Oklahoma State Gave Its Football Players A Participation Trophy In The Form Of Rings For Losing The Cotton Bowl

okaystate

Apparently the “participation trophy generation” is starting to find its way into college athletics.

In 2013 the Oklahoma State Cowboys had what most programs would consider a very good year. The team finished 10-3 overall, and flirted with both a Big 12 championship and a BCS bowl before eventually playing in, and losing, one of the most prestigious non-BCS bowl games in the Cotton Bowl. In fact, Oklahoma State has been an elite program for the better part of the last six or seven years. It’s my belief they were robbed of a chance to play for the BCS National Championship for the 2011 season. Their presence certainly would have made for a more entertaining game than the LSU-Alabama matchup provided.

Regardless, in 2013 Oklahoma State did not win the Big 12, nor did they play in a BCS bowl, or win the bowl game they did play in. Despite that, and for reasons I’m having a tough time identifying, literally aside from the participation trophy-esque reasoning of “Yay! Sports!”, Oklahoma State University is giving its players and coaches rings commemorating the good, but not actually all that commemorable, 2013 season.

Oklahoma State’s web developer posted pictures of the ring to Instagram.

Uh, what? Did I miss the trend where teams just start giving out rings for seasons that were over .500? The only thing that makes ANY sense about these rings is that this team helped finish the accomplishment of 50 wins in 5 seasons. Other than that, Oklahoma State, despite having a very good year, didn’t actually win or accomplish anything, within the 2013 season itself, that was what you could call ring-worthy. They didn’t even win Bedlam.

These words aren’t uttered often, but here goes: you’re better than that, Oklahoma State.

h/t College Spun

  1. BobLS

    I’d actually disagree with the phrase “Oklahoma State, you’re better than that”. Because they aren’t.

    You’re talking about a school that has been a doormat for the better part of the last century. They finally got a halfway decent team around 1987-88 then lo and behold we found out they were cheating and the NCAA hammered them back into doormat-ness.

    They continued to suck for another two decades until the late 2000s when they suddenly started getting good again. Then lo and behold (again) we started hearing rumors about rampant cheating before Sports Illustrated runs a five part expose on the drugs, prostitution, money and illegal activities going on in their recruiting. The NCAA hasn’t hammered them back into doormat-ness this time (yet), but it’s a good bet that five years from now they’ll be back to scrimmage fodder for the bigger programs in that conference like Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech.

    As for getting robbed in 2011, I’m pretty sure if Iowa State could beat them then my Crimson Tide would have kicked them around like rag doll.

    To sum it up, giving participation rings is about par for the course for a program like Oklahoma State.

    11 years ago at 7:01 pm
  2. dick_kumzinya

    Actually, Oklahoma State had nothing to do with the rings. The rings were designed by the web developer and the players were given the option of buying the rings with the gift card they received from the Cotton Bowl, or paying $169. Some players elected to get the rings as a memento of having played in the game, others elect not to. So it’s not like Oklahoma State gave every player a ring, that did not happen.

    11 years ago at 3:21 pm