coach Gene Chizik, the Cyclones called on Rhoads. No word on whether Chizik and Rhoads just swapped houses.

Anyway, Rhoads has gone 12-13 in two seasons at Iowa State, after Chizik went 5-19 his two seasons in Ames. Rhoads is doing what Dan McCarney did at Iowa State; winning in the face of adversity. McCarney eventually didn’t win enough. Cyclone athletic director Jamie Pollard foolishly fired McCarney, so beware, Rhoads.

But Rhoads got me to thinking. If OU or OSU had to change football coaches and could only hire a current Big 12 head coach, who would be the most likely candidates? Who would be the best fit?

Here’s my list for both OU and OSU.

SOONERS

1. Gary Pinkel: The only downside to Pinkel is his age. At 59, he’s only a year younger than Howard Schnellenberger was when hired by OU for the 1995 season. But Pinkel seems two decades younger. Pinkel is a heck of a coach. He’s restored Missouri football to where it hasn’t been since the 1960s.

2. Paul Rhoads: Personally, I’d take Rhoads over Pinkel. But Rhoads is a tougher sell. Just ask the Auburn fans who were aghast when Auburn hired a losing-record coach in Chizik.

3. Tommy Tuberville: The guy can coach. I don’t know if everyone around the Big 12 has figured that out, but the guy can coach. Give him OU-type athletes, and he would produce OU-type results.

4. Art Briles: Hard to dislike Art Briles. Hard to dislike Art Briles’ coaching.

5. Mike Sherman: This guy is all football coach. I don’t know that he instills warm fuzzies. I don’t know that he would connect with Sooner Nation. But he seems popular enough in Aggieland.

6. Mike Gundy: You know, I don’t detect much hatred from OU fans toward Gundy. They wouldn’t like a Cowboy hired, but if they ever had to hire a Cowboy, Gundy’s the man.

7. Bill Snyder: Snyder’s too old now to get another job. But this is fun to think about — how would Snyder in his prime have fared at a powerhouse school? Oh well, maybe he wouldn’t have had the drive to perform the miracle he accomplished.

8. Mack Brown: Brown’s a fabulous coach, but this just wouldn’t work. You can’t let your fans call Mack a goober (incorrectly) for 13 years, then turn around and hand him the keys to the executive washroom.

9. Turner Gill: Those Nebraska quarterbacking days seem a long time ago.

COWBOYS

1. Paul Rhoads: He’s a slightly better fit in Stillwater than in Norman, if for no other reason than he knows what it’s like to be the little brother.

2. Tommy Tuberville: Speaking of little brothers, Tuberville is one of the Auburn coaches who have elevated the Tigers from that status in their rivalry with Alabama. Tuberville would do great at OSU.

3. Art Briles: It’s hard to overstate how popular Briles would be as the OSU coach. The Cowboy faithful would love the Southwestern twang. Probably love the results, too.

4. Gary Pinkel: You know what’s crazy? Pinkel has worked wonders at Mizzou, yet you could argue that during that time, his program’s been passed by OSU on the Big 12 food chain.

5. Mack Brown: It’s hard to imagine Mack working at a school that has to huff and puff to get up the hill. But he’s done it before, with success, at both North Carolina and Tulane.

6. Mike Sherman: Sherman’s a little gruff for Stillwater. OSU likes its coaches to have a little charm.

7. Turner Gill: OSU wants no part of Gill, but it wants no part of these other guys, either.

8. Bill Snyder: Together, the ages of Bill Snyder and Boone Pickens add up to 154.

9. Bob Stoops: What I said about OU fans

---

Power Lunch Chat Recap: Berry Tramel

---

OU football: Schedule not unexciting

I’ve received a couple of emails the last day or so from people comparing OU’s 2011 football schedule to Nebraska’s 2011 football schedule, complaining about how much more exciting of a slate the Huskers are playing.

And I agree. Nebraska’s schedule is more exciting. Because it’s new. Nebraska is playing a Big Ten schedule, with a bunch of new faces. Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State, Wisconsin. Heck yeah, that would be exciting. Just like it would have been more exciting if OU had joined another conference and was playing Oregon, Southern Cal, Arizona State and Stanford. Or Alabama, LSU, Arkansas and Tennessee.

But new can’t carry the day. Is Nebraska’s 2011 schedule all that much better than Oklahoma’s, other than the novelty factor?

Here’s what I did. I went through Nebraska’s schedule and found a partner off Oklahoma’s schedule. I tried to match programs in terms of prowess and marquee value. Didn’t always get an exact match, but I think I got close. Then at the end, you see who’s left over and determine which schedule contains more sizzle.

So here goes, with Nebraska’s opponents listed first:

Chattanooga=Ball State: The Moccasins are I-AA, but really, when you get a mediocre Mid-American Conference team, there’s no real difference.

Fresno State=Tulsa: Fresno State probably has a bigger name, but Tulsa’s had a better team in the last few years. And while Fresno State has a little exotic quality than TU, the in-state rivalry counters some weight. So this is a wash, too.

Wyoming=Kansas: The Cowboys stink. The Jayhawks stink. Dud games for both.

Washington=Kansas State: They even both wear purple. Both were grand in the ’90s, and if you argue that UW’s 1991 co-national title makes the Huskies grander, then you have to admit that KSU has been better in the 2000s.  This seems pretty close to me.

Wisconsin=Oklahoma State: I’ll give you that Wisconsin has been better longer than OSU. The Badgers have been to four Rose Bowls in the last 48 years. Which is no small thing. But does Wisconsin have more national appeal than OSU? Maybe, but I don’t know that for sure. Wisconsin has the edge but it’s not big.

Ohio State=Texas: Midwest Longhorns. Southwest Buckeyes. These programs are very similar. Virtually the same in prestige.

Minnesota=Iowa State: Even their uniforms look alike.

Michigan State=Missouri: I would argue Mizzou under Gary Pinkel is better. Michigan State hasn’t been ranked No. 1 since 1966. The Tigers were there in 2007. But it’s close. Call it even.

Northwestern=Baylor: The Wildcats’ Rose Bowl run in 1995 was a story for the ages. And Northwestern has been putting up a fight longer than Baylor’s current mini-revival under Art Briles. But the truth is, their sizzles are about the same.

Penn State=Florida State: Another intersectional twin, except the Seminoles no longer have their old man winner and are expected to be a lot better than the Nittanys this season. I’d call it square.

Iowa=Texas A&M: More twins. Both guaranteed to break your heart.

So that leaves Michigan and Texas Tech. Michigan is a bigger name. Heck, maybe even a better team in 2011, though that hasn’t been the case in quite awhile.

Either way, you’re telling me Nebraska’s schedule is so much better because Wisconsin and Michigan trump OSU and Tech? Maybe so.  But those Nebraska matchups are as exciting for their freshness as they are for their fight. Bedlam could be one of college football’s games of the year; two of the last three years, it has been just that. Hard to make the argument that Bedlam drags down the OU schedule.

Plus, remember the Big Ten schedule lightens up soon for Nebraska, when it plays Illinois and Indiana. Eventually, the Big Ten plans to go to a nine-game schedule, like the Big 12. If the Huskers keep a decent non-conference schedule — they’re scheduled to play UCLA, Miami and Tennessee the rest of the decade — then by all means Nebraska will have an exciting schedule.

But the idea that OU’s schedule is some kind of dud, well, that’s just silly. The only problem with OU’s schedule is familiarity. The only legitimate knock on the entertainment value of the Sooners’ foes is  are playing mostly teams we’ve seen a bunch.

I don’t see why everyone thinks Nebraska’s schedule is so much better, other than it’s new.

---

Big 12 football: Answering college football realignment questions

I love my readers. Even when we disagree. Most are sharp, even witty, and passionate. They ask great questions. The following email is a great example. Bryan emails every once in awhile, and he sent me an outstanding dispatch Wednesday about conference realignment. Bryan made nine points, either asking a question or making a point, all of which made me think. I responded to each and decided to share them with you.

“As an OU alum, donor and lifetime fan I have to say that I am incredibly disappointed in how this whole conference issue has been handled. I am a traditionalist and really not in favor of any playoff I have seen proposed. So clearly for me to want radical change to college football is saying a lot. But here are some issues that I just don’t understand about the Big 12 Conference.”

1. Needing Texas is overrated. I get they are a big school and I get that they have lots of money and TV allure. However, if Texas is so great for a conference, how is it possible that they have been a part of two failed conferences? The SWC failed and anytime you lose two prestigious schools and add none, that is a failed conference too. There are only two schools that have seen the light, and that is Arkansas and Nebraska. I challenge you to compare Nebraska’s schedule, Arkansas’ schedule with OU’s and tell me what fan base is ripped off.

“Need” Texas? OK, I’ll agree. Overrated. But it’s best for OU to stay together with Texas. And vice versa. I still think the best avenue for OU is to be in a conference with Texas. OU athletics in general and football in particular has prospered during the Big 12 era. Heck, so have Texas athletics. OU and UT are like Reese’s; two great tastes that go great together. Arkansas’ schedule might be good. But the Razorbacks last January played in the first BCS bowl since 1989. Don’t hold up Arkansas as an example of prospering without Texas.

2. Texas wants to act like an independent but have the benefits of a conference as well. See the Longhorn Network.

No kidding. Which is why Texas isn’t interested in independence.

3. OU is the real loser in all of this. Oklahoma is one of the greatest programs in the history of college football. They have a national following. Yet we are acting like we have to have Texas. My favorite Saturday every year is in the Cotton Bowl vs. Texas. I like Texas to be good so that it makes that game compelling. But I have my limits. Nebraskans are not sore losers. Nebraska is every bit the program if not better than Texas. But Nebraska got tired off the Texas arrogance and for some reason OU has decided we are not as powerful as Nebraska.

OU is not a loser at all. OU has been and remains a big winner. OU wanted its own network, too (heck, so did Nebraska a few years ago), and the only real difference now is all the money and power Texas has reaped from ESPN. There was talk that UT might get $3-5 million a year from its own network, while OU might get $2-3 million. All of a sudden, Texas gets $15 million a year. But the problem is, Texas always had more money than everybody else, so I don’t know what the big deal. The real issue here is ESPN power. Me and a lot of other people have talked about standing up to Texas, but maybe we’ve focused on the wrong thing. It’s time to stand up to ESPN. As for Nebraska being the same quality and caliber of program, sorry. That’s not so. First off, football-wise it’s not true. Nebraska’s football prowess has slipped, and there’s no reason to think it’s cyclical. The Huskers remain a very good program with lots of tradition, but to believe Nebraska is one of those divine-right programs is silly. The same could be thought of Minnesota or Georgia Tech in the 1960s. The Huskers have geographic drawbacks that make it difficult to win. Same with Syracuse and some others we could mention. Meanwhile, even in Texas’ down days, everyone knew the Longhorns would get back on the hooves just by getting close to hiring a solid coach. Which they did.

4. TV viewership is also overrated. If that is such a factor how is it that OU vs. Nebraska was a national game every year. If they played next year it would be a national game too. Fans want to see great programs and I don’t care if they are located in Lincoln, Norman or Green Bay.

TV viewership is underrated. Not overrated. Underrated. It drives the boat. OU-Nebraska is not a national game. It was when they were the powerbrokers of college football. But to say OU-Nebraska is still a national draw is like saying Dallas-San Francisco is an NFL mighty draw. Uh, no. Not anymore.

5. OU needs to act like a free agent and see what its options are. I will bet anything that the Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC would all love to have OU. If that is the case, why do we act like we need Texas so bad?

OU has acted like a free agent. It checked out the Pac-10 last year and decided to stick here. The Big Ten has never shown any real interest in Oklahoma. The Sooners want no part of the SEC, and while yes, part of that is the tougher environment, the bigger part of that also is the recruiting culture. I know it seems silly to say a program with the sordid NCAA history of the Sooners is trying to take the high road, but that’s exactly what OU has tried to do during the Joe Castiglione/Bob Stoops/David Boren era. And going to the SEC, where even its commissioner, Mike Slive, is apologizing for the lawless streets he’s trying to patrol, would be very frustrating for the Sooners. Meanwhile, the Pac-10 was a great option last year, when UT, A&M, OSU and Tech were headed West, too. But for OU to go off to the Pac-12 with maybe just one other school would be political and geographic folly. An East Division of the Pac-16 would be great for OU. The Sooners being one of only two schools in the Central Time Zone of a conference would be a disaster. And like I said, OU and Texas have performed great together. Conference alignment as it pertains to the Sooners is easy. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

6. Do you really think that Texas could handle OU and A&M heading to the SEC and trying to recruit against them. NO. Call their bluff saying they will never play us again. It is BS. Texas needs OU and A&M bad.

That’s been established. But OU and A&M need Texas, too, and trying to hurt Texas is a goofy way to think. Don’t do what’s worse for Texas. Do what’s best for Oklahoma. Sure, Texas would be hurt by OU and A&M in the SEC. Guess who else would be hurt? OU and A&M. Our prisons are full of men who thought this way.

7. So bottom line is that this conference as is is simply bad football. OU needs to make sure that they don’t look up one day and have a hard time filling seats because people have decided they are being ripped off watching the likes of Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and Baylor come to town every year. I will say this; I have been going to OU games for 33 years, am a season ticket holder and donor. The only thing keeping me writing checks is OU vs. Texas IN THE COTTON BOWL. If that ever moves and we are still in this conference I will not waste my money.

7. Interesting complaint. As I was reading the first part, I thought, there’s an easy way to improve OU’s home schedule. Play Texas at home. You want a good home schedule, bring the Longhorns to Norman. Then suddenly, you say no. So you want it both ways. You want to improve the home schedule, without moving OU-Texas. That’s asking Joe C. to cut the baby in half. Or maybe you want OU to join the SEC and still play Texas every year in the Cotton Bowl. Hope Stoops isn’t reading this. He might have a coronary just thinking about it. But the general premise is flawed. The Big 12 is bad football? Every league has weaklings. Kentucky is Iowa State. Vanderbilt is Kansas. Mississippi State is Baylor. South Carolina is Kansas State. Arkansas is Missouri. The difference between the SEC and the Big 12 is more teams in the elite level; the difference is not in the teams at the bottom.

8. Why is there no desire to go to the greatest conference in college football? It makes no sense. OU should look at its options. They could head to the SEC with A&M or the Big Ten with Mizzou. Or maybe even the Pac 12. Just look at it from a fan’s perspective. Can you imagine SEC schools or Big Ten schools coming to Norman. Now that is exciting. What is not exciting is Iowa State on Thanksgiving weekend. That is actually hilarious. I am less excited about the Pac-12 because we would be stuck in the old SWC with basically Arizona and Arizona State. Grant you it is better than what we have now. But it is still not great. I have no allegiance to Tech, Baylor or even A&M. But the administration needs to be put on the hot seat as to why they have no interest. Just a simple explanation would help. And don’t give me this academic BS. Vanderbilt does not seem to think the SEC hurts them.

I’ve covered this one pretty well, but go to the Pac-12, and it might not be Iowa State on Thanksgiving weekend. It might be Utah. Does that make you feel like turkey and dressing? Or Colorado, which replaced OU in one Thanksgiving tradition, maybe it could replace Nebraska this time. OU-Iowa State is a scheduling anomaly. It won’t be an annual thing. And if you want a big-time game on Thanksgiving, plus Bedlam in December, bring back the nitro pills for Stoops. Now, if what you’re really saying is you miss the championship game, I’m all in. I think the Big 12 eventually needs to get back to 12 teams, just for status purposes. BYU, Louisville, TCU, Arkansas, Notre Dame. Some can be had, some are pipe dreams. But a title game solves a lot of problems, including OU playing Iowa State on Thanksgiving weekend.

9. And yes I also know that for some reason OSU is a factor in OU’s decision making process. But here is a fact. OSU has no interest outside of this state. Other conferences do not want OSU. So why should OU lower their standards for OSU. We can still play them non conference just like Florida does with Florida State but we don’t have to lower our standards to make them happy. Other programs seem to figure out how to have non-conference rivalries. Georgia vs. Georgia Tech, Notre Dame vs. USC and Florida vs. Florida State.

In none of those examples were the teams together in a league but one pulled out, except Georgia-Georgia Tech. And the little brother left willingly, when Georgia Tech left the SEC in 1964 and probably has regretted it ever since. But a lot of OU people agree with you. None of them have to deal with the state legislature. You want to try to leave OSU behind, get ready for an appropriations battle that could cripple the university. All so OU could make some sort of macho stand against Texas? Save that for the Cotton Bowl. The other 364 days of the year, you have to think rationally.

---

Big 12 football: More conference realignment talk

Anytime I mis-use the word “ironic,” I hear from some pals who point out that I should have said “coincidental.” One thing about me, I’m coachable.

So here goes. It’s quite a coincidence that on the day I wrote a column mentioning Texas Gov. Rick Perry, and how his presidential aspirations could help keep his beloved Texas Aggies in the Big 12, The Oklahoman runs a political column from the Washington Post’s Michael Gerson that recalls Perry’s implied threat of secession.

Not from the Big 12. From the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

That’s what Perry warned in 2009, talking about states rights. Good lesson for me and maybe everybody, which is that just because a Texas Aggie becomes governor doesn’t mean he’s not capable of lifting one of those swords and telling people to get off the sacred grass of Kyle Field.

Anyway, after two days of Big 12 football talk in which displeasure with the Longhorn Network trumped what should have been a celebration of all the great quarterbacks and receivers and national title contenders, here a few other nuggets on realignment.

* I asked Texas Tech coach Tommy Tuberville what he had to say this year about the Big 12′s future, considering last summer he got his butt in a sling over expressing doubt about its long-term viability.

“I said a few things last year. And, of course, I believe that,” Tuberville said. “I wish we still had Nebraska and we still had Colorado. I think it was a very good conference. But it still is. We’ve got a chance to continue to build on what has been here for a long time. There’s a lot of good teams in this league.

“I don’t know what the future is, but I don’t think there’s any doubt we can sustain with 10 teams and we can make the best out of it and even become a stronger conference maybe than what it was.”

Then as he left the podium, Tuberville smiled and said, “That’s a political answer, right? I worked on that. Took me awhile.”

* Iowa State is in the most precarious position. You can fashion scenarios in which every school in the Big 12 has a soft landing spot in case the league fractures. Except Iowa State. The Cyclones might be homeless in terms of a major conference, which would be disastrous to the school.

Which is why I-State athletic director Jamie Pollard was being honest when asked about provisional plans should schools start defecting.

“I’m not spending any time worry about hypotheticals,” Pollard said. “We’re married. I’m married. I’m not going to be talking about who I want to be married to.”

Good advice for any marriage.

* The first public Big 12 football function without Nebraska and Colorado made everyone come to grips with the truth.

The Huskers will be missed. The Buffs, not so much. It was always tough to remember that Colorado was even in the conference; now it will be tough to remember that the Buffs are gone.

---

Big 12 football: Bob Stoops lauds Landry Jones’ leadership

Mack Brown talked on Monday about seeking leadership from his quarterback at Texas. Bob Stoops talked on Tuesday about how leadership has to come from performance.

During Big 12 media days, Stoops talked about the progression of Sooner quarterback Landry Jones, who made major strides last season, to now where he’s mentioned as a Heisman Trophy candidate.

“Just naturally, he had some really big games down the stretch,” Stoops said. “On the road at Oklahoma State, look at the Big 12 championship game against a really good defense (Nebraska’s), and then in the Fiesta Bowl (against Connecticut), he really played great. Major factor in us winning those games.

“Then you add the winter, how hard he works, everybody recognizes. Now the experience, the confidence, it’s natural as a guy matures. He’s become a really strong leader. He’s become more comfortable in it.”

Stoops said that comfort is a natural progression of the 2010 season.

“If he hasn’t played and earned that respect and performance and meeting challenges, it’s hard to be that guy,” Stoops said. Jones “has all that now. He’s a true, true leader on this team and a special one.”

---

Big 12 football: K-State’s Bill Snyder talks celebration

College football’s excessive celebration penalty has been relaxed, primarily courtesy of Kansas State and Adrian Hilburn. Hilburn was the unfortunate KSU receiver who momentarily saluted the crowd and was flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct after scoring a late touchdown in the Pinstripe Bowl. The penalty forced KSU to attempt a 2-point conversion from the 18-yard line, and the Wildcats lost to Syracuse 36-34.

During Big 12 media days Tuesday, KSU coach Bill Snyder was asked if he had any input on the relaxation of the rule.

“I had no impact on it that I’m aware of,” Snyder said. “There was an awful lot of media attention that was paid to it. That perhaps had some impact on it. It happened, and it is what it is, or was what it was.

“The important thing is, I don’t know how much did the rule change itself? The important thing is continuity, that there’s some consistency about how things are called. You have a chance to play within a conference. But when you get outside the conference, you play with officials from another conference, you’re not sure you have the same continuity.”

Snyder said the best way to make sure the penalty is not called is “make sure youngsters don’t do anything that would threaten the letter of the rule. That’s a matter of discipline. That’s hard. You would want young people to be passionate about the game, play with great spirit and emotion. Because it is that kind of game. Sometimes you just show your joy. And it’s strictly that. It’s not trying to demean anyone. It’s the joy of accomplishing something on the field. To be penalized is kind of a hard thing for young guys.”

---

Powered by Wordpress | WP Premium theme by WP Remix
Copyright 2007. Berry Tramel's Blog. All rights reserved

• Home
• RSS Feed
• Berry Tramel’s Website | NewsOK
• Contact Berry
• Berry on Facebook
• Berry’s Bio
• Sports | NewsOK