Hungering for the movie

(BEWARE: the following contains multiple spoilers to both The Hunger Games movie and book). 

Brace yourself for sacrilege. Channel your inner outrage. Prepare to pepper me with poisonous, pointed pricks of pain meant to wound my inner child.

Yes, it’s true: I think The Hunger Games movie is superior to the book.

I’ll now pause for a moment for everyone to re-locate their jaws and get the initial rush of hate-filled invective ready for me.

(Done yet? Now? Feel better? Breathe … BREATHE …)

Yes, I do believe it’s true: The movie surpasses the 2009 book written by Suzanne Collins. And, for those who know me well, this is FAR from a common stance for me to take. In fact, I can probably count on two hands the number of times I’ve preferred a movie over its literary counterpart.

Examples include:

1. The Last of the Mohicans — Seriously, if a person truly wants to punish themselves, try to sit down and make head or tails of James Fenimore Cooper’s nonsensical prose. While Michael Mann’s movie only resembled the plot of the book in passing, that’s a good thing since trying to figure out the plot of the book actually means deciphering what’s going on in Cooper’s obviously laudanum-induced dreamland of the colonial United States.
2. The Shining — This wasn’t a case of the book being bad – Stephen King’s tome on madness closing in on a snowbound family was excellent – it’s more a case of an absolutely classic movie adaptation being crafted by a wondrous filmmaker in Stanley Kubrick.
3. One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest —Again, not a bad book by Ken Kesey, but the movie starring a crazed Jack Nicholson overshadows it entirely.
4. American Psycho — Just an OK book – the movie, however, is a cult classic. The first-person narrative of the book took away from its impact: it’s hard to have a insane man be the only guide for a reader.
5. Children of Men — I love apocalyptic and dystopian fiction, but I found this novel by P.D. James to be, quite frankly, BORING. For the movie, they took the basics of the plot and added the quaint notion of INTERESTING THINGS HAPPENING.
6. No Country For Old Men — Put succinctly, Cormac McCarthy’s writing style is distracting to me. Buried in his weird style are GREAT stories, but I become annoyed wading through his narrative methods.  The movie laid the story out there in a much more digestible, and emotional, format.

These are just ones that come to mind, there obviously could be more of which I’m not thinking. However, this is a good starter list.

And now, we can throw The Hunger Games on there. I will say it definitely isn’t anything like the unreadable Last of the Mohicans. Instead, the film/movie comparison is closer to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest: a case of a good, solid read being crafted into a semi-classic movie.

For starters, there’s the problem of the clumsy first-person narrative in the book, which is also one of the things that also bothered me about the book version of American Psycho: I felt the literary-framing device of not informing the reader of anything more than the main character knows limited what could have been greater enjoyment for the audience.

For The Hunger Games’ film production, director Gary Ross* wisely eschewed this version. The end result was a win for the audience as we were able to keep track of what was going on away from Katniss’ immediate surroundings. We saw the gamemakers plotting. We saw the unrest in the other districts. We saw the concern by Gale, Prim and the others left back in District 12. We saw the machinations behind the scenes of the Games themselves by President Snow and Head Gamemaker Seneca Crane – who wasn’t even mentioned by name in the first novel.

(*This was only Ross’ third time in the director’s chair. His previous efforts were 1998’s underrated Pleasantville and 2003’s wonderful Seabiscuit. With Michael Bay polluting our cinemas on a yearly basis and even the up-and-down-and-down-and-down Clint Eastwood always emerging every few months to collect undeserved hosannas, can we please find some more things for Ross to direct?) 

However, the biggest thing missing in the book I enjoyed in the cinema was the pure emotion dripping from the screen during many of the biggest scenes of the story. I found this emotion to be lacking – if not missing entirely – in the book.

There are a number of examples of scenes I felt forced me into emotional involvement in the movie that seemed to be glossed over with a couple of paragraphs of the book. The most notable being the “launch room” scene with Katniss and Cinna minutes before she is to start the Games themselves.

In the movie scene, you finally see Katniss’ defense mechanism of surliness and standoffish attitude melt away and, for the first time, realize she’s just a teenaged girl possibly minutes away from death. Jennifer Lawrence’s performance here was magnificent – by barely saying a word, emoting mostly with panicked breathing and absolutely HAUNTED eyes, Lawrence dragged the viewer right into the launch room with her and made them feel the fear closing in on her.

When Cinna pulled Katniss close to calm her down, he was channeling what the entire audience wanted to do … and, in a way, was calming the audience down as well. As Katniss’ launch tube slowly moved to the surface and the arena of the Games, we again saw the scared girl in her eyes, in her entire BODY, and felt as if we were right there next to Cinna watching her ascend.

Meanwhile, in the book … well, let’s put it this way: I just wrote as much describing that scene as Collins penned in the book. While it’d be flippant to say it was glossed over, it did all take place within a few paragraphs on a single page.

This is the inherent problem with reading young adult literature: it’s targeted for young adults. Hence its name. Therefore, you end up with stories that don’t dwell on the details older, more experienced readers, tend to enjoy. I simply felt there were too many scenes fraught with emotional impact that didn’t jump out to grab me in the novel as they did on the screen where they were brought to life in a fuller, more complete, ADULT way.

I will admit there are things the book does better than the movie. There’s been plenty of sturm and drang about the absence of the mayor’s daughter and how Katniss originally came about possessing her signature mockingjay pin. There are also parts of the movie that, if you hadn’t read the book beforehand, would leave you scratching your head in trying to decipher a piece of dialogue.

And, for myself, the biggest disappointment in the movie adaptation was the way it portrayed the “romance” between Katniss and Peeta during the Games: the feeling of duplicitousness by Katniss of “playing it up” for the audience back at the Capitol was not as strong in the movie as in the book, leaving a moviegoer to think she was ACTUALLY falling madly in love with the baker’s son and was absolutely ready to commit “Berry”cide with him.

Still, even weighing those issues, I prefer the movie version to the book. Not by a wide margin and not enough to engage in what I know are heated arguments awaiting me, but enough to matter.

Emotional content means something. I regularly describe myself as being “emotionally involved” in a football or baseball game if I’ve been totally sucked into the goings on. This is opposed to my unemotionally-involved sportswriter façade I put on if I’m trying to only clinically view a game unobstructed by emotions. Sportswriting is work; it’s a job. Going to a movie or reading a book most certainly is not – I WANT my emotions tantalized during those events.

It’s something I felt the movie was superior in achieving compared to the book … which is why I enjoyed it more.

RPI, RBI … Oh My!

This weekend, it’s a matter of RPI versus RBIs for the Oklahoma baseball team.

It’s a real-life Sophie’s Choice between the two: on one hand, the Sooners will get the chance to up their batting averages, pad their RBI totals, lower their ERAs and gain a few easy wins on Friday through Sunday; on the other hand, victories on all three days still likely result in their RPI rank plummeting.

OK, it’s not really anything close to what Meryl Streep’s character faced in the 1982 movie. Given any true choice at all, the Sooners would much rather continue to bolster their RPI ranking by playing a fairly top-notch opponent this weekend – the possibility of hurting individual stats be damned.

Nevertheless, it’s the hand they’ve been dealt, unjust or not. The mighty Hornets of Alabama State stroll into L. Dale Mitchell Park in Norman this weekend carrying a 16-23 record and an RPI rating of 257 … out of 297 teams. All the work the Sooners have done to see their own RPI rating move up better than 50 spots in the last month – OU was rated at No. 53 on Thursday – will come to a screeching halt this weekend.

But hey, those statistics for “all games” should look shinier for the Sooners after Sunday!

It’s really nobody’s fault in Norman the Sooners have to take a break this weekend from conference to play to entertain the visitors from Montgomery, Ala. Given truth serum, there’s probably a good bet the OU baseball braintrust is not exactly pumped about this weekend’s games.

So, why then ARE the Hornets coming to town?

There’s multiple reasons. The very first shot from the Blame Thrower* can be aimed directly at Ames, Iowa. When the Iowa State athletic department dropped baseball as a varsity sport following the 2001 season, this left a weekend hole in the schedule for all Big 12 teams, which forced schools to schedule non-conference series in the middle of the usual conference season.

(*If anyone has seen the underrated 1999 movie “Mystery Men,” they should get the reference there.)

Of course, there were still an even-numbered 10 schools playing baseball in the Big 12 Conference at the time, so there really was NO need to schedule non-conference games in the middle of April and May. But let’s not bring logic or correct mathematics up when discussing the Big 12 Conference. After all, it’s still the Big 12 … with only 10 teams in it right now. And also 10 again next year, although a different 10.

I guess. Probably. Maybe? Barring the Mayan 2012 apocalypse, I guess. Or DeLoss Dodds upsetting someone further.

Anyway, this problem was exacerbated by Nebraska departing the conference this past summer, leaving us with only nine conference schools playing baseball. Which, of course, in the eyes of the Big 12’s magic schedule-making machine, means there’s now TWO weekends that need to be filled with non-conference opponents.

For one of those openings, the Sooners got a solid mid-major program in Samford to come to town. For the other … well, the pickings are slim in the middle of conference play, so they ended up with ‘Bama State.

But, give credit to the Sooners as they are approaching it the right way. With only the horrible Hornets looming on the weekend, OU head coach Sunny Golloway didn’t hesitate to use any and all weapons at his disposal for a tricky road contest against Oral Roberts on Tuesday. Right there in the 5th inning, erstwhile Sooner weekend ace Dillon Overton came trotting in from the bullpen in a tight situation and commenced to pitch the rest of the game.

The 71-pitch outing by Overton may preclude him from starting a game this weekend. But the Sooners can probably survive without the sophomore lefty’s services against Alabama State. In fact, if he doesn’t pitch, it sets things up perfectly for him to start the upcoming non-conference game at Oklahoma State on Tuesday, leaving normal mid-week starter Damien Magnifico to pitch on Wednesday against Dallas Baptist.

Both of those non-conference games are of far more consequence than this weekend’s auto-wins against ASU. Therefore, having an extremely weak opponent such as Alabama State come to town for a weekend gives Golloway and company a chance to juggle their rotation to better suit the team’s needs.

And right now, those needs are good RPI boosts … not individual RBI boosts.

No Contest – Baylor Bears Cap Perfect Season, Is There Enough Competition in the League?

The Baylor Lady Bears have captured their second national title in women’s college basketball after a stellar 40-0 campaign (a first in either men’s or women’s college ball) led by All-American Britney Griner and coach Kim Mulkey.

During their tournament run the closest team to give the Bears a run for their honey (oh cool, bear puns) was Stanford in the Final Four matchup where they only were able to win by 12 points. Before that it was Texas A&M in College Station that the Bears won by 7 points. Overall on the season only three teams were able to hang within single digits of the Bears (#4 UConn, Texas Tech and #14 A&M.)

Their dominance this year is unquestioned and can be likened to Geno Auriemma’s successes at Connecticut. In comparison, Auriemma’s Huskies went two full years without a loss and only one, yes one, single digit victory. (vs Stanford, 2010 National Championship, 53-47)

Their success has been lauded as a big “get” for women’s basketball in terms of exposure. More sets turn to see players like Britney Griner dominate the game in a way people haven’t seen before if only because of the relative new car smell women’s college ball has (NCAA didn’t sanction tournament until 1982.)

In the men’s game there have only been seven NCAA basketball champions with undefeated records with the last one coming in 1976 as Bobby Knight led his Indiana Hoosiers to the title.

In the 40 years of a women’s tournament there have been 10 undefeated teams. That’s a third of their champions. At this rate in the next 40 years there will be another 10 undefeated teams in women’s college basketball bringing the total to 20.

Now in no way is that taking away from what these women have accomplished. Their seasons were perfect, they were the best in the game for that one-year and there was no contest that they couldn’t take care of, but on the other hand… there just was no contest.

To capture a national title is the ultimate goal but to have a perfect season with it is the dream. Baylor and UConn’s success has been great for the women’s game, but neither team was even the first team in the women’s game to go undefeated, there are actually seven others (three of them before the NCAA tournament.)

Before the NCAAs for women there was the AIAW (Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women) Women’s Basketball Tournament starting in 1972 and going until 82 until the NCAA decided to hold their own tournament.

In the second year of the tournament the Immaculata Lady Macs ran the table and went 20-0 to cap the first undefeated season. Now granted this was the second year a women’s tournament was even held, so the newness of it may have caught some competitors off guard. Surely it would take some time before the next undefeated team came along.

There are a lot of factors in how the game was being played at this point. Title IX had just gone into effect the first year of the tournament so many programs that didn’t fund women’s athletics at the time were still in their stages of infancy as far as recruiting and building a women’s basketball team let alone a program. For a point of reference, the most successful women’s basketball program at Tennessee didn’t make the NCAA/AIAW tournament until 1977.

• 1973 Immaculata Might Macs (20-0)
• 1975 Delta State Lady Statesmen (28-0)
• 1981 Lousiana Tech Lady Techsters (34-0)
• 1986 Texas Longhorns (34-0)
• 1995 Connecticut Huskies (35-0)
• 1998 Tennessee Lady Vols (39-0)
• 2002 Connecticut Huskies (39-0)
• 2009 Connecticut Huskies (39-0)
• 2010 Connecticut Huskies (39-0)
• 2012 Baylor Lady Bears (40-0)

           There they are, the ten women’s teams able to run the table and bring home a title since the inception of the tournament 40 years ago.

            To be fair, the women’s game is still in its infancy in comparison to the men’s game and tournament. The fact that there are so many undefeated teams in such a short amount of time raises a flag, though. Is there enough competition in the league?

            The men’s game as had time to develop and reach a certain level of parity across the field and has been around for some time now (1938 was the first NIT Tournament, then the premiere college basketball tournament before the NCAA began sponsoring one.) The success stories are numerous and several in the past decade with George Mason, Butler and VCU all trying on Cinderella’s glass slipper.

            Ironically, the women’s game has seen very few Cinderellas and this year’s tournament being all chalk (all four No. 1 seeds made it to the Final Four) is a prime example. Not to say the sport is without it’s ups, downs and upsets but there’s just much more competition in the men’s game.

            To put it into terms, the great programs of the women’s game (UConn, Tennessee, Stanford, Oklahoma…) are the 1% and control most of the “wealth” (in this case, good players and to an extent facilities and support) while the other programs, the 99%, make the best out of what they have.

Norman, we have an RPI problem …

Break out the slide rules and the graphing calculators because the chances of OU’s baseball team making the NCAA tournament this season might be in the hands of the mathematical gurus among us.

It’s time to use the three-letter acronym that’s become a four-letter word for many sports fans: RPI. The Sooners currently sit at 108 in the latest RPI ranking – an unenviable position since it is MUCH too poor to even be CONSIDERED for an at-large berth in the NCAA tournament.

Of course, the problem isn’t where OU currently stands in the RPI … it’s where they end up after the last game around the country is played on May 27. Those will be the numbers placed in front of the NCAA tournament selection committee.

And, in all honesty, things look a little dim for the boys from Norman.

Besides the problem of three digits having to be used to describe their current ranking, the prospects for raising that ranking are nebulous at best. The usually-tough Big 12 Conference is having a serious down year with just four teams in the top 100 of the RPI at this point, and only three of those four are hanging in the top 50.

Of those four teams, OU has already played series against two. And one came against a team in Texas Tech that will be hard-pressed to keep its ranking in the top 100 by the time the season ends since the Red Raiders are currently in last place in the Big 12 standings.

Meanwhile, you have one team sitting at 106 (Missouri), another at 122 (Kansas State), another at 174 (Oklahoma State) and yet another hanging out in a low-rent district at 184 (Kansas).

OU has yet to play any of those teams. That’s 13 games* upcoming against schools with RPIs in triple digits.

(*OU plays a non-conference game at Oklahoma State along with the regular three-game conference series.)

But that’s just in conference play. Let’s not forget OU has another game remaining against Oral Roberts (111 in the RPI), as well as a who-the-hell-scheduled-this-three-game series with Alabama State, which currently holds a lofty RPI ranking of 231.

That’s out of 297 teams, by the way.

So with 30 games remaining in the regular season, more than half (17) will be against squads with current triple-digit RPI rankings.

What about those other 13 games? Shouldn’t that be OU’s chance to shoot straight up in the rankings?

Yes and no. More than half of those games are comprised of series with Texas A&M, Baylor and a one-game contest with Arkansas. All three of those teams currently rank in the top 15 of the RPI, so the opportunity is certainly there as a few wins against those schools would see the Sooners shoot straight up the RPI charts.

But how realistic is even a middling 3-4 record in those seven games? The Sooners best win of the season, according to the RPI, was a victory at No. 25 Pepperdine (in a three-game series OU ultimately lost). Otherwise, OU is 1-6 against teams in the top 25 of the RPI. So, can we really expect the Sooners to come close to .500 against the Aggies, Bears and Razorbacks judging from past results?

It seems the Sooners best chance to really have a positive effect on their RPI ranking lies in those other six games against top 100 competition: a three-game set with Samford (74), two games with TCU (49) and a single game against Dallas Baptist (75).

Those teams appear to be in OU’s wheelhouse as a 5-1 record against them would seem to be very doable.

However, it might need to be more than simply “doable” and, instead, fall into the “must-do” category considering the contrasting polarity of the other teams on the Sooners schedule in regards to the RPI.

So what does the final number need to be next to the Sooners name once the season ends? That’s impossible to predict exactly, but finishing in the 50s would seem to be a necessity. The at-large NCAA tournament team with the worst RPI last season was St. John’s with a 53 ranking. Conversely, and just for reference, the last time the Sooners missed out on the NCAA tourney – 2007 – OU had an extremely respectable RPI of 25.

There are very few studies done on RPI rating and the resulting tournament possibilities for college baseball teams, but studies of college basketball do shed a little insight: there’s only been one team in at least the last 13 years to make the NCAA basketball tournament with an RPI in the 70s or worse. And, it should be noted, there are four fewer teams in the NCAA baseball tournament than in the NCAA basketball tournament.

However, before we hand over kit-and-kaboodle to the pocket-protector set in figuring out who should be in the postseason, there is one giant caveat: conference finish. There have been no fewer than four teams in the NCAA tournament from the Big 12 since the conference’s inception in 1996. Therefore, it’d be bucking serious history if the Sooners finished fourth, but were left out of the postseason picture.

Again, however, there is one fewer baseball team in the Big 12 this season, so we could be comparing apples to oranges in that regard.

Which brings us right back around to the RPI: what exactly will happen to the Sooners chances when mathematics meets sports on tournament selection day May 28? Stay tuned.

Making a Mountain out of the BCS Poll

The “Plus One” model is nothing new to the college football fan; it’s something that people have been clamoring for since near the inception of the controversial BCS Poll.

 

The renewed interest stems mainly from the fact that the most dominant conference in college football was able to get two teams into the BCS National Championship game leaving hopefuls Oklahoma State and Stanford competing for third place out in Tempe in the Fiesta Bowl.

 

The ten other conference commissioners (and Notre Dame’s AD) of the college football conferences all of a sudden are very much in favor of a playoff… or at least the fabled Plus One model. The SEC presidents were actually some of the first to propose a playoff system.

 

So now everyone seems to be on board with moving forward.

 

Wait.

 

Only concerned matching #1 vs #2? Conference champs only? Home sites for the first round for the top seeds? Get rid of the BCS system as we know it today?

 

Still got some work to do it seems like. Of course the bowl executives are quivering because the millions of dollars their bowls make on being in the BCS rotation is about to be drastically changed and no longer guaranteed.

 

In reality… it’s not that hard of a problem to address.

 

So you have 12 Angry Men sitting around debating how to handle it.

 

Notre Dame’s AD is going to seek out ways to maintain the Fighting Irish’s independence so they can continue to reap the benefits of their deal with NBC Sports Network.

 

The smaller conferences (Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt) don’t want to be left out this time and with good reason as the Mountain West and WAC have demonstrated the ability to not only get teams into the games, but win them as well.

 

The rest of the conferences have their own dog in the fight (thankfully Mike Vick isn’t a conference commissioner.) The Big 10 and PAC 12 (to a lesser extent it seems) wants to continue maintaining the tradition of the Rose Bowl and sending their champs to play there.

 

The Big 12 hasn’t had the issue of fielding someone able to compete for a national title and will most likely go with what the SEC wants. Why not? The two conferences have the most title game appearances and the most titles of any of the others. The SEC’s biggest dog in the fight is whether or not the Plus One model is for “Conference Champions only” as some schools have suggested. This, of course, would have barred Alabama from playing in their rematch against LSU (also Nebraska and Oklahoma from playing in the title game in the past, too.)

 

The ACC and the Big East, although power basketball conferences, are a little more timid this time around. Multiple times has a team many found not worth of a BCS game snuck into the system by virtue of being a conference champion. While still considered power conferences, if the BCS does decide to disband matching up the other BCS Bowls the two conferences will have to find a new strategy to stay relevant in an increasingly southern-dominated league.

 

Many of the conference commissioners feel that the BCS is too large in that it’s trying to do too much by pairing the other teams it ranks into others bowls as well. The idea is to focus primarily on determining who is #1 and #2. This idea doesn’t necessarily work with the Plus One model. Who’s going to decide what teams are #3 and #4?

 

The term “selection committee” has been tossed around a lot with the restructuring talk. The idea is much similar to how the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee works, a bunch of white old guys sit around sipping scotch and smoking Newports decide who’s going to play for it all. The difference is that they don’t have 68 teams to get it right. Instead, they only have four bullets in the gun and better have good aim or there’s going to be some pissed off fans.

 

What’s baffling is despite all of this talk about changes to the system to make it better is that everyone wants the Plus One in some shape or form. However, in the process it would completely toss the BCS Poll itself in favor of the selection committee.

 

This seems a little bit backwards.

 

One of the biggest gripes was that schools were left out of the title game (Miami in 1999, Auburn in 2004 and Oklahoma St/Stanford in 2011.) So apparently the idea is to take a system away that is at least somewhat accountable (though highly debatable) to going to a selection committee that doesn’t have to give rhyme or reason as to their selection?

 

Kansas St and Boise St felt this kind of prejudice because of their smaller fan bases and instead Michigan and Virginia Tech got the nod.  Michigan got in after not even making their conference championship game (Kansas St would have played for theirs) and Virginia Tech (then #5) lost twice to the eventual conference champion that was ranked #20 at the time by three scores.

 

So do we want more of the smaller fan bases and schools getting the short end for the sake bottom line? Or perhaps a system that’s already place…

 

In reality… the solution is simple: keep the BCS Poll.

 

Why? In the instances of teams saying they deserved a shot and didn’t receive it here’s how the playoffs would look with a Plus One model.

 

1999:

#1 Oklahoma vs #4 Washington (Norman, OK)

#2 Florida State vs #3 Miami (Tallahassee, FL)

 

2004:

#1 USC vs  #4 Texas (Los Angeles, CA)

#2 Oklahoma vs #3 Auburn (Norman, OK)

 

2011:

#1 LSU vs #4 Stanford (Baton Rouge, LA)

#2 Alabama vs #3 Oklahoma St (Tuscaloosa, AL)

(Use this Plus One model for any of the other years that the BCS has been around and you get some really fun and interesting matchups on home campuses.)

 

Hopefully why this is a good idea is apparent… there’s no more controversy anymore. All four teams (even though the first two instances were between 1-3) get an opportunity to make it to (insert title game location here.)

 

Rarely, if ever, the debate has gone past the three or fours teams. Perhaps the next big controversy will be between #4 and #5. In this case, it is flawed, but only in that way.

 

This could also preserve the BCS Bowls at that aren’t the Rose Bowl in helping determine matchups and can even still have five BCS games (add the Cotton Bowl already) and from there the bowls get to draft the teams that they want. Less exciting matchups because all eyes will be on the tournament, but isn’t that how the BCS games were that weren’t the title game were already?

 

Who remembers who was ranked outside of the top two after a year generally anyway? With this format it make the poll more relevant and makes the regular season just as (if not more) exciting.

 

If the BCS had initially been some kind of playoff model or had entertained the idea earlier, less people would have likely said that the BCS is a “complete joke.”

 

Sure, it hasn’t been the perfect system for the current model. Spreading the love for great seasons across five bowls games is a tough task and really just adds fire to the debate. The commissioners (and Notre Dame’s AD) don’t need to try and reinvent the wheel, they just need to realize that you can’t put a unicycle wheel on a car and expect it to function to it’s potential.

Nine mad men

An oft-used (some would say overused) quote goes along the lines of “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.”

Whether that quote was uttered by Albert Einstein (as is popularly and commonly attributed) or Benjamin Franklin (likely more accurate), the underlying meaning holds true: only a madman would constantly bang his head repeatedly against a brick wall expecting it to miraculously quit hurting.

With that in mind, maybe the University of Oklahoma baseball team is a collective group of madmen.

The Sooners once again gave themselves a headache last weekend by continually cracking their skulls against the brick and mortar that is the Texas hardball team. It was the 14^th consecutive dropped series to the Longhorns, which includes losses in 11 of the past 12 games.

Anyone up for some Thorazine?

To be fair to the Sooners, it’s not as if they have a choice in the matter: as a member of the same conference as the Longhorns, a higher power has deemed they are forced to play the hated ‘Horns from Austin each season. So maybe it’s not a case of being insane or unattached to their senses.

It’s probably more just a case of being mentally owned by Texas. As the losses build, so does the mental edge for Texas. As one OU fan said in disgust during the weekend, “I wonder if (Texas head coach) Augie Garrido just texts (OU head coach) Sunny Golloway a picture of his junk right before the series starts to taunt him?”

While it’s doubtful the Longhorn leader partakes in such exploits, the point is well taken: Garrido and his Texas Nine are playing hopscotch in the cerebrums of anyone wearing the crimson and cream. It’s evident in the new and inventive way the Sooners manage to lose to Garrido’s group:

• In Friday’s game, the Sooners scored four times in the first inning to jump all over Texas. They commenced to not score a run over the next seven innings, eventually falling behind.
• Again on Friday, after stunningly tying the game in the bottom of the ninth with a solo homer by outfielder Cody Reine, the Sooners saw a chance to win slip through their fingers in the 11^th when pinch-hitter Matt Oberste grounded into a double play with one out and the bases loaded.
• On Saturday, OU managed to strand eight runners in the first three innings, managing only one run during what was a barrage of baserunners.
• On Sunday, starting pitcher Steven Okert couldn’t make it through the second inning before being pulled after allowing seven of the 10 batters he faced to reach safely.

However, the Burnt Orange have since left town after laying waste to Norman and the question becomes “what now?” for the Sooners. Getting swept by the Longhorns is, in and of itself, not a big deal for OU – after all, it’s become as seasonal an event as Groundhog’s Day or green beer at O’Connell’s on St. Patrick’s Day.

The difference this season is the weakened stature carried before even being pummeled by Texas. For example, in 2009, ’10 and ’11, before the yearly Bashing By Bevo, the Sooners were comfortably among the top 32 teams in the country. While heart-rending, the series losses to the Longhorns were FAR from fatal to the long-term success of the season. In fact, the Sooners went on to be a national seed in ’09, a regional top seed (and eventual College World Series participant) in ’10 and a respectable No.2 seed at the nearby Fort Worth Regional last year.

This year, however, paints a far bleaker picture. The Sooners came into the series after two stunning losses at Oregon State and at Dallas Baptist. The Oregon State loss came after they led 7-0 in the game. The DBU defeat was after staking themselves to a three-run lead in the ninth inning.

Following the Texas series, OU stood at 139 in the RPI standings – a tenuous position to be sure with the unlikelihood any team outside of the top 50-75 will be considered for an at-large berth in the NCAA Tournament.

Can the Sooners rally, right the ship and make the postseason? A doubleheader sweep of Air Force on Wednesday provided no real clues as the Falcons were extremely poor competition.*

(*Any doubts on the comparative weakness of Air Force baseball and most baseball in the Rocky Mountain states were settled in 1996 when the 1995 WAC Player of the Year, Lance Massey, transferred from the Academy to Oklahoma. While with the Sooners, he was only little more than a part-time player and that was on the first OU team since 1993 to miss the NCAA Tournament.)

A much more suitable test lies this weekend on the South Plains of Texas against the Red Raiders. While the Red Raiders are far from world-beaters, Lubbock isn’t the most hospitable of places for visiting baseball teams. It could be particularly more so this season with the opening of Tech’s new baseball facility.

However, the Red Raiders ARE a Big 12 opponent, and a Big 12 opponent the Sooners will probably be vying against for what may end up being only one conference at-large NCAA Tournament bid outside of the power trio of Texas A&M, Texas and Baylor. A series loss to Tech would immediately put OU behind the eight ball for a postseason berth.

After Tech follows a home game against perennial NCAA Tournament team – and the same team that eliminated the Sooners in last year’s Tournament – Oral Roberts and then a three-game home set against Kansas State. The Wildcats are another team of Texas Tech’s ilk that – while not extremely powerful – could be competition for a NCAA Tournament berth.

So, it appears once again the series loss to Texas isn’t the end of the world for the Sooners’ baseball team. However, this one season, it might be the BEGINNING of the end of the world.

And, although OU’s baseball definitely could be classified as madmen by the aforementioned quote, this apocalyptic warning isn’t being thrown about by anyone insane.

From New Orleans to Tempe

I sit here on New Year’s Eve sipping a whiskey and coke before heading out with friends. Should be a good time, but something doesn’t feel quite right.

It’s not January and my beloved Sooners have already played their bowl game. I realize how spoiled that sounds.

For the 33rd time is history, OU has recorded 10+ wins in a season which is an NCAA record. In comparison, OSU has only 2 in school history.

Now I’m not trying to rag on OSU, I was humbled by the loss and realize they probably deserved it more. Obviously they did, they just wanted it more.

It’s supposed to be the arch-rival’s job to knock their nemesis off the throne when they’re about to make school history, especially in the so called “Bedlam Series.” OSU, of course, knocked OU out of potential title appearances the past decade and OU had recently kept OSU out of the BCS bowls twice. Here was the Sooners’ chance to avenge those losses and retain their Big 12 dominance. Not so much.

Before this year I never considered the Bedlam Series to even be a rivalry. Again, a very spoiled attitude. After this year I have to concede that it’s becoming somewhat of a rivalry at least in recent years, the ridiculous lopsided series record be damned.

My dad always told me, “It’s hard to be humble when you’re a Sooner.”Of course he’s right. As a fan, it’s something to be proud of to be the best program in NCAA history in the modern era.

Hell, even Kirk Ferentz said no one did it better than Stoops.

While I can concede that I can be a bit of a homer… oh hell, who am I kidding? I’m in the state of a Chicago Cubs fan, “There’s always next year.”

My friend Kurt used my own mantra against me last night as I was brooding over what I felt was a sloppy win and ending a disappointing season.

“It’s all about The Climb, Roughface.”

He got me.

I can’t say I’m thrilled about the end of the season, but I’m happy that we’ve added another 10 win season and are keeping our bowl streak going. (Granted, UConn and Iowa aren’t really white whales.)

This season tested a lot of patience of myself when I watched my team.

As a fifth-year senior, I’ve never seen the Sooners lose at home and I’ve been to a majority of the games during the streak. I also got to see it end from the press box. Bittersweet. The announcers and producer respected our professionalism while watching it.

I let loose as soon as I got out of the stadium.

But I couldn’t be upset. Hell, I said we probably wouldn’t even end up in the title game on Twitter. My reason being was for the fact that our defense gives up huge chunks of yards at a time, rarely really making a team “drive” on us and instead just taking chunks of yards at a time.

Exactly what Texas Tech did.

I think something else was wrong with that game though, not just the sloppy defensive play.

For those who don’t know, I’m a heckler. I’m a big fan. I love being part of the atmosphere, the tradition and pageantry. That’s what makes college sports fun to me and why I can get more fun out of them than professional sports. I can say I’m a Sooner when I graduate. In all likelihood, I’ll probably never be able to say, “I’m an Oklahoma City Thunder.”

So there was the 2 1/2 hour delay. I get that not everyone is going to stay that long to see the Sooners, presumably, whip up on the Red Raiders.

The students didn’t surprise me. They all turned tail and ran beside a few brave souls.

To be honest, I can’t really say I was probably going to stay much longer either if only because of the stadium’s no re-entry policy… couldn’t go get my drink on or anything.

At the Baylor game I became pretty hot towards the crowd. I probably didn’t handle it the way I should’ve, but hell I was mad.

Our team was trailing on the road against Baylor and no one really gave a damn. No one was trying to get the team excited. No one was pumped.

I tried to be the spark and got some people going and cheering a little bit. Hey, we started winning.

Too little too late, though. While I agree with Stoops’ decision to call that timeout, it was ultimately what gave RG III and the Bears the winning points ultimately.

There we were, out of the title race. I was humbled pretty easily at that moment.

Had to tip my hat to Baylor, they’d never beaten us and I was pretty sure they were going to have their first Heisman winner

See ya, New Orleans and a rematch with LSU.

Oh well, we could still end up in a BCS bowl… just beat OSU.

This is when I thought the whole season about being for Austin Box would maybe light a fire under the players.

Not so much. They played some of the most uninspired defense I’ve ever seen, I think Austin would be pretty bummed.

Where, oh where would we end up? San Antonio? Dallas?

Tempe of all damn places… down the road and a few days before “little brother” got their first shot at a big boy bowl game.

I was expecting a loss honestly. I wasn’t sure if the team would show up.

They did eventually. Can’t say I’m a huge fan of the Blake Bell package, can’t say I understand how it’s so hard to defend either… but if it works, it works.

With all the defections and transfers, the Sooners aren’t necessarily going to be able to run into the title race next year.

I’m disappointed with the lack of heart and hustle the team showed. Certain players would retweet every article they could find about themselves.

Even Tress Way admitted the Sooners weren’t all that humble with how they handled the year and their lofty expectations.

This season in a lot of ways was a pretty big disappointment. The second year in a row that the Sooners had a legitimate chance at capturing a title and they let it slip away.

It’s a good sign that Stoops is cleaning house with some of the dead weight players. Hopefully he can do the same with coaches.

It’s hard to be humble when you’re a Sooner.