It is Brent Venables.
It is also Ben Arbuckle.
It is also John Mateer.

Not long ago, it was Venables, Seth Littrell and Jackson Arnold.

Stop me if you’re detecting a pattern.

There’s really no other way to look at following 11th-ranked Oklahoma’s 17-10 loss at Michigan’s Big House on Saturday.

Again, the Sooners did nothing in the ground game. Again, Mateer threw the ball poorly, barely completing 50 percent of his passes.

As for the aforementioned trio, all three were so utterly lost on OU’s final possession of the first half, even had the Sooners won the game, even had they played well otherwise, that one failure alone would have been enough to ask if they even know what they’re trying to do.

“Really disappointed in how things shaped up,” Venables said. “Lost a turnover margin, didn’t tackle great in the first half, love to get a call back on the long touchdown run [Michigan quarterback Bryce] Underwood had. They got us in a bad call, and you know we lost the turnover margin two nothing.

“Seemed like we were penned up inside our own 5-yard line the whole day … Thought our guys came out in the second half and really got into a really good rhythm. John [Mateer], I think, hit his first nine passes in the second half.”

Now, in the second paragraph of that long quote, you might have noticed I chopped a few words. That’s what the ellipsis, the three dots, is for.

So, if you’re scoring at home, after his offense scored 10 points, gained fewer than 300 yards from scrimmage, averaged just 3.4 yards per carry and completed 17 of 33 passes for less than 200 yards, the Sooner head coach talked for a long time about any number of things — turnover margin, tackling, a call he made from the sideline, special teams, turnover margin again — before ever mentioning his offense and when he finally did it was complimentary on a day it sucked.

What game is he watching?

“I thought John did some really good things with both his arms and legs, and did a good job managing the game,” Venables later added.

Good grief.

“What did I think of John’s play,” Arbuckle said, repeating the question. “I thought maybe a little bit shaky early. Really came out and responded [in] the second half. I think he completed the first nine or 10 of his passes.

“And then there late in the game, I mean, just some things where he had to hit some chunk balls, try and move the ball down the field, and I think two or three of them kind of sailed on him a little bit.”

No points in the first half, but maybe a little bit shaky? Two or three of them kind of sailed on him?

Really?

Arbuckle called the first half like he had no confidence in Mateer. He called the last drive of the first half like he had even less. And he answered questions about him like he had no confidence he could handle the truth.

“I missed a lot of throws that I normally don’t miss,” Mateer said.

He certainly missed a lot of throws he needed to make, and made nearly none when it really, really mattered.

It’s true, Mateer completed five straight on OU’s first drive of the second half to take the Sooners 90 yards in eight plays, Mackenzie Alleyne grabbing a 22-yard score that brought OU within 10-7.

It’s also true he completed his next four tosses, extending into the fourth quarter, leading to a 34-yard field goal from Tate Sandell that tied the game with 11:51 remaining.

The rest was brutal.

Over the Sooners’ final three drives, Mateer completed 1 of 8 for three yards, seemingly every miss a bad throw, and an interception that set the Wolverines up at OU’s 6-yard line, two plays after which they scored what would stand up as the game-winning touchdown.

Of course, it wasn’t just Mateer.

Some combination of Arbuckle and Venables conspired to embarrass the whole program at the end of the first half.

OU got the ball, down 10-0 with 2:27 to do something about a horrendous offensive first half.

Let me tell you about it.

Mateer completed three of four passes for 7, 6 and 3 yards.

It’s a two-minute offense, so why not take a shot down the field? Unless, oh, yeah, the quarterback can’t complete balls down the field.

But he worked with Sam Bradford in the offseason, received counsel from Terry Bradshaw and turned heads at the Manning Passing Academy?

Maybe, but ball and frightened play-calling don’t lie.

Still, OU found itself facing second-and-7 at the Michigan 45 with two timeouts still in its pocket. From there, Mateer first threw incomplete to Xavier Robinson behind the line of scrimmage.

Then, wait, this can’t be right … a quarterback draw … for two yards … forcing a punt … and they kept both their timeouts?

Arbuckle can’t call that play.
Venables can’t let it be called.
Mateer might want to get in the way of it, too.

“I don’t know what they’re doing here,” said Joel Klatt, speaking for a college football nation as he provided analysis alongside play-by-play man Gus Johnson.

Now, everything should be on the table.

From making Kevin Wilson your new play-caller, perhaps your new offensive coordinator; from giving up on Mateer as a frequent passer and making him a run-first quarterback; from rolling out another quarterback altogether.

Perhaps none of it could happen until a poor performance at Georgia ups the pressure. Then again, if moves must be made, why not do it before facing New Mexico? Would you rather wait until visiting the Bulldogs or meeting Texas at the Cotton Bowl?

In summary:

It is Venables.
It is Arbuckle.
It is Mateer.

For a second straight season, it’s not working.

We’ve seen this movie before and it always ends the same.

Perhaps the cast of characters needs some changing.

Share

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Refer a friend

As you may have heard, I have a hard time believing in Ben Arbuckle, Sooner offensive coordinator, and much of it stems from listening to him talk.

For instance, earlier this week when asked if he learned anything new about his running backs after getting five of them into Oklahoma’s 51-0 victory over UTEP last Friday, he failed a truth test.

“I don’t know if I necessarily learned anything new,” he began. “Lloyd [Avant] was who Lloyd’s been and that’s reliable, tough, physical, you can count on him.

“It was cool to see [Jonathan] Hatton get out there and get to have some carries … You know, X Rob in there getting to play, I love watching X play. But just that whole room.”

All right, “X Rob” is Xavier Robinson and I love Xavier Robinson and for a long time have felt too many carries have gone to Tory Blaylock instead of Robinson.

Yet, against the Miners, and to my chagrin, Robinson gained 30 yards on seven carries, which was no great shakes on a night Avant went for 79 on 15, the anonymous Ben McCreary went for 40 on six and Hatton went for 21 on three, all 21 coming on his first carry.

When Arbuckle says something like that, saluting a player after a bad game, it makes me wonder if he can’t think on his feet, if he’s looking out for everybody’s feelings to the point of looking silly or, worst of all, if he didn’t see what the rest of us saw.

Whatever it is, it’s a bad look.

Why can’t he just answer the question?

“The whole room.”

Come on, man.

He was also asked about his offensive line, about which he named nobody and did not offer much, though a slight bit of balance.

“I thought the urgency was high. I thought there was, at times, really, really good pad level, really good velocity off the ball,” he said. “But I do still believe that we can get a whole lot better in these areas and we need to, absolutely.”

He might have gone into OU being without two starters, Jake Maikkula and Ryan Fodje, and having to remove another, Michael Fasusi, after just 17 snaps, and offer praise to his running game for performing as well as it did — 39 carries, 188 yards, 4.4 per carry — given such challenges.

Maybe he forgot.

Well, and now we’re getting to it, that running game, though saluted by Brent Venables and Mateer, both, Friday night after the win, still needs to be much better.

Consider this.

Nebraska played what would seem to be a much better team than UTEP opening day, facing Ohio, the No. 4 preseason pick (of 13 teams) by MAC coaches, winning 49-21, pulling away in the fourth quarter, netting 523 yards of total offense along the way, 248 of it on the ground, gaining 5.9 per carry.

Can’t OU be as good on the ground as Nebraska?
Dr. Tom retired a long, long time ago.

Facing Michigan at 11 a.m. Saturday morning in front of 100,000-plus at The Big House, OU should be better equipped on the line.

The belief is both Maikkula and Fodje should return to the fold, though Fasusi is less clear, despite Venables pronouncing him “great” after OU dispatched UTEP.

As for the running backs, SoonerScoop reported that while Tory Blaylock may be ready to play after not facing UTEP, an ankle injury may slow Hatton, who did not practice on Monday and rehabbed his ankle during Tuesday practice.

Nevertheless, whoever’s ready, two things should happen Saturday and every Saturday after that.

The line should get better and better, and the best Sooner running back available should get the most carries.

Sounds simple, right?

On the second of those things, at least, it hasn’t been.

For example, last season, while Blaylock gained 480 yards on 120 carries for an even 4 yards per carry, Robinson carried 83 times for 421 yards, or 5.1 per carry.

Why the carry discrepancy?

That’s between Venables, Arbuckle and the departed DeMarco Murray, the responsible trio.

During the 2024 season, Jovantae Barnes carried 122 times for 577 yards, or 4.7 per carry, while Taylor Tatum received only 56 carries that he turned into 278, or 5 per carry.

I couldn’t remember if Tatum got hurt, so I looked it up. He did, missing two games. You know who missed more? Barnes, missing four.

Blame Venables, Seth Littrell, Joe Jon Finley and Murray for that.

The 2023 season was an interesting one.

Gavin Sawchuk carried 120 times for 744 yards, 6.2 per carry, though his average was propped up by five runs of 30 or more yards, those five accounting for 227 of his total. Meanwhile, Tawee Walker carried 102 times for 513 yards, 5.0 per carry, while only once carrying for 30.

If you absolutely needed 3 or 4 yards, Walker was the best choice. Maybe he should have carried the ball more often. Go figure.

I digress.

Often, trying to understand how long it’s been since the Sooners claimed a legitimate big-time back, we recall Kennedy Brooks, who was terrific on Lincoln Riley’s last OU team, gaining 1,253 yards at 6.3 per pop in 2021.

That, though, is wrong.

Eric Gray was by far the best offensive player on a bad Sooner team, Venables’ first, in 2022, gaining 1,366 yards on 6.4 per carry, despite being keyed upon in a way Brooks wasn’t.

Still, offensive coordinator Jeff Lebby suffered many other challenges that season and the next one, too, and Sooner fans should be happy Mississippi State took him off their hands.

Wait, I may have missed another point.

How is it OU can’t find another Gray, or Brooks or, before him, Rhamondre Stevenson, who ran for 51 yards and caught for 44 against Seattle Wednesday night as the NFL opened its season.

Who knows, but they haven’t.

Hopefully, Hatton will be fresh by Saturday. Hopefully, his coaches will realize his first carry against UTEP was much more exciting than anything Avant or, again to my chagrin, Walker managed.

Murray, now gone, had a history of holding back young talent and Venables and Arbuckle, by association, do, too.

It’s time for them to get over it and finally, finally, finally present an exciting run game to Sooner fans and, eventually, SEC opponents.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

We’re doing it again.

We’re doing everybody’s favorite, the “four things” column.

Now, one of these, probably the third, will be an Oklahoma State thing. But, I promise, if you’re an Oklahoma fan, good chance you’ll enjoy that one.

Alas, making this a “four things” column became necessary due to a fair amount of breaking news on the Sooner front, so you have that to look forward to, too.

So, strap in and try to enjoy this antiquated prop of a column dynamic that we turn out at Oklahoma Columnist only when our hand is forced.

Of course, I’ll try to be wry, cutting and clever because that’s what we do here.

Upgrade to paid

Read more

Author’s Note: Friday night I was in the press box covering the Sooner season-opener for The Lawton Constitution, the sports editor of which, Murray Evans, decided he needed to be present for opening night of the high school football season, as any hometown sports editor should. Not a column, just a game story, and still I’ll bet you can glean my thoughts from the game.

NORMAN — Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all, and Oklahoma’s 51-0 season-opening victory over Texas-El Paso Friday night atop Owen Field may have offered something for everyone, even those not so inclined to love it.

For instance, how can a team like the 10th-ranked Sooners score just two first-half touchdowns against a team chosen to finish dead last in the Mountain West Conference?

Or, how can OU, with an improved offensive line and a rejuvenated running backs room, gain just 4.4 yards per attempt.

On the other hand, though limited to field goals three different times, the Sooners also found points on every drive — eight straight — until late in the fourth quarter after their third quarterback, Bowe Bentley, made an appearance.

Seven of those drives belonged to John Mateer-led units, and the last one to a group quarterbacked by second-teamer Whitt Newbauer, whose 3-yard tote with 12:11 remaining capped the scoring

Also, the defense pitched a shutout and it’s hard to do better than that.

Sooner head coach Brent Venables offered a measured review.

Upgrade to paid

Read more

Let’s begin by getting the cast of characters straight.

Brent Venables is the head coach, of course, Ben Arbuckle, all 30 years of him, is Oklahoma’s second-year offensive coordinator and then there’s this guy named Kevin Wilson, who you may be hearing about a lot, but not quite know why.

Previously a Sooner offensive analyst since leaving behind the head coach’s title at Tulsa, Wilson is no longer an analyst but a real life Sooner assistant coach and wait until you hear his title:

Assistant head coach for offense.

We mentioned Wilson as analyst and Golden Hurricane skipper, but there’s more in his past than that.

He became OU’s offensive coordinator in time for the 2005 Holiday Bowl following previous offensive coordinator Chuck Long accepting the head coaching job at San Diego State and leaving the Sooners to get a head start with the Aztecs.

It didn’t work out for Long, who won nine games in three seasons and was gone.

But it worked out swimmingly for Wilson, whose Sooner teams averaged 368.7 yards of total offense in 2006, 448.9 in 2007, 547.9 in 2008, 423.8 in 2009 and 481.4 in 2010, after which he became head coach at Indiana (after which he became offensive coordinator at Ohio State).

Incidentally, the quarterbacks for those Sooner teams, in order, were Paul Thompson, a freshman Sam Bradford, a Heisman winning sophomore Sam Bradford, a freshman Landry Jones and a sophomore Landry Jones.

It should be noted, Jones was a far better quarterback under Wilson than under his offensive coordinator successor, guy by the name of Josh Heupel

OU averaged 354.3 yards from scrimmage last season, failing to hit 400 even once against conference foes.

So, Wilson has this title that would have you believe it’s Arbuckle’s job to listen when he speaks. Line coach Bill Bedenbaugh might want to, too, Wilson being an old line coach before Bob Stoops put him in charge of the whole offense.

As it happened, when Arbuckle took his weekly turn at the mic on Monday, he appeared to channel Wilson when speaking about the offense becoming more “versatile.”

“Specifically, you know, whenever you think abut the tight end room and some of those bodies we’ve brought in at receiver and how some of our running backs have come along, I absolutely believe that gives us the ability to go out there and do a few different things,” he said. “You know, just finding ays to take advantage of the space, the numbers on the field, while ultimately getting those guys in a situation on the field to go be successful with operational space. I think that’s what it all comes down to.”

For those who don’t remember, that was Wilson’s whole thing.

He sought matchups, he sought space, he sought spreading the wealth. He loved taking all the information an opposing defense gave him and using it to find vulnerabilities to attack. Any play could be called at any time because his brain absorbed every possibility in real time.

Probably, Arbuckle won’t do that. His brain doesn’t work as fast. He’s not Wilson.

Nonetheless, he appears to have embraced Wilson’s ways and what that might lead to against UTEP tonight, eight days later at Michigan and beyond ought to be very, very interesting.

What might it look like tonight against the Miners?

In almost a throwaway line, Venables told everybody what he wanted to see during his pregame presser.

“If you say, ‘‘Hey, what’s winning look like?’” he said. “You stop the run, you run the football and you create explosive plays and you win the turnover margin.”

Earlier in his remarks, Venables said, “We need to be a more explosive offense, I think that goes without saying.”

So, pretty clear.

Can the Sooners run the ball, can they create explosive plays, can they do both on the ground and through the air?

Also, their quarterback must play responsibly and well, because it needs to be a strong warmup before facing the challenge of the Wolverines, and a habit by the time conference plays rolls around two weeks later at Georgia.

Begin with Mateer.

People forget he wasn’t all that great a year ago even when mentioned in Heisman conversations, even before the thumb injury. Prior to meeting Auburn in Week 4, the game the thumb was hurt, Mateer had still thrown just five touchdown passes against three interceptions and only against FCS Illinois State had he tossed for 300 yards.

The best thing he did before injuring the thumb was run 19 times for 71 yards and two touchdowns against Michigan.

Now, he must be better.

You’d like to see his completion percentage rise from 62.2 percent to 70 percent. You’d like to see him throw fewer interceptions after tossing 11 last season. But what Sooner Nation is really starved for is watching him throw accurately deep.

A long time ago, Bob Stoops said his preference as a defensive coordinator was for the offense to score as fast as it possibly could, after which the defense would be ready to return. I don’t know if Venables has reached that point, but he’s finally asking for a high-powered offense, so Arbuckle better not be timid and Mateer better perform.

Next, despite some injuries that should have Caleb Nitta, OU’s third choice, starting at center, the Sooners should be able to run the ball this evening and beyond, even if the truth is they ought to still do more than that.

The last big-time runner to wear the crimson and cream was Kennedy Brooks and before him Rhamondre Stevenson. OU’s had nothing close to those guys since. But the line is older and ought to be better, maybe even a real strength and, finally free of DeMarco Murray’s depth chart decisions, Xavier Robinson’s in a position to succeed, as is first-team partner Lloyd Avant, a Colorado transfer. Also tonight, we ought to see Tory Blaylock and Jonathan Hatton, too.

Just maybe one of them (or more) will really shine.

And you know what, all of them should have a chance now that Arbuckle’s sounding a lot like Wilson, whose running game was never dull and never not multiple.

His influence could make that much difference.

That’s kind of it.

Mateer can’t be the old Mateer and expect to elevate his team the way it needs to be elevated. Arbuckle must grow in his OC role under Wilson’s mentoring. A year ago, whether he was told to or not, Arbuckle quit trying to put a great offense on the field and went into don’t-lose-the-game-mode instead.

You have to like the receivers, led by Isaiah Sategna, and maybe the tight ends, led by new position coach and NFL stud Jason Witten, but they can’t do anything without Arbuckle’s schemes and Mateer’s accurate throws.

The coordinator and quarterback, that’s where it begins for the Sooner offense.

Starting tonight, they can show it.

Share

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Refer a friend

Hey all, my friend Ryan Welton and I have been busy with the podcasts this week on his Oklahoma Memo platform, giving me the opportunity to offer two of them right now.

In the first, each of us go through every game on the schedule and come up with how and why the Sooners will finish with the record with which they’ll finish. Spoiler alert, Ryan and I do not come to the same conclusion.

In the second, a breakdown of Friday night’s UTEP tussle, we give you the game, yet so much more, discussing what a revamped Oklahoma offense could, should, and might produce Friday and beyond.

Also, you can wake up Friday morning to my game preview column, right here on Oklahoma Columnist.

Thanks so much. Thank you for being with me here at Oklahoma Columnist as we wind down our fifth year.

Of course, if you’d like to support this project, which includes, as Substack likes to say, “thousands of subscribers,” for which just a tiny fraction are paying subscribers, please consider a donation via a paid subscription for just $6/month or $60/year.

Below is the second podcast.

Enjoy.

Upgrade to paid

So Brent Venables was asked about Omarion Robinson and good chance you don’t recall who he is and for good reason, too.

Though he played in nine games last season, he didn’t do much, collecting three tackles as his only stats. Yet, no biggie, he was a true freshman.

Venables was asked about him likely because Robinson didn’t do much last season, yet his name appeared twice on the Sooner depth chart, released Monday, as a second-teamer at two positions, strong safety and free safety, behind Peyton Bowen and Michael Boganowski.

Now, I don’t mean to be a lazy writer but you’re going to love Venables’ answer, just a fraction of which goes a long way.

“Confidence, consistency are the things that jump out to me with Omarion,” he said. “A year ago he’s a freshman, and most freshmen play like freshmen … where they flash and do some great things and show you, give you reason to believe, they’re going to have great futures.

“Then one of the hardest things is playing at a consistent level. That’s what wins for you … It’s a hard thing to do because it means you’ve got to show up every day and you’ve got to take the bad with the good and you’ve got to put it in every day.

“That can’t be conditional to whatever results or opportunity you’re getting. You’ve got to show up every day and put the work in.

“The law of the price tag. You’re going to get what you pay for, and nobody’s going to give anybody anything.”

He kept going and going, and here’s the thing, too.

Of the 70 or so players appearing on the depth chart, for those who arrived in Norman as true freshmen rather than transferring in, Venables could have been talking about any of them.

Upgrade to paid

Read more

The story is too big.

It is too big to explain all the what-ifs. Too big to explain all the whys. Too big to count all the things it might become a harbinger of.

Or, perhaps, it only seems that way because if it’s a one-off, well, it might prove helpful, yet be disappointingly small.

Because the SEC did a thing on Tuesday that has since been mirrored by the Big 10, Big 12, ACC and, would you believe it, the Mountain West and Sun Belt, too, and that’s just through Thursday evening. By the time you read this, the AAC, Conference USA, MAC and the reconstituted Pac-12 may have done it, too.

That is, essentially, no professionals, even very short-term professionals, allowed back on the college football field and perhaps every other arena, diamond and court, too.

Should it go that way, hallelujah, college sports may actually wind up saving itself from itself, all without Congress passing a law the Big 10 and SEC have demanded it pass (on their terms). Maybe it could all, kind of, sort of, happen in house.

Thank the NCAA, the courts, and you bet, Lane Kiffin, too, for making it all possible.

The timeline is rapid.

Call it the “five-for-five” rule, put in place by the NCAA in late June, giving athletes five years of eligibility rather than five years to complete four seasons of competition.

You can guess what happened next.

A judge, on the last day of July, decided the NCAA’s new rule meant athletes that arrived in 2022, who thought their time was over in 2025, were also eligible for 2026.

The NCAA disagreed.

Conferences and schools likely disagreed, too, talk about a headache, though one part of U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney’s ruling may have heartened them.

If a player had already signed a professional contract, even a worth-nothing free-agent contract, the type handed out to undrafted prospects often cut quickly, well, that player could not return to the college playing field.

Then, come August, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily sided with the NCAA, blocking Sweeney’s ruling.

Next, a Louisiana judge, because of course — where’s Kiffin coach now? — ruled a group of 16 football players, several of whom had attended NFL training camps on free-agent contracts, were now eligible to return to college, even mandating the NCAA reopen the transfer portal for a week to accommodate them.

And this is where it gets fun.

Dae-Quan Wright, one of those 16 players, who’d recently been waived by the Cleveland Browns, who played for Kiffin at Ole Miss last season, entered the transfer portal and media reports had him on his way to LSU, where Kiffin coaches now.

As they say in the South, “Oh, Lordy.”

Enter the SEC with its rule, which I will paraphrase.

Member institutions are not permitted to place athletes on their rosters who have declared for the NFL, NBA or WNBA draft and did not properly withdraw; or signed with an NFL, NBA (or G-League) or WNBA (or affiliate) team; or have ever been listed on the roster of any professional football league, or an NBA or G-League roster or WNBA or affiliate league roster.

That happened on Tuesday, the Big 10 and Big 12 followed suit on Wednesday, the ACC, Mountain West and Sun Belt opted in on Thursday.

The day after it announced its rule, the SEC announced its penalties should the rule be broken, which itself was an interesting thing, because if it’s a conference rule, how on earth could it be broken?

Well, probably because the SEC understood it couldn’t control the courts and their eligibility decisions, it could only control what might happen if one of its schools went with the courts rather than the conference.

The penalty for putting an ex-pro, of virtually any form, on a roster?

The SEC coach who did it would be suspended half the season and the specific program would be fined half its sport’s operating budget.

Also, as they say in the South (and everywhere else), “Holy $%#&.”

So there you go.

The SEC started something and the rest of the conferences finally understood they didn’t have to be subject to the whiplash of the courts, they could make their own rules.

There are some differences, league to league.

The Big 10, Mountain West and Sun Belt made it a football-only rule. The Big 12 made it for every single one of its varsity sports, the SEC and ACC made it football and hoops.

Good chance the football-only ones wanted to act fast and not complicate. Good chance the Big 12’s where everybody will land once they have time to work everything through.

You know what this means?

Well, it could still be a one-off, each Division I conference, the football ones at least, seeing the wisdom of the same thing at the same time, falling in line and following suit, all without colluding, which is still no tiny trick.

Or it could mean something much bigger.

It could mean a willingness to work together and do what, thus far, the NCAA and Congress have yet to do. It could mean self-regulation, and if not for every Division I football conference, at least the Power 4, which is a whole lot different than the Big 10 and the SEC going off on their own.

Beyond a willingness, it could create a nationwide epiphany among universities and conferences that nobody can save them from themselves but themselves and the way forward is to cooperate, because the Big 10 and the SEC really do need the Big 12 and ACC and, guess what, all of them need the other conferences, too.

Maybe football’s an outlier, but it would be the only one. And maybe it’s not an outlier at all.

Of course, since I began this writing, this headline popped up from none other than the Associated Press, which allegedly gets everything right.

“Texas Judge puts new eligibility rule on hold.”

But I’ve read the story over and over again and I’m pretty sure the AP got it wrong.

A judge ruled a group of 41 athletes to be eligible to return to the college playing field, but he did not rule the SEC (and other conferences) must abandon their new rules, nor withhold penalties should they be broken.

To tell conferences they can’t set their own rules would presumably require another legal fight, and by the time that happens, the season will be too far gone.

Also, recall the SEC’s farsightedness with its rule and penalties.

Here it is in action.

The conferences are in control.

Of how much do they want to be is the trillion dollar question.

Whatever, the Wild West is slightly less wild now.

Call it a win.

Share

Subscribe now

Upgrade to paid

Leave a comment

Refer a friend

How shall we regard another election in the Sooner state?

Half horrendous?
One-out-of-two ain’t bad?
The worst of all possible worlds?
Oh, wait, not quite?

Mike Mazzei topped Gentner Drummond to become the Republican Party’s gubernatorial choice, which has been tantamount to becoming governor since 2010, when Brad Henry completed his second term, a Democrat not to be heard from since.

Robert Franklin, thank goodness, knocked off James Taylor to get the Republican nod to be our next superintendent of public instruction, and Franklin will indeed win the general election come November, for most Democrats have already disavowed their own candidate for the post, Jennettie Marshall.

So, what’s next.

What can be done to stop Mazzei, who will never get the “plan” he claims to have made into law because even he he knows it’s a joke.

You know the plan, right?

Reduce the state income tax until it’s zeroed out. Eliminate property taxes for seniors and veterans. It won’t fly because the state couldn’t pay for anything if it did, so what’s a governor who made things up to get elected bound to do?

Nothing good.

What can be done?
I’ve got something.

One, Franklin must campaign for Cyndi Munson, because their values align.

He wants to make education a priority again in our state and he has a plan to do it and that plan demands resources, which is exactly what Munson wants to deliver and exactly what Mazzei won’t.

Mazzei’s already told us how every district superintendent is a radical socialist, and his calling public schools “government schools” is entirely intentional, an effort to tear down public education in the public imagination.

Franklin must get to the other side of that.

Recall, he’s been a Democrat most of his life, is now utterly non-partisan, doesn’t have political ambitions beyond the post to which he’s bound to be elected and does not arrive at at his decisions through a political prism. He arrives at them by asking what’s best for public education, and that puts him on Munson’s side.

Two, it can get even better.

Did you listen to Drummond concede last night?

You need to see it and listen to it.
Or read it, at least.

Mr. Mazzei, tonight I wish you and your family well. Now you have to show up.

You have to show up for the teachers who walk Oklahoma classrooms every morning. You have to show up for the police officers, the firefighters, the first responders who put their lives on the line for people they’ve never met. You have to show up for the public servants who keep the state moving.

You have to show up for the rural hospitals to keep their doors open. You have to show up for the families desperately searching for mental health treatment for someone they love. You have to show up for the farmers and ranchers, the small business owners and the working families, and you have to show up for the Oklahomans who didn’t vote for you just as surely as you show up for the ones who did.

That’s the job.

The governor doesn’t work for the wealthy. The governor doesn’t work for the special interests. The governor doesn’t work for the people who can write the largest campaign checks or hire the most expensive lobbyists. The governor works for the people of Oklahoma.

Does that sound like a Republican to you?

Me, neither.
So what will he do?

Primary Mazzei in four years? Run for governor again in eight, because Oklahoma governors, regardless of party, tend to get two terms.

Waiting eight years would make him 70 years old and by then, politics in this nation and state will have changed. MAGA will have crashed, even in Oklahoma. Or, if it doesn’t, many Republicans will have become Democrats by then. All of that gives Drummond the chance to be way out in front of the curve by endorsing and campaigning for Munson.

Through the force of his authenticity, sincerity and will, he could change Oklahoma politics in one fell swoop, because, I promise you, Drummond and a great many of his supporters still do not want Mazzei to become governor. They know he’ll take the state further backward.

Imagine Munson, Franklin, Drummond (and maybe Oklahoma City mayor David Holt, too) on the stump together, agreeing on any number of things that are neither left nor right, but dang good policy the whole state can get behind, beginning with educating Oklahoma children, because who’s against that?

All of us should be upset about Mazzei getting through, about this slow-talking, creepy-sounding, wind-him-up pablum delivery man becoming governor, but it need not happen.

It’s a moment for Franklin to put state over party and, for him, particularly, it ought to be a layup. It’s a moment, too, for Drummond to do the same, and by doing it becoming the most consequential person in Oklahoma politics since I don’t know when. I want to say David Boren, but even he was no paradigm shifter, just a terrific governor, senator and university president.

Mazzei, after all, is Ryan Walters without the car videos, Ryan Walters without the ability to speak quickly while maintaining command of the language, Ryan Walters without the vulgarity, the demonization, the … Oh, wait, scratch that last one because he’s all of those things and has proven it on the stump.

Bottom line, there’s still a chance to turn this state around.

We, and some very singular individuals, Drummond, Franklin and others to be named later, must take it.

Columns like this remain free because I believe they’re too important to limit readership. Still, that only works if enough readers choose to support it. Given that, consider a donation in the form of a paid subscription for just $6/month or $60/year to keep this kind of journalism alive in Oklahoma.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

Roger Denny may be smarter than all of us, but I doubt it and you should, too.

Since taking over for Joe Castiglione as Oklahoma athletics director in mid-February, he’s made two big decisions. Well, maybe more, but two he’ll be judged by, two he’ll answer for until he makes others of similar import, two Sooner Nation will return to when it asks, “Hmm, what kind of a job is that Denny guy doing.”

The first arrived in March, when he saluted Porter Moser for coaching a team that performed beyond the resources it was given, rather than firing him for being the worst Sooner men’s hoops skipper in more than half a century, who’s reached the NCAA tournament once in five seasons, whose conference record after three seasons in the Big 12 and two in the SEC is 32-56.

At the time, Denny invoked the “underdog spirit” that had long spurred Sooner sports to greatness, thus proving he knew nothing about the history and culture of the athletics department he’s now running.

The second one came, it appears, some time ago, though terms may not have been agreed upon until recently and the headline did not arrive until Thursday.

That is, two more years have been added to Brent Venables’ contract as Sooner football coach, making him good to go through the 2031 season, with an annual reported salary of $10.5 million.

Nothing’s official until approved by the regents, but if the salary figure holds up and other coaches don’t sign up for more in the interim, Venables will become the 11th highest paid coach in the nation behind Oregon’s Dan Lanning, who makes $10.6 million.

For the record, the spots above them belong to Georgia’s Kirby Smart ($13.3M), Indiana’s Curt Cignetti ($13.2M), LSU’s Lane Kiffin ($13M), Ohio State’s Ryan Day ($12.6M), Alabama’s Kalen DeBoer ($12.5M), Southern Cal’s Lincoln Riley ($11.5M), Clemson’s Dabo Swinney ($11.5M), Texas’ Steve Sarkisian ($11.1M) and Texas A&M’s Mike Elko ($10.8M).

Denny, who doesn’t lack certainty even when wrong — see Moser — has his reasons.

“I’ve had the opportunity to spend a lot of time with coach Venables, his staff and our student-athletes,” he said in the story OU released on its athletics website. “It didn’t take long to see how well suited he is to lead Oklahoma football. Coach Venables is elite at building culture, not just in the locker room, but throughout the entire program.

“Our players are drawn to him. They trust him, they believe in him and he has a unique ability to connect with young men and bring out the best in them. What I hope this extension says to our players is that in an environment that changes every day, we’re investing in stability for our program.”

Great.
Terrific.

Stability is indeed a very good thing in the midst of so much surrounding instability. Score one for Roger.

Of course, unless the buyout, which remains unknown, is a fraction of the contract’s value — an apparent $63 million — it’s a terrible decision on its face.

Upgrade to paid

Let us now enter the numbers portion of this exercise.

Since 1937, nine different Sooner football coaches have spent at least four seasons on the job, and here they are, along with their records and winning percentages over their first four seasons, the same number of seasons Venables has already coached the Sooners.

• Thomas E. Stidham (1937-40), 27-8-3, .750
• Dewey Luster (1941-45), 22-13-3, .579
• Bud Wilkinson (1947-63), 38-4-1, .884
• Chuck Fairbanks (1967-72), 30-13-1, .682
• Barry Switzer (1973-88), 41-3-2, .891
• Gary Gibbs (1989-94), 29-14-2, .644
• Bob Stoops (1999-16), 43-9, .827
• Lincoln Riley (2017-21), 45-8, .849
• Brent Venables (2022-26), 32-20, .615

It’s more staggering than I figured before looking it up.

But for Dewey “Snorter” Luster — funny nicknames were once required to hold such positions — Venables has the worst four-season winning percentage of any Sooner football coach who wasn’t an abject failure or didn’t die going back 90 years. And when did being better than Gomer Jones, Howard Schnellenberger or John Blake become reason to reward a coach as though he’s a Wilkinson, Switzer or Stoops?

Yes, it’s a brand new world, and yes, Venables appears to have a great working relationship with general manager Jim Nagy, and yes, there appears to be a seamlessness in place as the Sooners redefine the coaching and administrative model for college football, an achievement whose credit belongs to Castiglione rather than Denny.

Simultaneously, since landing at Max Westheimer Airport, surrounded by friends, fans and The Pride of Oklahoma, Venables has recorded two losing seasons, is on his third defensive coordinator, who happens to be himself, and his fourth offensive coordinator, Ben Arbuckle, who still has much to prove.

Then there’s the buyout.

We don’t know what it is, but we know what it used to be, and it used to be 100 percent of the contract.

If it were to remain 100 percent of the contract, and, say, Venables were to turn in an additional two losing seasons, back to back, under his original deal, he would have been owed about $17.4 million to go away following the 2027 season.

Under the one about to be approved, if the salary figure is accurate and the old terms of the buyout remain in place, Venables would be owed around $42 million to go away following the 2027 season, which is insane.

“We’re in this place in our industry where literally the second we come out and demonstrate a commitment to a coach, everyone wants to know what it costs to fire him. What are we doing?” SoonerScoop’s George Stoia reported Denny to have said during a meeting with reporters on Tuesday. “If that was on our mind, we wouldn’t be signing this contract.”

Only it’s Denny’s job for it to be on his mind, especially given the biggest reason Venables kept his job following the 2024 season was the gargantuan cost of his old buyout, part of the contract about to be torn up for a new one.

Is OU thinking he might bolt?
It shouldn’t.

Venables spent 20 years saying no to head-coaching opportunities before OU decided it wanted him back. He already has the only job he wants, so why not wait to be more certain he’s figured things out?

“I don’t need to see this season to know what we’ve got,” Denny told Stoia.

Does he even hear himself?
Not good.

Venables could become an all-timer. He could win SEC crowns. OU could run off three national championships in the next five or six years. It could own the game again like it owned it in the mid-70s. But it won’t make Denny right. Given every fact in evidence, he’s jumped the gun and put millions, maybe tens of millions, more at risk.

He’s 0 for 2.

Hoping his coaches will bail him out.

Share

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Refer a friend

Back in the top 10.

That’s where Brent Venables’ fifth Sooner team will begin the season.

Yeah, it’s kind of meaningless.
Because no, it’s not a great predictor.

The last time OU claimed the national championship, 2000, it began the season ranked 19th. Thirteen times since the Sooners won that crown they’ve entered the season in the top five and seven times in the top three, all without winning another national championship.

Go figure.

Still, this time around’s preseason rankings appear worth noting.

Right now, both preseason polls having been released, the Sooners are No. 10 on the Associated Press media-voted list and No. 9 by the coaches, and the last time something like that occurred was Venables’ first season, 2022, when OU began ninth in each.

That season, of course, wound up a literal lost cause, Venables and offensive coordinator Jeff Lebby both appearing not to know what they wanted to do.

Just an aside, it should be noted that during his own five-season run, Lincoln Riley’s Sooners began no season ranked lower than seventh by the AP and eighth by the coaches, and in three of those seasons, OU reached what was then a four-team playoff. And still, it would seem everybody would rather have Venables’ next five seasons than what Riley might have done had he stayed.

Interesting.

Probably, it’s a simple case of it being good to be liked, rather than wearing everybody around you out.

Now, back to our program.

One way to look at it is Venables has finally returned to zero, ranked pretty much right where he was when he began his head coaching experiment. Four seasons later, two with 10 wins and two with six, folks believe in him again enough to put him right back where he began.

On the one hand, it’s hard to be any higher given the conference in which OU now plays. In fact, it appears to be some kind of trick.

Picked seventh in their league by media covering the SEC, the Sooners are nonetheless fifth among conference entrants on the AP list behind No. 3 Georgia, No. 6 Texas, No. 8 Texas A&M and No. 9 Ole Miss; and fourth behind No. 3 Georgia, No. 4 Texas and No. 8 Texas A&M in the coaches’ poll.

Go figure again.

The object is to do no worse than stay there, though moving higher remains preferable. So, if OU’s not to be tumbling again, let’s review what Venables can’t afford to let happen again. I’ve got three things.

Upgrade to paid

Read more

Debating James Taylor on statewide television Monday night, each hoping to become the last Republican standing in the race for state superintendent, Robert Franklin ran into an issue so many thoughtful, righteous and service-oriented candidates struggle to avoid.

Because when they really know their stuff and really want voters to understand what they’re about, they can become too precise, which can sound tedious, even aloof.

It’s a great way to govern, but perhaps not debate.

Nothing to be ashamed of.
I love candidates like that.
Lets me know they’re smart and they care.

But there’s a way to nail it and remain accessible, and I’m not sure Franklin pulled it off as well as he might have liked. Too much talk of “data” and “best practices,” terms I wonder if regular folks fully grasp.

Sorry, regular folks.

Still, if you appreciate leadership and expertise, just a couple of answers to a couple of questions were all you needed to know.

It’s a job for Franklin, one Taylor should be kept from at all costs.

Take the first volley.

Given everything the state department of education has been through since the last election, and while we know it’s not an “overnight fix,” what’s the first thing you would do “to move the needle in the right direction.”

“Lindel Fields has put some salve on the wounds at the state department of education,” Franklin began. “I think you bring him and his team in on the turnaround and you begin to say, ‘What have you learned, what gaps do you see, what questions and concerns might you have?’

“And then what begins to happen is you bring tribal leaders to the table, you bring higher ed partners, career tech partners, moms and dads … and industry partners to the table to say, ‘Let’s create a [100-day] strategic plan,’ and thus begin to put that in motion. And again, it’s not going to be what we do in a day, it’s what we’re going to do daily that’s going to make the difference.”

Got it?

Make the most of the transition with the group sent to save the department Ryan Walters destroyed. Get briefed, learn the lessons, understand size and scope. Then bring everybody in, decide what’s to be done quickly while momentum’s on your side and keep plugging away.

“The work is heavy, it’s daunting,” Franklin added, but “I think we can move in the right direction.”

He sounded like two things.

One, a leader, and two, one who’s given the challenge great thought.

Taylor?

“Well, first of all, we’ve got to make sure that our teachers are well prepared and equipped for the classroom. That they know exactly what they’re supposed to be doing. Also, we are going to be doing better simply because our legislature has put into place, brought back phonics, it brought back cursive, and there’s no social promotion, so we really have nowhere to go but up. But we’re going to be making sure that our kids can read. Our legislature says third grade. I think it should start at first grade. Actually, if kindergarten start reading, but by first grade, they should be reading at grade level. So we are going to make sure that those kids get the things that they need in their classroom for teacher preparation, as well as seeing if we can get some additional reading specialists. The legislatures did put in the budget …”

I have to cut him off.

I’m not sure how to summarize it other than to ask whether Taylor declared his candidacy in June or yesterday, because he sounded like he’d never pondered the question until the moment it was asked. And even then, given the 60 seconds Franklin spoke before he took his turn, Taylor should have come up with something better than that.

Legislature this. Legislature that.

Also, cursive?

An artistic way to pen the language, yeah, Dodger and Cardinal jerseys would be lost without it. Also a form of writing that, but to sign my name, I haven’t used since the 10th grade when I was told notes taken in “print” were more easily retained (and they are).

Further, I’m pretty sure teacher preparedness and being equipped falls almost entirely to teachers already, though I’m sure they’d love to expense getting their classrooms in shape each year.

Taylor, though, isn’t about that at all.

“We just gave teachers another $2,000 raise this year. So I am not one that says a lot of money into the issue is going to change the issue.”

Oh, brother.

“But we’re going to be making sure that our kids can read,” he said.

If only he’d explained how he’d do that.

One more.

Before the teacher-pay question, an on-screen graphic noted entry-level teacher pay in Oklahoma to be $41,294, significantly less than $54,372 in New Mexico, $49,465 in Texas and $50,076 in Arkansas, while the national average sits at $48,112.

The candidates were asked whether they had a way to pay teachers more.

It was a borderline unfair question because a state superintendent can’t unilaterally and universally raise teacher pay. Only the legislature can appropriate that money. Still, a superintendent candidate ought to have a ready answer.

I wish Franklin’s had been stronger.
Yet, compared to Taylor, he shot the moon.

“I think you have to get back to that piece of the puzzle that says we only have X amount of dollars to spend, and where do we target those dollars?” he said. “And if indeed we can start to save some dollars through the process of how we redo our state assessment model, those are millions that we can also funnel back into the funding formula.

“But I also don’t think that we can take a pass on working with our legislative teams, working with business and industry partners, working with our tribal leaders, perhaps differently than we’ve ever worked with our tribal leaders before, to say, ‘Let’s all lean in together so we can make sure that we’re regionally competitive in the wages and supports that we’re providing for our educators.’”

I wish he’d led with his willingness to lobby the legislature, to fight for Oklahoma’s kids and teachers, to make clear he’d be a tireless advocate for what’s required. I’d have liked it even more if he’d borrowed that old Kelvin Sampson line: “You achieve what you emphasize.”

Still, not bad. Be efficient, remain engaged with the appropriators, get everybody aboard the train to effect required change.

Taylor?

He doesn’t want more funding.

Because who needs more resources, teachers, specialists, counselors, even a fully staffed state department of education for crying out loud? Who does he think he’s there to advocate for if he wins? Mike Mazzei, who wants to crush revenue streams and likes to call public schools “government” schools?

“We have increased funding since 2018 by 51 percent. It is the No. 1 chunk of the money that’s going into our schools, and you would think that our numbers would be going up, but they’re not, they’re not going up. Actually, they went down. So there is not a necessary correlation between more money and better results,” Taylor said. “Taxpayers want results for their money. We just gave the teachers another $2,000 raise this year, so I am not one that says a lot of money into the issue is going to change the issue.”

Well, great.

Who needs money?

Had Taylor answered the question first instead of last, Franklin might have jumped in to note Oklahoma still ranks 47th in the nation in per-pupil spending, and that you don’t just achieve what you emphasize, you tend to get what you pay for, too. Not to mention, if our state’s raised education spending 51 percent since 2018, just imagine the place to which our Republican legislatures allowed education to fall.

Hey, if you really want education to become a statewide priority, vote for Franklin on Aug. 25 and again in November, and for Dems in house and senate races.
Just some free advice.

At every turn, Franklin was more equipped than Taylor and, at every turn, Franklin was trying to solve the problem in front of him rather than yammer.

Let us hope viewers noticed only one of them sounded ready to lead, while the other made the case for an archaic type of writing as he buttered up the same legislature that refused to stand in Ryan Walters’ way. And that one stands ready to advocate for students and teachers, while the other thinks little of stepping up with the resources required to make a difference.

Who do you think will fare better?

Vote for that guy.

Columns like this remain free because I believe they’re too important to limit readership. Still, that only works if enough readers choose to support it. If you can, consider a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year to keep this kind of journalism alive in Oklahoma.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

THE HOME OFFICE, Okla. — In the three-minute, 30-second video serving to announce Russell Westbrook’s retirement from the NBA, at least that’s what I think it was, narrator Michael B.. Jordan began like so.

Every museum has a curator and every exhibit, they have a story. But some stories don’t need someone to tell them, they just speak for themselves. So, tonight, I’m not going to tell you what any of this means. I’m just going to show you.

And I’m going to ask him a few questions along the way. Not because I expect an answer, but because some things deserve to be asked.

It was at that moment I thought, yeah, he just won the best actor Oscar, appeared in “The Wire,” “Creed” and “Black Panther,” but now he’s like the rest of us who’ve spent portions of our working lives trying to get Russell Westbrook to answer our questions, and we didn’t expect them either.

It’s just a piece of his quite complicated legacy.

Along with Kevin Durant, he helped lead the original young Thunder to the NBA Finals.

After Durant departed hastily and with little class for Golden State, he became Mr. Thunder, signing long term (twice), putting together three consecutive triple-double seasons after it had not happened once in 53 years, winning an MVP for the first of them and leading the OKC to the playoffs each of them.

Never was he happier than the day he first inked up to make those things possible.

OKLAHOMA CITY — We are all capitalists and still there is no currency like appreciation.

So yeah, Russell Westbrook has 8.8 million additional reasons to be thrilled about his next year of basketball in Oklahoma City — and maybe more than a quarter billion over the next seven seasons should he choose to stick around for the very long haul — but all of that seemed less important than the adulation flowing every direction Thursday afternoon inside Chesapeake Energy Arena.

A scheduled press conference, what it really was, was a love-fest flowing every direction between Westbrook, the organization he works for and the fans that cheer them both.

Is there really any doubt that Oklahoma’s favorite son, should Westbrook remain longer than the two seasons his new contract guarantees, will be a Los Angelino who played two years of college basketball at UCLA?

“Me being able to come back is a true blessing,” Westbrook said. “There’s no place I’d rather be than Oklahoma City. You guys have kind of basically raised me.”

— “It’s only two years on paper, but Westbrook seems to be here to stay,” Aug. 4, 2016, The Norman Transcript, by Clay Horning

If, indeed, Westbrook’s done for good, he’ll have finished his career with 209 triple-doubles, more than anybody else, though Denver’s Nikola Jokic (198) is bound to pass him soon.

He’ll also exit with 10,351 assists, fifth all-time behind John Stockton, Chris Paul, Jason Kidd and LeBron James; 27,176 points, 14th all time behind James, Kareem-Abdul Jabbar, Karl Malone, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, Dirk Nowitzki, Wilt Chamberlain, James Harden, Shaquille O’Neal, Carmelo Anthony, Moses Malone and Elvin Hayes; and 9,025 rebounds, 60th all time and first among point guards, 623 more than Kidd’s 8,402.

The best player to wear the Thunder uniform is Shai Gilgeous Alexander. But the player most able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, and it’s not close, is Westbrook and always will be Westbrook.

He came right through the screen.

If you were in the crowd, and close, he may have burrowed into your soul.

Beyond the arena, he was a service-oriented prince and kind of still is.

He owned the city and because neither Bedlam entrant owned the whole state, Westbrook kind of owned that, too.

He was also horrendous to local media and semi-regularly shot his team out of games, leaving teammates and his coach to make excuses for him they knew not to be true.

Everybody can see it, everybody can feel it: Westbrook relishes the opportunity to do it himself, now, too much to let it pass. And the majority of the time, by taking that opportunity, he kills the Thunder’s opportunity.

It has happened twice this season, first against Boston, Oklahoma City’s fourth loss to begin the season, and Saturday.

Thunder coach Billy Donovan was asked specifically about Westbrook’s shot selection afterward.

“I’ll go back and look at the film,” he said. “A lot of them were catch and shoot.”

Except they weren’t.

Most came in those moments the entire arena sensed Westbrook’s temptation to do something ill-advised.

— “When things go sideways for OKC, Westbrook, denial is the name of the game,” Nov. 27, 2018, The Norman Transcript, by Clay Horning

Nonetheless, a more exciting player the league may never have seen.

My half-century-plus basketball brain goes to David Thompson, Julius Erving and George Gervin, the original did-you-see-that players, but they did not fly like Westbrook flew.

There’s Michael Jordan, of course, yet Westbrook clocked in faster, and if it made him reckless it only made him more exciting, too. And if Jordan was the real Superman, living in the air, Westbrook’s still the only player capable of running away from the other nine players on the court despite the requirement he dribble the ball.

Like it was a trick or something.

Maybe he’d play defense and maybe he wouldn’t. Maybe he’d take good shots and maybe he wouldn’t. Maybe he’d give you the time of day afterward and maybe he wouldn’t. But he was mesmerizing either way, turning in triple-doubles night after night.

Comps are difficult

Trae Young’s a highlight reel, yet not a winner.

Westbrook was far better than that.

You could question his choices, but not whether he cared.

Allen Iverson?

Who played harder and who had to do it all themselves? Sound familiar? Iverson, though, struggled with life. Westbrook suffers no such malady.

And none of them played the most impossible game in league history.

Just Westbrook.

OKLAHOMA CITY — For one half of the fourth quarter Tuesday night against the Los Angeles Lakers, the Thunder threatened another collapse that would have replaced all the other worst losses of the season with a new one.

In the second half of that same quarter, Russell Westbrook put the finishing touches on an individual performance that had not occurred in the NBA in 18,687 days.

Because it was on Feb. 2, 1968 that Wilt Chamberlain, playing for the Philadelphia 76ers, registered the first 20-point, 20-rebound, 20-assist game in league history.

Nobody had done it since, until Westbrook grabbed his 20th board with 41 seconds remaining against the Lakers.

On the day Chamberlain did it, he registered 22 points, 25 rebounds and 21 assists, playing all 48 minutes against Detroit.

On this day, Westbrook scored 20 points, dished 21 assists and grabbed 20 rebounds in 12 seconds short of 37 minutes.

“He can impact the game in a lot of different ways,” Thunder coach Billy Donovan said.

Oh, yeah, Oklahoma City beat Los Angeles 119-103.

— “Hussle Westbrook,” April 3, 2019, The Norman Transcript, by Clay Horning

If he gets the statue, funny thing, three other professional athletes will have beaten him to it in Oklahoma City.

Take a lap around Bricktown Ballpark and you’ll find Mickey Mantle, Warren Spahn and Johnny Bench waiting in bronze. Still, they did their damage in New York, Milwaukee and Cincinnati.

Westbrook did it here.

So, should he get it?

Look at this way.

For all that he did, he might deserve two. Also, for his need to play the hero, the poor decisions it led to that cost his team and his general postgame dickishness to others just doing their job, one should be taken away.

So sure.
Give the man his bronze.

The day it’s unveiled, we’ll all enjoy it and nobody more than the man himself.

Because there’s still no currency like appreciation, Russell Westbrook loves being the man and, on that wonderful day, I’ll bet you he answers Berry Tramel’s question, too.

If, that is, he’s really done.

At the end of that three-minute, 30-second video, after Jordan finished talking and Westbrook, gazing from a chair, said nothing, the screen went dark and these words appeared.

The greatest thing he left behind couldn’t fit inside a museum.
It never had to be said.

As though profound, as it tells us nothing.

Why not?

So many points, rebounds and assists.
Might as well commit one last turnover, too.

Russell being Russell.

Right to the end.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Refer a friend

A long time ago, I gave Stephanie Bice, Oklahoma’s 5th District congresswoman some credit.

It had been a year since Donald Trump encouraged the throngs to storm the Capitol, Joe Biden was president and not yet sleepy and everybody figured the nation was done with the horrible orange wonder.

Bice played both sides that anniversary day, but at least she said …

“The events of Jan. 6, 2021 are not a reflection of who we are as a country. The breach of the U.S. Capitol building and subsequent violence that occurred undermine the very foundation of our democracy.”

… before saying:

“I empathize with those whose frustrations with the electoral process remain unresolved. Executive and judicial branches in certain states acted in an unconstitutional manner by implementing changes to state election laws.”

She was trying to thread a needle and still she said more than senators James Lankford and Jim Inhofe and house members Kevin Hern, Markwayne Mullin, Frank Lucas and Tom Cole.

Combined.

Bice, though, miscalculated, not accounting for Trump’s second act, nor his wish to hold U.S. taxpayers up for $1.8 billion he believes the U.S. Treasury should pay him and others investigated, charged and convicted in various courts of law following the insurrection, to say nothing of he and his family being forever protected from IRS audit.

We know this, because Bice was asked precisely about that so-called anti-weaponization fund on KFOR’s Flashpoint two days ago.

“I don’t think that’s necessary,” she said. “I think there’s other ways to be able to make sure that people that could … potentially … had issues with the way that they were charged with these crimes could be compensated.”

So, all these years later, after once saying the actions occurred on Jan. 6, 2021 undermined “the very foundation of our democracy,” she has pulled a 180 … Because even though it may not be necessary to steal $1.8 billion from the American people and give it to violent perpetrators who’ve since been pardoned by Trump, it’s not necessary only because there are other ways to compensate them?

To which, I can only say, is she #%!@$%# kidding.

I’d love to see Jena Nelson, running against Bice for her seat, find a way to make an issue of it, because when a U.S. House member essentially says …

“Yeah, violent offenders who took part in the storming of the capitol, who horribly injured police and who were prepared to hang the Vice President of the United States, they should receive real compensation for the prosecutions they later suffered, just maybe not the way Donald Trump wants to hand it to them.”

… it ought to be scandalous, unthinkable and disqualifying.

I’m just not sure voters would latch on.

Perhaps they, like “Flashpoint” host Kevin Ogle, who’s yet to meet a difficult follow-up he’s willing to ask, would not quite grasp all the moving parts of the issue and Bice’s answer. But maybe Nelson can make it work. She’s a skilled politician, good on the stump, unafraid and fluent in the sarcasm required to getting a point like that across.

Yet, if she can’t quite do it, it’s not like Bice didn’t open herself up to other items in which she appeared utterly ridiculous because that’s what happens when you’re running scared.

Let’s go over a few.

Affordability?

One way to make products not become more expensive is to not raise taxes on them, but that’s what tariffs are and, get this, Bice defended them during her Sunday appearance.

“President Trump is actually trying to level the playing field,” she said, as though that gets her and other Republicans off the hook for supporting them when the whole world knows tariffs raise prices and the cost comes out of the pockets of the consumers whose nation imposes them.

“Yes, there were some challenges with it. Yes, we’re fixing that, but it was actually in the best interest of this nation to be able to negotiate those tariffs,” Bice said.

It was actually in the best interests of Oklahomans to see prices rise on everyday products, and that was before invading Iran and propping up prices at the pump, too?

Great, Stephanie. Thanks.

Come to think of it, has Bice come out against the war with Iran, or does she think it’s all good, no matter the price at the pump?

Stephanie Bice, state champion of higher prices?

Yeah, that’s fair.

Health care cuts?
Medicaid cuts?
Stealing the health and financial security of hard-working Oklahomans?

A result of the oxymoronic “One Big Beautiful Bill,” our state is projected to lose $6.7 billion in Medicaid reimbursements and, according to the Oklahoma Hospital Association, endure a $3.1 billion hit to hospitals in the 5th District.

But that’s not putting Oklahomans in a health care bind, argued Bice, that’s Republicans actually saving health care.

Pretend I’m saying this next word in the voice of Scooby Doo.

WHAT?

“When we made those changes in the big beautiful bill, what we were doing is actually shoring up programs,” Bice said, “because there are people that are on the programs that shouldn’t be.”

I swear to God, Republicans have been arguing they’re targeting fraud and abuse every time they make regular Americans’ and Oklahomans’ lives more difficult since the beginning of time.

It’s obscene, it’s always been obscene and Stephanie Bice is all about it, believing hurting Oklahomans is fine and dandy as long as she can spout some song and dance about it being the opposite.

Stephanie Bice, killer of Oklahomans health care and willing to lie about why.

It’s bad enough Bice refuses to hold in-person town halls with voters where she’d be bound to face tougher questions than anything lobbed last Sunday morning, and that she’s thus-far refused to debate Nelson. It’s also a tell she’s running on nothing but the wish to keep the perks of her job, and why should anybody vote for a candidate like that?

Like Mike Mazzei, Bice has so little to say.
She just happens to be more skilled at sounding like she does.

Here’s a classic voters should see right through.

On debate possibilities, Bice said, “We’ll have to see. That was thrown at me a couple days ago. You know, we’ll wait and see.”

Embarrassing.

Perhaps Nelson can shame her into a debate, but it’s clear Bice wants to avoid it. She’ll play prevent defense as long as she can, because that’s the plan when you’ve nothing to say.

Not to mention, the idea a debate was “thrown at me a couple days ago” is unserious and asinine.

The moment both parties begin thinking about a general election debate is the moment each knows they’ve won their party’s candidacy.

If you’re way ahead, you stay away. If you know you’ll lose, you try to stay away. If not showing is more risky than losing, you begrudgingly appear. Bice has known this forever and the way things are going, door No. 3 may be where she lands.

“We’ll wait and see,” is a giveaway she fears getting into the ring with an opponent who knows what she believes in, which is more than Bice can say about herself.

It’s all so clear.

Nelson’s challenge is to make it clear, which she’s wholly equipped to do. But the x-factor is reach. How many voters can be made to see her make it clear?

Here’s hoping it’s enough.

Columns like this remain free: no paywall on political writing. That only works if enough readers choose to support it. If you can, a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year keeps this kind of accountability journalism alive in Oklahoma.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

I’ve been charting the gubernatorial candidacy of Mike Mazzei.

Perhaps you’ve noticed.

He’ll meet state attorney general Gentner Drummond in a Republican runoff election Aug. 25.

Lately, he’s taken part in a forum alongside Drummond and Democratic candidate Cyndi Munson, also a straight up statewide televised debate against Drummond only last Saturday.

They have me thinking.

Does he have nothing to say?
Does he mean to be an empty suit?
Is he as dumb as he sounds?
Does he believe in anything?

First I’ll answer those questions.
Next, I’ll project what wonders might happen if Mazzei’s eliminated asap.
The answers:

• No, he has nothing to say, because having been embraced by Trump, there’s nothing to say. Immigration aside, Trump’s doing nothing popular in our non-border state and what he’s willing to do for struggling Americans remains nothing. The corrupt do-nothing fix is in.

So, if Mazzei’s going to live off the endorsement, he can’t go with substance because there is none. You’d think Trump’s endorsement to be helpful in a red state like ours but I’m not so sure when it means getting dominated at every get-together with other candidates.

In MAGA-land, don’t you know, smarts, expertise and problem-solving only get you further away from the boss.

• Yes, he means to be an empty suit, because it’s kind of the MAGA uniform.

Real policy? Affecting positive change? Who wants to work that hard?

• No, he’s not as dumb as he sounds, but he does mean to sound dumb, because he’s betting on low-information, non-thinking and poorly educated Oklahomans to elect him. Dummies.

The problem is, though many Oklahomans have not taken part in higher education, that doesn’t make them dummies. One hopes they’ll see through the guy betting on their stupidity.

• No, he doesn’t believe in anything, or anything beyond being elected. Maybe he likes telling himself, as Ronald Reagan and Alan Greenspan believed, the market being self-correcting, lower taxes are always a good idea. But that would make him dumb, because those times aren’t these. These days, the Invisible Hand slaps around salt-of-the-earth Oklahomans.

So what could happen if Mazzei’s swept off the electoral table Aug. 25?

First, a quick disclaimer.

Cyndi Munson’s our best gubernatorial choice.
She should be our next governor and I’m voting for her.

When the moderate position on education spending is giving away $275 million through the state tax code to private school parents, a political party has jumped the shark and must be reined in, and that means no longer being a Republican trifecta state.

Her victory is more likely if she faces Mazzei rather than Drummond in the general, but given the stakes it’s still no reason to vote for Mazzei in the runoff.

So what’s the not-impossible, best-of-all-possible-worlds scenario that Drummond’s ascension into the job puts on the table?

For starters, the end of MAGA in Oklahoma.

Drummond and his wife may never have meant to send campaign money to Joe Biden — or very quickly realized it would look really, really bad — but Drummond is no Trump fan even if he sometimes plays one on TV.

He’s anti-corruption, he believes in the First Amendment, which includes the separation of church and state, and he’s for the rule of law.

MAGA knows nothing about any of that.

He might prefer lower taxes, but he’s not for lowering them when Oklahoma faces horrendous education, health care and mental health crises.

MAGA’s not about fixing those things either.

It’s also very reasonable to presume he’d rather get his agenda through the statehouse than worry about where the votes are coming from, and that’s where a brave new world, even without a Democrat in the chair, might begin.

For the first time in more than 16 years, Oklahoma’s governor might not need to worry about passing legislation via votes limited to his own party, which means also for the first time in 16 years, Democrats can finally cast votes that matter.

Now, 19 Dems in the House and eight Dems in the Senate mostly have nothing to work on beyond making their numbers bigger and shaming Republicans into being something less than the batshit crazy their rightest-right flank prefers.

But if Drummond’s going to do anything dramatic for his big three — education, health care, mental health care — he’s going to lose lots of folks from his own party and may need some Dems.

Should that happen, Dems finally matter at the statehouse again and governance is back, dropping the political temperature around the state, from school boards to the courts. And when that happens, Dem numbers will grow, which, believe it or not, will please many Republicans who’d rather work across the aisle than with the Freedom Caucus and their run-amok ilk.

Oklahoma will move forward.

But first, Mike Mazzei must be dealt with.

If you have a vote, deal with him.

Columns like this remain free: no paywall on political writing. That only works if enough readers choose to support it. If you can, a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year keeps this kind of accountability journalism alive in Oklahoma.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

“Thank you, Mr. Mazzei … You have changed your mind about the [Inola aluminum smelter] project. You were against it, but shortly before getting President Trump’s endorsement, you decided to back it …

“So, a question specifically for you. What do you say to the people who are worried about the impacts on their families and on businesses in the area.”

“First, thanks for joining us tonight. I’m so pleased I get to share with you my plan for growth by making Oklahoma a no-income tax state, abolishing property taxes for seniors and veterans, launching a massive statewide reading program and enforcing Oklahoma’s constitution, which forbids the foreign ownership of land.

“Now, this plan is why President Trump has endorsed me to be Oklahoma’s next governor. You’ve already heard some lies, and you will hear many more lies about me, the president, this aluminum plant tonight, but don’t be surprised. President Trump has called my opponent a Republican in name only, and that’s because …

Oh, brother.

“As for the aluminum plant. I have a plan to make sure that it will be 100 percent in compliance with the Clean Air Act, and we will bring in a third-party independent evaluator to make sure the air and water is safe for the people, the cattle, and the hay.”

So it began for Mike Mazzei in Tulsa Monday night, where he and Gentner Drummond debated, each hoping to become Oklahoma’s next Republican candidate for governor.

With it, both the die, and dye, were cast.

Drummond mostly answered the questions given to him and, not only that, also explained why he answered the question the way he answered it.

Mazzei?
Are you kidding?

Answering as Drummond answered would have required knowing what Drummond knows, which he didn’t and doesn’t.

But that’s Mazzei’s game.

Two or three talking points — income tax, property tax, literacy — repeated ad nauseam, counting on voters to be as dumb as he’s chosen to be.

Then, finally making a run at a real answer, he failed, as he does.

Because, sure, we should believe another unexplained “plan” will make the project abide by the Clean Air Act, and because he’ll “bring in a third-party independent evaluator,” aka some guy who’ll give it all a green light, we should believe everything else will be just fine, too.

Who knew a couple of well-placed bureaucrats could hedge off all malfeasance in a project so large — one of high interest to the always (never) rule conscious Trump Administration — co-owned by the royalty ruling the United Arab Emirates?

Of course, they can’t.

That, though, was not the drama in the debate room. The drama was how many more times the moderators — KOTV’s Craig Day and KWTV’s Amanda Taylor — would go back to the well demanding Mazzei explain why he changed his mind on the project just as he received Trump’s endorsement.

The answer was two more times, after which Mazzei refused to acknowledge his change of heart, or even that he’d had one. Instead, he sold economic impact, hoping Day and Taylor wouldn’t cancel the remainder of the evening due to his refusal to answer, which they didn’t.

One hopes viewers looking to make a choice understood what Mazzei was doing.

Yes, he’s running for governor, and yeah, this was a debate, but that didn’t mean he was there to answer questions. It meant he was there to offer the same old pablum, believing there to be enough simple, dumb and incurious Oklahomans to vote him into the governor’s mansion.

It’s embarrassing is what it is.

Mazzei began his campaign at the curb and has yet to reach the grass.

So it went.

The candidates were asked about the possibility of a Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus, a gift the U.S. Department of Energy might grant our state if we’re willing to take it and can beat out Louisiana, Tennessee, Utah and Idaho for it.

Drummond was all about it.

“I think it would be remarkable for Oklahoma to get that project, as long as we have local control, they pay for their power and we conserve water,” he said.

Mazzei had no clue.

“I prefer to focus on the oil and gas industry in Oklahoma, and one of the reasons my plan to make Oklahoma a no-income tax state is so important …”

For Christ’s sake.
Change the broken record.

Drummond’s most dense moment — dense as in heavy, detail-oriented, researched — came when he deconstructed Mazzei’s “plan.”

“It’s a gimmick,” Drummond said. “You’re going to have to restore grocery taxes. You’re going to have to eliminate sales exemption taxes. Farmers and ranchers, get ready. Churches, civic groups, museums, you’re going to lose your exemptions.

“He’s going to have to adopt a Tennessee plan where everybody’s consumption is taxed. When you go to your barber, beautician, car repairman, accountant, you’re going to be paying a tax. Corporate tax will have to go up from four and a half to 6 percent. And to my friends in the oil and gas industry, get ready. Gross production tax will go through the ceiling …

“You do all of that and we’re still $1.6 billion short.”

Imagine the gift Drummond offered, giving Mazzei the opportunity to debunk Drummond’s critique. Because who should know Mazzei’s plan more than the man himself.

Mazzei was ready.
Not.

“He lied about the tax plan,” Mazzei said, as the moderators tried moving on.

Later, he returned to the topic.

“In spite of the lies you hear from Gentner Drummond, my income tax plan will lower the income tax rate from 4.5 percent,” Mazzei said. “And one big drop as a three-part strategy to have a revenue-neutral approach to tax reform, and despite the lies of Mr. Drummond, this will never touch the sales tax exemption for manufacturing or agriculture.”

Sorry, but I don’t see a plan.
From 4.5 percent to what?
Which exemptions will be touched?
Who wants consumption taxes running amok?
Nobody.

And isn’t it interesting how Mazzei’s quick to explain who his plan won’t affect, but not who it will? Or that it took Drummond hammering his plan to get Mazzei to say anything, anything, beyond merely his having “a plan.”

Because his real plan is to not reveal his plan, just to say enough to be elected by dumb and unthinking Oklahomans he’s confident will remain dumb and unthinking, the way they were when they stuck with Mary Fallin and Kevin Stitt and elected Ryan Walters.

So embarrassing.

Surely it won’t work.

Not this time.

Right?

Columns like this remain free: no paywall on political writing. That only works if enough readers choose to support it. If you can, a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year keeps this kind of accountability journalism alive in Oklahoma.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

Nationally, and otherwise, Democrats have no leadership.

For instance, unless they can find somebody better, when the Dems take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, as everybody believes they will, they ought to make Pete Buttigieg the Speaker of the House.

They ought to because current minority leader Hakeem Jeffries inspires nobody, just as Chuck Schumer, minority leader in the Senate, inspires nobody.

So why not hire a communicator in chief..

You’d think, in this perilous moment, a moment going on and on, national Dems could at least get their ^%$# together, but they haven’t because nobody wants to give away power and nobody wants to risk what little they have to give others more.

So it goes.

Here at the state level, the characters involved, minority leader Cyndi Munson in the House, also running for governor, and minority leader Julia Kirt in the senate, might indeed have what it takes to get together what national Dems can’t, but we’ll never know until a Dem finally becomes governor again or a big money benefactor moves into the state party apparatus along with a ruthlessly amazing manager who knows how to turn the thing around.

Like, I’ve got a lot of left-of-center politics stuff in my YouTube algorithm but you know what I’ve never seen? Something from Oklahoma’s Democratic Party.

Without the charismatic pull of a super candidate able to be elected governor or money and expertise enough to build an effective state party, one able to run multiple constant ad campaigns — think Progressive: Flo, the Gecko, Passive Progressive — defining the party brand rather than allowing Republicans and pulpiteers to do it for them, state Dems hardly stand a chance.

So, Dems blunder and, around here, get buried. The Republicans, on the other hand, nationally and near, well, they’re kind of a joke and you wonder if their voters are near having enough.

Let’s begin with a couple things Mike Mazzei said at last Saturday’s Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Association Gubernatorial Agriculture Forum.

The question was literally this:

What would your administration do to strengthen access to hospitals, physicians, emergency care, and other healthcare services in rural Oklahoma. What changes, if any, would you support to regarding Oklahoma’s Medicaid policies as part of that effort?

What did the slow and creepy talking Mazzei say?

Healthcare is very personal for me. I was in a car accident many years ago, and fortunately, through faith and family, I pulled through a long, difficult season.

Whenever we talk about healthcare in Oklahoma, we have to talk about Sooner Care. The state’s Medicaid program provides healthcare to 1 million Oklahomans, but an audit was done a few years ago by our friend [state] auditor Cindy Byrd that found there were 1.6 billion dollars of questionable expenditures every year. And you know what the legislature did about it? Absolutely nothing.

It’s true, Mazzei was involved in a 2009 car accident that included an apparent recovery that took so long he twice led the senate in missed votes. Also, none of it has anything to do with rural healthcare.

To the same question, attorney general Gentner Drummond posited rural Oklahoma would lose 27 of 90 hospitals in the next five years if expanded Medicaid were to go away.

Mazzei?

He brought up an old audit that never found fraud, only that many recipients failed to have their income properly verified, which is a staffing problem, while the number he offered was twice the actual number.

Read here and see.

A clown.

Later, Mazzei was asked to how he would strengthen rural schools, the questioner noting those schools are at the center of their communities.

Mazzei began by saying he married a teacher — irrelevant — and spent the rest of his answer on literacy, that “500,000 students are not good readers,” which is unacceptable and that he’ll hire a statewide literacy directory his “first week in office.”

Nothing about funding, which could collapse given his tax plans. Nothing about teacher pay or retention. Nothing about the costs of pulling state education out of the ditch and, most of all, nothing about rural schools.

All he knows are his talking points and he thinks it’s enough.

It’s why both Drummond and Munson crushed him at the forum.

But are Republican voters listening. I guess we’ll find out on August 25.

Meanwhile, as explained in a story penned by Oklahoma Voice’s Emma Murphy, state rep Tom Gann (R-Inola) is trying to get his arms around the whole smelter issue that may or may not come to his town, but speaker of the house Kyle Hilbert (R-Bristow) won’t let him.

Not only did Hilbert deny Gann’s request, as Murphy reported, “to hold an interim study about aluminum smelters,” he was also denied house resources to push out a news release, aimed at his constituents, explaining why no such study would take place.

“They don’t want to be transparent, they just want the narrative to support their position,” Gann said, to which the only reply would appear to be, “representative Gann, welcome to your own party.”

My favorite part of Murphy’s story was this two sentence paragraph:

Hilbert’s office declined to comment or answer any questions from Oklahoma Voice. Hilbert has publicly supported the Inola Shelter.

You’ve got to love it. Or hate it.

“The people in Inola are desperate for information,” Gann said.

You think Gann is only right now understanding this is how his party works, leaders making decisions in the dark, unwilling to put their public voice behind them.

Finally, this.

James Taylor, in a runoff with Robert Franklin to get the Republican state superintendent nomination, who brought his 20-year-old communications director, Lane Brown, with him to an on-set interview with KFOR, did not quite finish said interview because Brown killed it the moment he became the subject.

Brown, you see, likes to call people he doesn’t agree with “r-tarded” and one who support the adoption of children by homosexual couples as “a f-g.”

Read all about it and see the tweets here.

Also comical was Brown, who Taylor stammered to refer to as a “volunteer,” getting Brown to kill the interview mid-interview, lest it embarrass Brown any longer, as though Taylor doesn’t pull the strings in his own campaign, while a 20-year-old flunkie does instead.

Spencer Humphrey, conducting the interview, also recalled the time Brown referred to non-Christians as “third-world parasites.”

What a guy.

What a guy to be hired by a guy who wants to educate your children.

Only in the Republican Party could Brown find work, voluntary or otherwise, helping to direct the campaign of a candidate for a high-profile statewide-elected job.

Only in certain quarters of the Republican Party — parts of it — could a guy like Brown be celebrated for his sentiments.

How long will Republican voters put up with it. How long will so-called reasonable Republicans, who want the votes but abhor the bigotry, put up with it?

Yes, it’s a good time for a reckoning.

For both sides, really.

The one that needs to grow up and get organized.

And the one that’s horribly lost its way.

Don’t forget to vote.

If you appreciate this type of journalism and commentary, a roster of paid subscribers is required to keep Oklahoma Columnist viable and to keep pieces like this in front of the largest audience. Please consider a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

Last Saturday, the three candidates still standing to become Oklahoma’s next governor took the stage in Tulsa for something called the Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Association Gubernatorial Agriculture Forum.

A mouthful, indeed.

At it, the trio of Republicans Mike Mazzei and Gentner Drummond and Democrat Cyndi Munson, among other things, spoke about taxes, income and property.

“Everyone in this room, regardless of political party — and we’ve got to get away from the partisan stuff — is prioritizing our schools, prioritizing healthcare and making sure that our rural communities continue to thrive,” Munson said, explaining that those priorities demand revenue and maybe we shouldn’t be cutting it.

She said it that way, perhaps — “rural communities continue to thrive” — because the cattlemen represent rural Oklahoma and they don’t want to hear their communities aren’t thriving, even as they overwhelmingly vote Republican, which makes it harder for their communities to thrive.

Because it’s the Republicans they’ve helped elect who steal money from the public schools — sometimes Mazzei likes to call them “government” schools — that bind their communities together, giving away $275 million via the tax code, reimbursing parents who were already sending their kids to private schools.

But I digress.

“My property tax plan to abolish property taxes for seniors and veterans isn’t really all that complicated,” Mazzei said. “We’ve got to do something because property taxes for seniors have gone up 30, 40, 50 percent.”

Mazzei, of course, did not explain where state revenue will come from in his post-tax world, but that’s because his tax positions aren’t designed to be implemented, only to get him elected.

So there’s that.

But let’s quicken the pace, because this thing’s about Drummond.

“We need robust education, we need healthcare, we need mental health and we need to develop the next generation,” he said. “We need to make sure we have policies in place that permit our children and grandchildren to continue in our place.”

Later, this.

“We have to be careful,” he said, “with this notion of zero income tax without growing our economy.”

Wait, what?

Does Drummond not know he’s a Republican?

Does he not know this isn’t what Republicans do?

Isn’t he supposed to stick to guns, religion and demonizing the other side?

Sarcasm lifted, does he not know just how uncommon it is for an Oklahoma Republican to offer common sense and common priorities, the types of priorities that benefit regular folks rather than Republican donors who buy access to influence policy that serves themselves?

Holy cow.

How on earth can he win speaking like this?

By doing more of it?

Speaking about rural healthcare, Drummond didn’t reach for a talking point, but for a grievance against his own party’s handiwork.

“Healthcare and mental health are [the] number two and three priorities of my administration. We have to do something different,” he said. “We have to protect the 90 rural hospitals that we have. If we don’t do that, we will lose 27 in the next five years. That requires the state of Oklahoma getting involved.”

“We outsourced to managed care organizations out[side] of Oklahoma the Medicaid distribution to our hospitals and our providers, and they are killing us ... I will fight for you on Medicaid expansion. Continue it.”

Continue it?

Not “reform.” Not “look into.”

Continue it?

Most Republicans see Medicaid expansion as an inconvenient budget hit. Are their voters ready to see it as their own healthcare? That’s what it is and Drummond gets it, but it’s not the party line.

Somewhere along the way it became Republican gospel that Oklahoma doesn’t need the OETA anymore. But Drummond begs to differ.

“All the Republican candidates except one said, ‘Let’s do away with OETA,’” Drummond said, referencing himself. “We have to have that for emergency services. It is the only broadcast network that goes to all 77 counties and protects us in our time of need. We have to defend that.”

And when the subject turned to his own governor, the one Republican voters elected twice, he was only too happy to throw haymakers at Kevin Stitt.

“We will not do silly things like Governor Stitt did when he fired Mark Goeller,” Drummond said. “He cut the heart out of the Forestry Department.”

Does Drummond not know that one of Stitt’s own farmhouses burned on the day Oklahoma burned? Of course he had to fire somebody.

He does, he just doesn’t care.

Look, Drummond has done all he can to appear to support Donald Trump and a lot of it’s been hard to watch, even if his heart’s never appeared to quite be in it. Now, he’s either freed himself from those vestiges or he figured he couldn’t bullshit the cattlemen so the best call was to be true to himself.

Either way, last Saturday in Tulsa, Drummond sounded like a terrific candidate who might make a great governor, just not much of a Republican candidate.

Can he win his runoff with Mazzei despite it?

Great question.

I’ll be voting for Munson.

But it’s Oklahoma, so we better hope he can.

If you appreciate this type of journalism and commentary, a roster of paid subscribers is required to keep Oklahoma Columnist viable and to keep pieces like this in front of the largest audience. Please consider a paid subscription for $6/month or $60/year.

Upgrade to paid

Share

Refer a friend

Leave a comment

On his way out of Tampa, site of SEC football media days, The Oklahoman’s Colton Sulley filed a fine story about Oklahoma quarterback John Mateer.

Sulley’s piece served a couple of purposes.

Underneath a headline proclaiming, “OU football QB John Mateer enters 2026 season with renewed confidence,” it shed light on a part of Mateer’s offseason we didn’t know about.

Apparently, he blamed himself horribly for his team’s failings, though the Sooner brass, general manager Jim Nagy and head coach Brent Venables, particularly, stepped in to make clear he remained valued.

“I struggled. I really did, but they had my back the whole time …” Mateer said. “Them bringing me back and wanting me to be here, and uplifting me to be who I am, means the world.”

It’s clear Mateer took his struggles hard.

In the same press gaggle that supplied Sulley’s story with its quotes, Mateer was asked what he thought were the reasons for the Sooners offensive inconsistency last season.

“I would say I was the reason,” he said. “I mean, to be honest, when you’d watch the film … I cringed when I watched the film.

“So, I’ve got to be better, we’re all working towards it. We’ve all done a great job, but if the quarterback doesn’t perform then it’s tough on everybody.”

Upgrade to paid

Read more

THE HOME OFFICE, Okla. — The problem with SEC Media Days, or any conference’s media days, is you can’t possibly be everywhere at once, and you really can’t be everywhere at once when covering it remotely.

Players and coaches may sit for a formal press conference, one producing a transcript all can read. There’s also bound to be exclusive sitdowns (or standups) for radio and television, or breakout sessions here, there and everywhere, maybe for hometown reporters who traveled, or just anybody standing around.

I’m not sure which Oklahoma quarterback John Mateer got himself involved with on Monday. I only know it did him no favors.

The Sooner quarterback was seated in front of an SEC banner, speaking into an SEC microphone, while the reporters appeared to be standing, crowding themselves around Mateer’s makeshift mount.

Often, it’s called a scrum. A rugby reference, even in America.

Whatever, it produced a kind of damning quote, showing up on Instagram and Twitter as though it was the entirety of one of Mateer’s thoughts.

The question was said to have been about reading SEC defenses and Mateer’s quote was said to have been the following:

“There’s not really any time to think. If someone is open you just throw it to them.”

It’s not the kind of quote you want following you around after a season in which you threw almost as many interceptions (11) as touchdowns (14).

In a tweet, reporter Chris Marler, who appears to have many employers based upon a look at his Twitter page, called it a “Potential Quote of the week on day one.”

Yet, as it turned out, the question wasn’t exactly about reading SEC defenses and Mateer’s answer wasn’t nearly all that was reported.

In fact, you can listen to both, beginning at about the 1:40 mark, on this video.

The question, though hard to hear every word, had to do with the decision to “stand in the pocket or extend the play,” and what Mateer said was this:

“Yeah, you don’t really have time to think out there, so it’s all instinct, you know, so you just play and feel. It’s all feel and instinct, but you train those instincts in the offseason. So, you just react and if somebody’s open you throw it to them and if the pocket’s breaking down, you go make a play.”

One, Marler, if he hasn’t already, should take down his tweet, as well as the story he produced for AtoZ Sports, which then found its way to Yahoo, built entirely around just a snippet of Mateer’s entire answer and nothing else.

Honestly, I’d be shocked if Marler was even in the scrum surrounding Mateer. Had he been, he should have known what the real question was and what the real answer was.

Yet, not being there — or being there and paying no attention — he went with his tweet and story anyway, designed entirely for clicks rather than any real understanding of what Mateer said.

Two, it’s still not a great look for Mateer, because it’s not really all feel and instinct, is it?

And when you say something like, “you just react and if somebody’s open you throw it to them,” even as part of a much larger answer, it still sounds a lot like “if somebody appears to be open you throw it to them” which was a problem of his last season, when beyond the TD and INT numbers, he completed only 62.2 percent (247 of 397) of his passes for just 11.7 yards per catch, which no longer approaches big-time college football adequacy, though it might have made you an All-Pro in the 1970s.

Perhaps if he’d said something about reading the defense.

Perhaps if he’d said something about his improved pocket awareness leading to better decisions in the coming season.

Of course, the question was not about what happens following the snap, but what happens when it’s time to hang or bolt, at which point it really does come down to feel and instinct.

Ugh.

Parsing is exhausting.

Then again, even the most non-forgiving Mateer critic should understand a quote like the one Marler tweeted (and others ran with) screams to be found in its complete form.

What Sooner fans should hope is what Mateer said about “training those instincts” comes true in the new season. Because, you may recall, pocket awareness was mostly not on his bingo card last year.

And so we move on, with a little more understanding of and for the Sooner quarterback, not to mention the inherent inaccuracy of stories and tweets designed not to inform, but just to be clicked and shared.

Share

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Refer a friend