Yeah, that was a solid game last night.
OU’s athletic department brought in 175 million to OSU’s 88 million last year. OU’s is not subsidized in part by student fees in part where OSU’s are. This is a substantial difference in resources that T Boone did not close.
OU’s history as a consensus top 5 all time program is a soft resource that we cannot compete with either.
From the little I’ve read on OU finances, they been operating in the red for a while under Boren and the new president has been dealing with the clean up. They have been raising student cost like us regularly since I’ve been in school too, I get upset every time I hear on the news about a tuition hike
That’s true on the academic side, not on the athletic side. OU athletics is a separate entity.
1 Like
That of course makes perfect sense, consider the ratio of fans to alumni at OU and you quickly realize that the University basically existed for 2 reasons: 1) The NCAA requires it to have a football program and 2) Boren’s buddies who lost reelection needed jobs
Unfortunately (for them) someone who didn’t graduate from the OU Business School saw the numbers and realized that money in vs. money out was scary bad and the OKC gravy train was not long for this world. Unfortunately (for the tax payers) the Boren buddies have one thing they are good at and that’s ginning up outrage out of nothing…thus they ran the guy trying to right the ship out on a rail.
I really really hated to see that… Really made me feel bad for them.
2 Likes
They’re still 70 some odd spaces ahead of us in the academic rankings… Which I know are biased, but it still matters.
And most of that is because those same elected officials have significant say over the charter of Oklahoma State. Acceptance rate is 80%, mostly for in state kids that aren’t ready for the academic requirements of a major University, so that leads to a 26% graduation rate. If the state would change the charter, allow OSU to raise admission standards, and strengthen the relationship with NOC to make borderline kids do their first two years there, it would see a decrease in the acceptance rate, an increase in graduation rate, and allow OSU to climb academic rankings the honest way… But alas, the elected officials don’t really give a darn about education and especially don’t believe in subsidized education, so we are stuck… But at least OU gets to retain their Idiocracy.
1 Like
Agreed.
My wife and I intend to enforce this kind of policy in our own home. Unless one of our kids just shows uncommon maturity, academic performance, and also get a scholarship they will be spending their first two years of college at TCC unless they decide to persue a trade school like OSU-IT. There are multiple reasons for this:
-
As Tulsa residents, TCC has tuition covered and the last thing we want is to have us or our kids saddled with debt while they are testing waters to determine if their chosen major is a good fit/what they want to do.
-
The kids can continue to stay at home. Two of our children have special needs which makes this doubly important but both my wife and I learned the very hard way that sudden freedom in today’s environment can lead to really huge problems that can wreck your life if you’re not really lucky (we both got very lucky).
-
TCC is very flexible with its hours/class times and I want my kids to get jobs and work while in school.
I really wish OSU could raise their standards of acceptance, increase ties with NEO, and expand their excellent program at OSU-IT (I hire more engineers from there than any other school… They come out 5 times better prepared for work than the main campus graduates… They also are in a lot less debt) but OKC will never support that since it might reflect poorly on OU.
1 Like
I said “IF”. They didn’t lose. In fact, I’m ecstatic that, for once, our defense carried the team. That has been sorely lacking for the last decade.
Good lord, is reading comprehension just not something that is taught extensively, anymore? Having grown up in Oklahoma, I know the education system is laughable…but my god man.
How are red zone issues Spencer’s fault? If the coaches call bad plays…that’s on them.
Honest question, how do you think the academic rankings are biased? Give me specific evidence.
The QB competition was because Sanders had turnover issues… In the spring game we saw it when he threw a pick in the red zone. Theory is that because Sanders struggles in the red zone in practice, so they call conservative plays in order to avoid turnovers in the red zone… Which is crucial.
Eventually that is going to have to change. Chicken - egg situation. Does Sanders need to get better and show it in practice? Do the coaches just need to take the risk? Depends on your football philosophy.
There are mountains of evidence out there that the USNWR national university rankings are heavily biased towards certain metrics, and those metrics can be manipulated without much ramification or punishment.
Example 1 - Northeastern University. They were ranked about where Oklahoma State was ranked 10 years ago. Mid tier commuter school in Boston with a quirky externship program. They started tinkering with their acceptance rates, job programs, and ramped up their giving programs (mostly through scholarships) that saw them shoot up the rankings to put them on par with Boston’s other universities, BC and BU, and their enrollment numbers and application numbers have risen significantly with the rise in the rankings.
Example 2 - Oklahoma. They were unranked last year because Boren had been sending false data, specifically around alumni giving, for 20 years. OU climbed into the top 100 at one point. They reentered at 139 this year.
1 Like
Has anyone ever sat down for 1 second and flirted with the idea that maybe the play calling HAS to be the way it is because Sanders ability or lack thereof to make smart/accurate passing decisions is limited? Trust me, I basically am driving the Sanders fan bus and have been forever. But I think its time we consider that this could be the case and figure out how we go forward from there.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t call college rankings biased, but I tend to think they’re fundamentally flawed. You’re using fairly simple metrics to rank complex institutions that serve multiple constituencies and purposes. A few issues I have:
- Too many ranking lists
- Much more input vs output driven. OU climbed the rankings, in part, on the back of their National Merit students. If you aren’t familiar with how national merit students are selected, I highly encourage you to read up on it. Spoiler alert: one test during your sophomore year.
- Looking at public schools, rankings will tend to be kind to state schools where state funding actually exists. Many variables that make up USNWR involve institutional spending. OSU (academics and athletics) tend to spend very conservatively knowing how limited resources are because of what the legislature thinks of higher education.
It’s just not a complete picture.
2 Likes
There’s not a lot of difference between admission standards. I thought it was fairly easy to get into both when I applied.
Coaches need to take the risk, period. He has to get the experience.
1 Like
I’ll read that when I have a chance.
I, personally, don’t care about rankings. You can get a good education at OSU…OU…basically anywhere where the professors were trained at other universities.
Nope.
You out think yourself. You talk gibberish. You are living in a world that you created.
What about Tech?