Blatant Homerism: Who needs luck?

Back in November, I wrote an article asking, “Who cares if OU is lucky?”

The Oklahoma Sooners had just beaten Alabama in Tuscaloosa, giving the Crimson Tide their first home loss in an SEC game since 2019. OU’s 23-21 win came in unconventional fashion: As Bama stumbled and bumbled at inopportune times on the field at Bryant-Denny Stadium, the Sooners generated touchdowns on an 87-yard interception return and an offensive drive that covered all of 31 yards. Without a turnover margin of plus three, OU had zero chance of pulling off the upset.

By the time the College Football Playoff rolled around, the perception of OU as a team getting by on smoke and mirrors seemed to solidify. The Sooners owed their reputation in large part to a punchless offense that managed to give them just enough to win tight games down the stretch. A 4-1 record in games decided by one score or less helped propel them into the postseason tournament.

But, returning to the original question, was this OU team lucky? The answer to that question matters a lot when projecting what the program could accomplish in 2026.

You could use a team’s record in close games as a crude indicator of its level of luck in a season. As handicapper Brad Powers notes, teams that put up especially strong results in one-score matchups in a given season tend to win fewer games the next year.

Conversely, teams that fare poorly in one-score games generally win more games the following year. We could call those teams “lucky/unlucky” by implication, but plenty of confounding factors could play a role in such trends.

The statistically inclined might cite that squad’s so-called second-order wins as a measure of its over the course of a season. ESPN stats wonk Bill Connelly calculates second-order wins using a team’s postgame win expectancy for each of its games that season. (Win expectancy reflects the likelihood of a team winning based on a variety of predictive factors from the game.) If a team has a postgame win expectancy of 90%, for example, that counts as .9 wins in its total for second-order wins.

OU’s second-order wins mark for 2025 was nine, one below its actual win total for the season. Notably, the Sooners had a win expectancy of just 5% in the aforementioned matchup with Alabama, which essentially knocked a full win off its second-order win total. In absolute terms, you could conclude a -1 difference between actual wins and second-order wins shows the ‘25 OU team got lucky, although not especially so. (For reference’s sake, national champion Indiana had two fewer second-order wins last year, 14, than its actual win total for the season of 16.)

Not surprisingly, the teams Powers mentioned with good records in one-score games all had more actual wins than second-order wins. The teams with poor records in one-score games had more second-order wins than actual wins. It stands to reason that teams winning a disproportionate share of tight games are overshooting their performance on the field, and vice versa.

So what does all of this mean for the Sooners in the coming season?

When it comes to projecting forward, it’s probably a mistake to assume the events we construe as lucky in one season will get balanced out by unlucky events in the next one. However, history does tell us that winning in an unsustainable fashion won’t last. The likelihood of OU winning a game this fall the same way the Sooners beat Bama in ‘25 seems low, for instance.

But OU isn’t destined to take a step back in the win-loss department, either.

The reality is that judging by efficiency metrics, OU was probably a top 15 team last year. The Sooners finished 15th overall in FEI, 14th in SP+, 14th in Adam McClintock’s power ratings, 15th in ESPN’s Football Power Index and 17th in the Sagarin Ratings. OU played about nine games versus teams rated around it, but none of those opponents looked categorically better than the Sooners when all was said and done. From that perspective, a 10-3 record for the season sounds like what you would expect.

In the end, the Sooners won’t require good luck in ‘26 to match or improve on last year’s performance. They just need to play even better football.

Coaches’ corner

As the OU men’s basketball team trudges towards the finish line of another disappointing season, it appears inevitable that head coach Porter Moser will get his walking papers right around the time the buzzer sounds on the squad’s final game. Allow me to share some thoughts about a few realistic candidates I’d consider to fill Moser’s spot on the sideline. (Note: I’m limiting this to current head coaches.)

Casey Alexander, Belmont

Belmont has one of the more consistent mid-major basketball programs in college basketball. Now in his seventh season as head coach of the Bruins, Alexander picked up where predecessor Rick Byrd left off. This year, his squad sits atop the standings in the Missouri Valley Conference and checks in at No. 55 in the KenPom Net Rating. As an added plus, Alexander could potentially bring with him some of the numerous underclassmen getting minutes for Belmont.

Bryan Hogsdon, South Florida

This Zangief look-alike quickly turned around a moribund Arkansas State program in his two seasons with the Red Wolves. Hogsdon now has a USF team that went 13-19 last year in position to win the American in his first season as head coach. The Nate Oats disciple prefers an uptempo style that would generate some needed excitement around the program, but Hogsdon’s track record shows he brings plenty of substance behind that flash.

I’d rank Hogsdon as my top candidate; the Sooners may find plenty of competition for his services after the season.

Eric Konkol, Tulsa

Konkol wouldn’t need to travel far to get to Norman. Tulsa’s head coach enjoyed a solid run in seven seasons at Louisiana Tech before the Golden Hurricane hired him in 2023. His first three seasons in T-Town stunk, but he has rewarded TU for its patience with him. Konkol’s squad is rolling this year: The 23-6 Cane rank 57th overall in the KenPom Net Rating.

Josh Schertz, Saint Louis

Hoops junkies know Schertz well at this point. He compiled a winning percentage of 83% in 13 seasons at Division II Lincoln Memorial before Indiana State hired him in 2021. The Sycamores won 32 games in his third and final year there. Now he has the Billikens playing like a top 25 team while setting the pace in the A-10. Like Hogsdon, prefers a fan-friendly style of play that emphasizes ramping up the pace. Also like Hogsdon, expect SLU’s head honcho to have many suitors this offseason.

Takayo Siddle, UNC Wilmington

Siddle likes for his teams to grind it out. What they lack in entertainment, they make up for in effectiveness. Siddle inherited a program that went a combined 31-66 in the three seasons prior to arrival. Since 2022, the Seahawks have won no fewer than 21 games in a season. Ranked No. 103 in the Net Rating, this is arguably Siddle’s best team yet.

LatestAllen KenneyOklahoma, Sooners, Porter Moser, Alabama Crimson TideComment