Occasionally, I read the TulsaNow forum, and I must say, it seems as though there is serious competition between OKC and Tulsa in the minds of those posting there. Most of the comments are negative towards OKC, especially concerning the latest unemployment figures that showed Tulsa's rate was slightly less than OKC. However, what those people fail to realize is that our job base is much larger, so in real numbers, our growth rate and real growth numbers are better. Apparently, it's a victory up there. I guess I will have to take a weekend trip to Tulsa soon so I can see this GREAT city that is so much better than OKC.

Tulsa has always had a horrible little brother complex.

Kind of like OSU to OU.

It is, however, a very nice city. I do like to visit occasionally to see an opera, or go to one of their great museums.

Truth be known, even most Oklahoma City natives 40+ would tell you that Tulsa WAS a superior city, in almost every way, until the last ten years. OKC moved ahead with MAPS and other things while Tulsa stood still. I talk to people in Tulsa who lament their better days.

That is the problem right there. Tulsans all too often lament the better days. Anyone who is older than me still in some ways believe Tulsa still holds its superiority in the state. Yes it did. But those days are gone. I don't believe either city is superior to the other. That is what I tried to emphasize on that forum to TulsaNow forum members. Some agreed with me. Others did not. One particular member made that very clear.

Oklahoma City and Tulsa has its differences, pros and cons, and are different even politically. My wife and I are in Tulsa at least ten times a year to visit her family, so I see a lot of what goes on in Tulsa. It is not my kind of community, but that doesn't make Tulsa a bad place. What makes Tulsa a real turn-off to me is the city's attitude. I don't take to kindly to the superiority complex.

I still enjoy my visits to Tulsa. Differences between two cities make Oklahoma the diverse and exciting place it is, at least to me. But it doesn't matter how successful Oklahoma City is, people in our neighboring city will still find bad things to say.

Honestly, it just seems silly for cities to "Bash" each other, especially since one the cities seem to be fairly different and two really no one outside those two cities really care about which one is better. Maybe I'm just high in thinking that, but that's how I feel.

I think its time to end this stupid feud between OKC and Tulsa. This Feud has done nothing more than hand down the control of this state to the small town politicians.

If OKC and Tulsa would learn to work together this state could be a first class state in no time at all.

I think its time to end this stupid feud between OKC and Tulsa. This Feud has done nothing more than hand down the control of this state to the small town politicians.

If OKC and Tulsa would learn to work together this state could be a first class state in no time at all.

Is there a feud?

We're talking about someone bashing OKC on an internet message board known for bashing things. I'm not sure that there's a "feud" as you put it. Could the cities work together a little better? Yes.

However, if you're asking for the representatives of the cities and their MSA's to work together nicely in the State Capital, remember, you're asking people like John Smaligo of Owasso to work with Opio Touré from OKC -- in other words, individual egos are going to keep that from happening, probably ever.

Here’s a view from Tulsa. I agree mostly with midtowner.

First off, you all may not know this, but Opio Toure is attempting to do real and tangible harm to Tulsa. Right he is hurting Tulsa in the form of attempt to block real and sensible reforms of OSU-Tulsa, OU Shusterman Campus and NSU-Broken Arrow in regards to Tulsa Community College and his little crappy pet college, Langston.

The house leadership wants OU, NSU and most importantly OSU to be able to offer the same courses as Langston and to be able to offer lower division courses. Currently no Tulsa area public college can overlap a Langston-Tulsa course and no one can offer freshman or sophomore classes other than TCC. If OSU-Tulsa is to realize it’s goal of a 20,000 student campus downtown in Tulsa they are going to have to be able to offer a full range of coursework and classes at all levels, not just Junior, Senior and Graduate. This is as important to the revival of downtown Tulsa as moving the Crosstown is to OKC, if not a lot more. Toure is attempting to block this to maintain enrollment numbers for his crap-ass dying college in Langston. Langston’s only real growth and probably it’s only real reason to exist anymore is it’s little campus in Tulsa. Tulsa as a city is far more important to Oklahoma than Langston is as a University. He can’t see beyond the outmoded and very dated idea of saving a “black college”, an idea that should be racist in it’s very concept. A Langston degree is just this side of worthless, why on earth would a black man, a black leader, want his people to get worthless degrees? Or is this his alma mater? I don’t know.

I have to say also that I have never seen a single thread there bash OKC to the point that Tulsa is here, I also have never seen a thread there that started in complaint to something posted on this board. Who has a complex? I’ve seen that happen several times, some in reponse to my posts. Frankly, you have too many thin skinned cheerleaders on this board. I’m sure that will offend many, but there it is. Most of the bashing on that board that mentions your city is not about your city but is about the state government that is IN your city. Please be aware of that.

To everyone else, I say comparison is natural between metro areas that are roughly the same size and in the same state when other nearby cities of the same size are few. What else is in this region? Omaha? Kansas City would be the next most relevant after Omaha, but at 1.9 million to OKC’s 1.16 million and Tulsa’s .9 million in the last census, that’s a reach. We are each others most relevant comparative city, so that is natural to happen. Don’t be offended when your city comes up short sometimes in that comparison. It’s going to happen.

For example, Tulsa’s economy has been in the tank, but that is changing. OKC’s economy has been better, but has done very little to improve it’s average income over the last few years. Tulsa needs to restore it’s average income lost over the last few years and improve it’s growth and unemployment numbers, OKC needs to radically improve it average pay while increasing growth, that in the end, still is nowhere near stellar. Growing by importing a decent number of low wage workers is no way to improve a city that has real issues with blight, and not just downtown like in Tulsa.

Tulsa and OKC do have to work together, too long this state has been run by small minded rural interests, look at the current bill to block the ability of the AG to file lawsuits. This is just a way to hinder the AG from protecting Tulsa’s drinking water from farming interests. The ads on TV mention a very suspect 12,000 farming jobs that might be at risk, but Tulsa has more than 400,000 jobs, which should be protected? But the rural interests are winning again.

I agree with you, swake. Much of our state's history was influenced by rural interests at the state capitol. Seriously, look at all the underutilized four-lane divided highways criss-crossing Oklahoma's countryside. Look at all the satellite universities scattered all over Oklahoma, and not jut satellite universities, small universities at that. Weatherford has a university. Ada. Lawton. Tonkawa, and the list goes on. The result is a $500 million bond issue that could have been avoided by not overbuilding state universities.

But the bashing I personally refer to, swake, and I speak from experience, is the bashing Neptune74137 did on the "Oklahoma City getting ahead?" thread on TulsaNow's forum started by Nuclear2525. Many of his comments were uncalled for. And take a look at the "Good jobs outlook for Tulsa" thread you started, and the posts made that followed.

Now, I am not offended by what you had to say, nor am I a thin skinned cheerleader. Most of what I have to say about the rivalry issue happens off this board, when I am in Tulsa, and when people from Tulsa are down here. This thread wasn't started to bash Tulsa, this thread was started to try and make sense out of this issue.

Yes, people on this forum have responded harshly to your posts on this forum, but we do not put up with Tulsa bashing on this forum, because constructive discussion is what is stressed on this forum. Your insight is always welcome on this board. You were never asked to leave, as I was on TulsaNow. As I have posted on this thread, I do not believe either city is superior to the other, and I was serious about that. We both have our shortcomings and our qualities.

It is important to note, though, swake, that Opio Toure has his own agenda. If Tulsa's representatives manage to gain the support of the state legislature for OSU-Tulsa, then I applaud Tulsa's efforts.

As far as average income is concerned, I have been tracking Oklahoma City's per capita personal income as well as household income. Its growth has accelerated in recent years. It had stagnated until 2001, whereas Tulsa's PCPI had greatly accelerated. Oklahoma City leaders have been focusing on bringing higher-paying jobs to Oklahoma City, with some success, but Oklahoma City's major manufacturing plants have seen increases in income as well, including some decent paying jobs at Quad Graphics, GM and Dayton Tire. Moreso, growth at Chesapeake Energy and Devon Energy has had positive effects on our community, as well as the research complexes at the Oklahoma Health Center.

I do believe, in the wake of Tulsa's loss of thousands of jobs, that Tulsa's economy will come back into full swing. I want to see both cities thrive. I want to see highways in both cities improved, and I hope to see better public transportation in both cities. I want to see good jobs in both cities. I support it, stress it, and encourage it.

Rep. Toure is indeed a graduate of Langston; he got his JD at OU.

"Opio Toure has his own agenda"
That has got to be the understatement of the year on OKCTalk.

2005 ECONOMIC OUTLOOK State of Oklahoma Forecast Update

"The state has now enjoyed approximately 18 consecutive months of job gains. In the revised data, state non-farm job growth the past 12 months reached 1.5 percent, only slightly slower than the U.S. growth rate of 1.7 percent. The under performance of the state relative to the nation is mostly due to continued weak job growth in the Tulsa metropolitan area. In the revised data, Tulsa started showing modest job gains in early 2004, but a weak job number for January 2005 resulted in no gains for the Tulsa area in the latest 12 months of data. The Oklahoma City Metropolitan area continues to lead the state and surpass the nation in job formation with growth the past 12 months reaching 1.9 percent. "

Rah, rah.......

Regarding Income Growth

Nothing against Tulsa, I believe we should all work together with respect to further our economy and image. Bashing one another is futile.

But, I will admit to being a cheerleader for OKC. It's exciting to see our city grow and so many involved in making this a great place to live and work. :cheerlead

There will always be room for improvement, that's everywhere but I choose to focus on some of the positives rather than the negatives.

These are facts regarding personal income that are worth mentioning after reading the above posts:


Growth in metro area personal income is expected to rebound from a 2.7 percent average gain in 2002 and 2003 to 4.4 percent in 2004 and 5.2 percent in 2005 . Similarly, per capita personal income is expected to rebound, with growth accelerating from 1.8 percent in 2003 to 3.4 percent in 2004. In comparison, the nation is expecting 4.3 percent growth in per capita personal income in 2004, expanding the income gap as measured by the relative per capita income. The metro area made significant gains in closing this gap prior to the 2001 recession and continued to do so during the first two years of the recovery, but the expected sharp increase in national income in 2004 will temporarily reverse this trend. The 2005 forecast for per capita personal income anticipates further gains for the metro area relative to the nation, raising relative per capita income from 89 percent in 2004 to 90 percent in 2005. Gains in income are expected to support consumer spending, as projections of taxable retail sales in the metro area reflect this with expected growth in 2004 and 2005 of 4.0 percent and 4.1 percent, respectively.



The Oklahoma City area looks to sustain employment growth beyond the national and state growth rates adding nearly 10,000 jobs to area payrolls in 2005. Expect healthy growth in hiring in the Mining, Construction, and Services sectors, while the Manufacturing, Real Estate, and Government sectors will remain weak. The forecast anticipates weakness in the Goods-Producing sectors to be offset by relatively larger gains in Services sectors.

Overall, metro area employment prospects for 2005 are significantly better than in 2004.

Real quick comment...I'll comment more later. What I don't understand is people on the Tulsanow forum spend countless hours ripping OKC. It isn't like we rip Tulsa on this forum. We do rip people that come to this forum bashing OKC, but I think most of us here like Tulsa as a community. I can't think of any threads where we've bashed Tulsa, unlike on Tulsanow where they constantlly bash OKC.

Call us cheerleaders if you want, but that's the general attitude in our city government. We're on the move and proud of it. We could care less what other cities think about us. We have a master plan in front of us and we plan on completing it.

I agree that we have serious issues in the state legislature, but I don't really think you can blame our city for that. Our city government isn't involved in that.

I will say as I always have before...I like Tulsa and I like the atmosphere that Tulsa offers. Tulsa is a gorgious city, with a landscape that's incomparable to OKC. I've said this before on Tulsanow...I like the upscale artsy feel Tulsa gives.

What I don't understand is everytime I post a positive comment on Tulsanow about Tulsa, I get bashed by posters like neptune, and a few others...this is after making positive comments about their city. I'm at a loss to understand that.

I like Tulsa, but it's the attitude of Tulsa's citizens that burns me.

My lord, we have been through this routine already for crying outloud!

... and wasn't I the last one to bring it up? *feels ashamed*

Just another comment...our city has tried to work with Tulsa. It's Tulsa city leaders that refuse to work with our city leaders. Mayors Ron Norick and Kirk Humphreys proposed working with Tulsa to build a shared airport in Stroud. It was OKC that came up with this idea, reaching across our city borders to the city of Tulsa. It was Tulsa city leaders who laughed in our face and refused to work with us.

It's hard to join forces with another city that wants to go it alone!

I think our city leaders work well with other city leaders. When we were planning MAPS, we talked to countless other cities to get ideas for our canal, ballpark, etc. San Antonio offered us a great deal of advice on our canal. And we've taken heed to some of their advice. For example, we're using natural gas powered water craft instead of gasoline powered boats. We've also focused on maintaining our landscaping, and keeping the canal clean! We've also established a police substation in Bricktown with a bike police force designated for the canal. These ideas were all put into action based on suggestions from the city of San Antonio.

We tried to offer Tulsa help with their Vision 2025, telling them what worked and didn't work in our MAPS. In some ways, our city leaders were snubbed.

All I can say, is we've tried as a city to work together with Tulsa. Tulsa leaders seem to have this idea that they're gods and they need to be worshiped. Many Tulsa citizens feel the same way about their city. It's hard to reach out to people like that, who have their nose so high in the air, they won't listen.

This is nothing against Tulsa by the way...I love the city of Tulsa. In some ways, I like it better than OKC. I just think there needs to be a whole attitude shift among the leaders in Tulsa.

Tulsa completes Oklahoma. It is so close, but offers what OKC cannot. OKC is the big city. It is a busy, hustle-bustle place with loads going on, and so is Tulsa. But Tulsa offers pictaresque mansions, hills, rivers, and lusher greenery than you could imagine. Art deco architecture for which it is worldly famed, and rightly so. Tulsa offers an upper class take on big cities. OKC offers a... very supersized take on big cities.

Supersized, you ask? Everything here is bigger. The nation's third largest size completes my statement. The land run spirit lives on in Oklahoma City. The oil legacy lives on in Tulsa.

Now, Tulsa is also home to 900,000 snobbish, arrogant anti-OKC residents, who feel (they are probly correct) that they have gotten the short straw, as far as State funding goes.

I am from Tulsa, and I agree with you on several of these issues..such as the leadership of Tulsa acting like they know everything...and a few from our TulsaNow forum that are little cheerleaders such as neptune that never let anything negative be said about our city...It just bugs me because okay...it seems like everytime anyone comes onto the TulsaNow forum and says anything negative..everyone jumps all over them...it is like they can't stand to be criticized...they need to get over that...oh..and also.. I agree..Tulsa needs to forget about the "oil legacy" and move on...I'm glad that someone here on this forum brought this topic up...oh and about the state funding...well there really is no argument there...i'm sorry

-Paul

Tulsa completes Oklahoma. It is so close, but offers what OKC cannot. OKC is the big city. It is a busy, hustle-bustle place with loads going on, and so is Tulsa. But Tulsa offers pictaresque mansions, hills, rivers, and lusher greenery than you could imagine. Art deco architecture for which it is worldly famed, and rightly so. Tulsa offers an upper class take on big cities. OKC offers a... very supersized take on big cities.

Supersized, you ask? Everything here is bigger. The nation's third largest size completes my statement. The land run spirit lives on in Oklahoma City. The oil legacy lives on in Tulsa.

Now, Tulsa is also home to 900,000 snobbish, arrogant anti-OKC residents, who feel (they are probly correct) that they have gotten the short straw, as far as State funding goes.

Well said, Sooner&RiceGrad. But what breaks me the most is anytime a beautiful neighborhood in OKC is discussed among some in Tulsa, they think it's all in Edmond. I've heard this comment before in Tulsa at Woodland Hills Mall by two women over by the Dillard's entrance talking casually... "Quail Creek has a lot of really nice homes." The other lady asked "Where exactly is Quail Creek?" The first lady replied "I'm sure it's in Edmond. That whole area by Quail Springs Mall is Edmond."

Point is, the pre-concieved notion is by most Tulsans is... if it's nice, then it's not in Oklahoma City. Some actually believe Putnam City is a city. It is just a school district.

"Supersized, you ask? Everything here is bigger. The nation's third largest size completes my statement."

This is an oldie that needs to be put to rest. Oklahoma City isn't all that big if you just drive the developed areas. OKC's "area size" that is pointed to with pride is actually only because of incorporated fields of wheat in all directions (mostly north). City leaders bought up tons of land years ago and it is calculated (rightfully so) as part of our "city size." I can drive one end of OKC to the other (North to South and vice versa) in under thirty minutes on the Interstate. That's not very big for a "big city" in land area. I'm all for cheering our city on, but sometimes we get a little carried away. Of course, when this is pointed out - some call it "negativity." I call it bringing some wild-eyed statements back down to earth.

I don't think I'd call it pride when we bring up Oklahoma City's 621 square mile total area (608 square miles of land) I think we all know that it's not one of OKlahoma City's strong points. Well, except for Sooner&RiceGrad. I wish this didn't happen. I'm okay with 350 square miles, but not 621. We wouldn't lose much by shedding all of the area east of Lake Draper, a huge chunk west of Moore, and clip off 20 square miles near Piedmont. Strangling suburbs is what did in Bethany, Warr Acres and The Village.

I like both cities. Growing up as a kid in Lawton in the 50's, and graduting from LHS in 1961, I'd never been to Tulsa.

Part of the reason was that Tulsa didn't then participate in Oklahoma's state high school competitions ... athletics, debate, band contests. Tulsa was an island to itself. It wouldn't be until several years later that would change, and, in some ways, Tulsa's stand-alone-ness remains true. Many of my non-Tulsa and Tulsa lawyer buddies refer to Tulsa as "The State of Tulsa".

That said, Tulsa does have MUCH history and attractiveness and I enjoy my trips there, always do (I don't like much driving there though ... too slow to get somewhere, or so it seems to me). Tulsa has a cultural heritage which exceeds that in here in Okc. We've got some great stuff, too, and I'm secretly pleased (or not so secretly) that many Tulsans have actually looked at Okc with some envy during the past decade or so.

Slightly off-topic, and I don't know what if anything might have come of it, but I was interested to see that the Colcord may become a "botique" hotel like Tulsa's Ambassador Hotel. I've stayed there once and it very very charming. It would be great to have that happen here. Here's a link: http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2005_1st/Jan05_Colcord.html

Both cities have much to be proud of. I like 'em both. It's natural, though, for competetion to exist, as in OSU v OU. I went to undergrad at OSU and it has my heart firmly in its pocket, and went to law school at OU. I root for both unless they are playing each other. I think that the OU and Tulsa both share an "attitude" issue. It would be much better just to be "nice" and live in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

"Supersized, you ask? Everything here is bigger. The nation's third largest size completes my statement."

This is an oldie that needs to be put to rest. Oklahoma City isn't all that big if you just drive the developed areas. OKC's "area size" that is pointed to with pride is actually only because of incorporated fields of wheat in all directions (mostly north). City leaders bought up tons of land years ago and it is calculated (rightfully so) as part of our "city size." I can drive one end of OKC to the other (North to South and vice versa) in under thirty minutes on the Interstate. That's not very big for a "big city" in land area. I'm all for cheering our city on, but sometimes we get a little carried away. Of course, when this is pointed out - some call it "negativity." I call it bringing some wild-eyed statements back down to earth.

xrayman, I like the attitude you bring to this forum. I think while some of us may be on cloud 9 about our city, you insert a sense of reality in our discussion.

Anyways, just wanted to tell you I appreciate your input.

I am from Tulsa, and I agree with you on several of these issues..such as the leadership of Tulsa acting like they know everything...and a few from our TulsaNow forum that are little cheerleaders such as neptune that never let anything negative be said about our city...It just bugs me because okay...it seems like everytime anyone comes onto the TulsaNow forum and says anything negative..everyone jumps all over them...it is like they can't stand to be criticized...they need to get over that...oh..and also.. I agree..Tulsa needs to forget about the "oil legacy" and move on...I'm glad that someone here on this forum brought this topic up...oh and about the state funding...well there really is no argument there...i'm sorry

-Paul

Paul, I think it's easy for one to be so optimistic about their city, they don't want to focus on the negative. I personally don't like to focus on the negative in our city, but reality is there are many things we as a city need to work on. City-wide beautification, continued urbanization of downtown, expansion of our airport, renovation of our deteriorating fair grounds, etc. are many ways we as a city need to expand.

I know there are many on this forum that are cheerleaders for our city. There's nothing wrong with that. Forward thinking is a good thing, and the reason we've completed ambitious projects like MAPS. Many called Mayor Ron Norick crazy when he pitched MAPS many years ago. They also called him a cheerleader. Several claimed he was dreaming and wasn't facing reality. You can now see the result of MAPS, thus it shows that cheerleading can be a good thing for forward thinking.

At the same time it's important never to lose site of the reality you're really facing.

I think many on this forum get frustrated with our city leaders. But to be real honest, many are forward thinking, but they face reality a little more than many of us would like to.

About Tulsa...I don't necessarily think they need to completely forget about their oil legacy. Oil has been an important part of Tulsa's history. I dfo think though that the days of Tulsa being viewed as an oil capitol are gone, and Tulsa leaders need to understand that. Tulsa's oil history is just that....HISTORY!

Tulsa needs to leave its oil legacy behind just as OKC needs to leave its Native American History behind. Leave it for the muesums, but other than that, it's time to move on into the 21st Century.

I know Sooner&RiceGrad sounds like a cheerleader with his Hydrogen fuel idea, but he brings up a good point. We as a state need to invest in something that will sustain us for the future. For OKC that may very well be the biotech industry, as evidenced by our growing research park. Tulsa still needs to find its niche!

I am from Tulsa, and I agree with you on several of these issues..such as the leadership of Tulsa acting like they know everything...and a few from our TulsaNow forum that are little cheerleaders such as neptune that never let anything negative be said about our city...It just bugs me because okay...it seems like everytime anyone comes onto the TulsaNow forum and says anything negative..everyone jumps all over them...it is like they can't stand to be criticized...they need to get over that...oh..and also.. I agree..Tulsa needs to forget about the "oil legacy" and move on...I'm glad that someone here on this forum brought this topic up...oh and about the state funding...well there really is no argument there...i'm sorry

-Paul

You won't find much escape over there then. I am one of those that may have jumped on you. May I ask what your sn over there is? I think that if they want to take a part in their community they need to start putting aside political differances, and actually brainstorm how to resolve city problems as an influential online body. Now that last part may not be true about TulsaNow, but as long as city leaders browse this forum we are influential.

I hope Tulsa never forgets it's Oil Legacy, but I do hope Tulsa moves on. But still keeps Oil near and dear.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/Smailies%2001-28-08/surrender.gif


This is an oldie that needs to be put to rest. Oklahoma City isn't all that big if you just drive the developed areas. OKC's "area size" that is pointed to with pride is actually only because of incorporated fields of wheat in all directions (mostly north).

Wrong. I firstly do not consider the area in Deer Creak "wheat fields" but rather a rapidly developing corner of our metro. :tiphat:


City leaders bought up tons of land years ago and it is calculated (rightfully so) as part of our "city size." I can drive one end of OKC to the other (North to South and vice versa) in under thirty minutes on the Interstate.

Than you are lucky. It usually takes me twice as long to go from Norman to Guthrie.


I don't think I'd call it pride when we bring up Oklahoma City's 621 square mile total area (608 square miles of land) I think we all know that it's not one of OKlahoma City's strong points. Well, except for Sooner&RiceGrad.

I love to be mentioned in an idiotic sense. Please do it some more. :LolLolLol


We wouldn't lose much by shedding all of the area east of Lake Draper, a huge chunk west of Moore, and clip off 20 square miles near Piedmont. Strangling suburbs is what did in Bethany, Warr Acres and The Village.

Atleast you can be asured we won't have urban decay if there is growth within our main city's city limits. Oh, and I think West Moore is absolutely vital to Oklahoma City. It is the metro's wealthiest zip code, with around 40,000 people, and a "mini Memorial".



Tulsa has a cultural heritage which exceeds that in here in Okc.


Quite right.

Edit: I put the quote codes in myself and they didn't come out very well.

Doug - "I think that the OU and Tulsa both share an "attitude" issue"

You are very correct about that. When anyone mentions anything good about OSU, an OU grad brings up that "they" have a better football team, or mention everything the Gaylords are paying for at the university, or say OSU is just a farm school with cowboys and rednecks. They think their school is the best, and there is nothing wrong with that, but they don't need to put down everyone else to make them feel that way.

Doug - "I think that the OU and Tulsa both share an "attitude" issue"

You are very correct about that. When anyone mentions anything good about OSU, an OU grad brings up that "they" have a better football team, or mention everything the Gaylords are paying for at the university, or say OSU is just a farm school with cowboys and rednecks. They think their school is the best, and there is nothing wrong with that, but they don't need to put down everyone else to make them feel that way.

Well, OU *does* have the better football team. You have to be sipping hard on the orange kool-aid to believe otherwise.

What that has to do with its academic excellence is beyond me.

As far as academic comparisons, you really can't compare the two, they have their niches, and are complimentary rather than in direct competition.

Most of the people who believe one is simply better than the other, most likely have never attended college.

I have.

Of course they think it's in Edmond. The Edmond Post Office delivers the mail to everything north of 150th Street. (Between Blackwelder and Eastern/Boulevard, it's Memorial Road; east of that, it's 122nd Street.) Almost none of the Canadian County areas of the city have an Oklahoma City ZIP.

I might - in fact, I will - point out here that not only is Oklahoma City the largest city in Oklahoma County, but it's also the largest in Canadian County, and the second largest in Cleveland County.

(2000 Census figures: OKC in Canadian County, 26,311; Yukon, 21,043; El Reno, 16,212.
Norman, 95,694; OKC in Cleveland County, 47,271; Moore, 41,138.)

russellc said, "You are very correct about that. When anyone mentions anything good about OSU, an OU grad brings up that "they" have a better football team, or mention everything the Gaylords are paying for at the university".

Now, now, russellc, I doubt that any OU devotee would brande their egos with pride upon the fact that the Gaylords are VERY substantial benefactors of that university. I don't mean to say that they are not glad to have the $$$. Hell, if the Gaylords had done the same with OSU, I'D be glad for OSU to have their money!!! But, to the point, I have a higher regard for OU people than to think that the beneficence of a donor, even a mega-wealthy donor, would be seen as a badge an honor. I mean, Boone Pickens did what he did for OSU w/o asking for naming rights on the renovated football stadium (even though the "naming" in fact happened). I have great admiration for the original Gaylord did in the development of early Oklahoma City, but that was then and this is now. And, as for national respect for the name of the new journalism school at OU, check the Net to see how well the Oklahoman is regarded beyond our state's borders.

But, then, MIDTOWNER, of all people (the sly devil ... I've got to watch it or Midtowner is going to get a complete catalog of all my punchable buttons), punches my buttons about OU Football (as if that really matters, as he admittely goes on to say).

Doubtless, this thread is not the place to get into OSU-OU stuff ... but PLEASE, don't get me riled, Midtowner! :( I only brought it up because I think the Tulsa-OU OKC-OSU analogy, in terms of relative "attitude", would "ring true" to most OBJECTIVE observers. A thorough OSU-OU debate should doubtless be saved for another thread ...

... except that I must wonder out loud, "Who in hell is responible for that mish-mash of ecclectic and non-homogeneous buildings that OU calls a campus, anyway?" :) :) :)

Humor aside, the truth is, if either OSU or OU devotees have a gander a the University of Chicago campus (for example), both groups would be left speechless. Now, THAT'S a campus!!! To carry the analogy further, I doubt that either Okc or Tulsa would have much response beyond silence to say if either were compared to some other mature midwestern city, for example, Kansas City, Mo.

That said, Tulsans and Oklahoma Citians are rightly proud of what they have done in about 100 years or so, as each group should be. We're doing great, Oklahoma(!), but everything is relative.

Doug

sooner&ricegrad said- "May I ask what your sn over there is?"

It is still flyingcowz

-Paul

Edmond?

Very few people in Tulsa have ever been to edmond, how many of you have been to Owasso?

but it's also the largest in Canadian County

Well I would be the first to tell you the nice part is Yukon. I know these things.

Funny that the OKC forum is offended by a little bashing from little brother Tulsa while at the same time bashing OKC's big brother Dallas in the thread above???????

There's a difference between bashing and stating the facts as you saw them! I reported on what I saw when I went to Dallas. No lies about it.

Thats ok as long as the Tulsa folks can say the same? I actually posted your comments on the Dallas Forum and most thought it was a fair assesment as did I. My point was that nobody should be offended by the opinions from Tulsa either.
As the saying goes, " If you can dish it...

while at the same time bashing OKC's big brother Dallas in the thread above?

If I remember right, SOME users bashed Dallas. I was not one, and actually made a joke about OKC in that thread. And mind you I am OKC's #1 source of propoganda.

I would stand for Dallas if the thread was repeated- but only till I got a migraine from being alone. You are right, renffahcs.

P.S. Long time no see, buddy!

Personally, I enjoy hearing opinions from Tulsans when they visit our city, good and bad. It reminds us that we still have a lot to work on.

I can give you a long list of things I don't like about OKC, and areas we could improve on. Let's see.....natural beauty is nonexistent, Lower Bricktown isn't exactly what we would've liked to have seen, I-40 coming in from Yukon looks like hickville, we have very little landscaping surrounding our streets, our schools are currently in disrepair, our streets are always crumbling, our airport is still a joke, the Ford Center isn't very attractive (Tulsa's will have class), etc. etc. etc.

I think the most helpful thing I've ever read was from a member on Tulsanow who commented on our zoo. He/she was right....our zoo has needed work for years...thankfully, work continues out there.

Sorry if it sounded like I was bashing Dallas. I was just stating what I saw, and I'm open to people's opinions on our city as well.

If we want to become a bigger, better city we have to ignore what other cities WITH NOTHING in common with ours say. We need to listen to the comments of Dallas, Denver (Maybe Hot Rod is right.), Omaha, and Little Rock to find out how we are doing.

Oh and yes, it does look like Hickville around Yukon.

If we want to become a bigger, better city we have to ignore what other cities WITH NOTHING in common with ours say. We need to listen to the comments of Dallas, Denver (Maybe Hot Rod is right.), Omaha, and Little Rock to find out how we are doing.

Omaha? :confused:

By the way, I can praise Dallas too......they have one mighty fine commuter rail system. When and if we get to the stage of developing our own, we need to model DART!

I like the concept of inticing the suburban commuter to the endless possibilities of mass transit.

Patrick, as I said earlier I did not have a problem with any of your comments and neither did most of the Dallas Forumers. I thought your comments were honest and balanced. There is a difference between constructive critism and bashing. Some people bash here and on the Dallas Forum as well. Just read the bashing between Dallas and Houston!! By the way, I really like OKC. I grew up in Wichita Falls and we would either go to DFW or OKC to get out of town so I have frequented OKC many times. I even spent a weekend downtown a couple of years ago and explored DT and Bricktown. Wow, Bricktown is a real asset!! Downtown seemed nice and clean from what I remember. I did not see any panhandlers either. I hope DT gets some retail, Starbucks would be good, and much more residential. This is one area Dallas and Fort Worth are booming with right now. Other problems seem to take care of themselves when people live downtown and can call it their neighborhood. By the way Patrick, next time you want to visit try DT Fort Worth. We don't have a canal but we have a very nice DT.

Omaha? :confused:

Yes, Omaha,

Omaha is a great town, it’s just a little smaller than Tulsa and they have a great downtown restaurant/nightclub district, a little larger and much more mature than Bricktown. Almost like a smaller version of KC’s Westport, but without the Plaza next door of course. There’s a decent amount of retail and some nice local restaurants. I haven’t been there since they built the new arena and hotel downtown, that should really add to downtown Omaha.

The people on this board didn’t really believe the hype about Bricktown being the best entertainment district in this part of the nation did you? Kansas City has that, hands down. I personally like Brookside more than Bricktown anyway. Brookside has many more local upscale restaurants than Bricktown and has a lot more retail, a lot of it more upscale than anything in OKC anywhere and since it’s just part of a big trendy Tulsa neighborhood, there is a lot of residential already. It’s less than a mile from Riverparks and also less than two miles from Cherry Street and Utica Square and less than three miles from downtown.

Westport is larger than even Brookside and has more a downtown urban feel. Instead of being strung along a big arterial street for two miles like Brookside, Westport is very compact and is just block after block of bars, stores and restaurants. Then there’s The Plaza, which is very similar to Utica Square is right next door. The Plaza also has a big hotel section to it that Utica does not and it’s somewhat larger, but they are very similar, Utica is in some ways is a bit more upscale. The Plaza has had a lot of big highrise condos go in nearby, and Utica has some of that too. There’s the one big 20 story condo building on 21st and a new complex going in right between Cascia Hall and Utica Square, but Utica is situated in a very upscale neighborhood, much more than the Plaza is, and just how much of that kind of construction is possible is very limited.

Now, just like Tulsa, The Plaza and Westport aren’t actually downtown, but they are very close. But also like Tulsa KC is building a big new arena, The Sprint Arena hoping to merge downtown with the Westport/Plaza area. Kinda like Tulsa would like to link downtown with Brookside/Riverparks/Cherry St/Utica. And KC has also talked about an NBA team, or hockey for the new arena. I think their chances might be better than OKCs. And the city is trying to talk the Royals into moving downtown too.

See, not everything is city size.

Who said we believed the hype about Bricktown being the best in this part of the nation? Bricktown has been a work in progress. I don't know how many times I have to stress that. And I don't believe Bricktown vs. Brookside is a matched comparison.

Brookside is a neighborhood district. Not a downtown district. Brookside, for one, is an excellent and trendy district, but Brookside has been around for a LONG time. The Western Avenue District is a better comparison to Brookside, because it too is a neighborhood district in an upscale area, especially since it straddles Nichols Hills. However, Western Avenue is relatively young compared to Brookside. Western Avenue District is only a decade old, if that. Bricktown is a little more than a decade old, so yes, the district in Kansas City is much more mature than Bricktown. But where does this warrant criticism? Of course KC has a better chance of landing an NBA team. They are a larger market than OKC's.

We've been busting our butts to get away from the Oklahoma City of the 1990's. We still have a lot of problems under repair. But why are we still doing time for the city we once were? And why aren't we allowed to provide constructive criticism for other cities we visit? Oh, wait, I forgot, we live in Oklahoma City. We're supposed to keep our mouths shut.

Read the posts, this thread is all about complaining about critical posts on the TulsaNow site. It’s the thin skinned worriers on this board that felt they were offended. I tried to point out that comparisons are natural and please don’t feel like someone is blasting you. But that didn’t seem to help.

Feel free to complain about Tulsa all you want, the politics suck, job growth is meager, the growing city vs suburb battle could be really bad. Downtown closes at 5pm except for a couple bar districts, neither of which is very large yet. The city council is a complete joke. Hell, just blasting on those issues could take days, weeks even.

Go to TulsaNow, see if anyone even notices any anti-Tulsa stuff here. I think I’m the only one that’s even seen this thread and I certainly am not going to complain there about what is said here, you aren’t hurting my feelings any. Hell, the negative stuff about Tulsa here is far weaker than what the posts on the Tulsa board say.

It’s almost comical, now you are saying that you aren’t allowed to say anything negative? I don’t care, go ahead, blast away. But this thread is all about complaining that some post on a Tulsa board was not kind to your city. I’m just saying, don’t worry so much about it, not that big a deal, come on!

Remember swake, this thread was started by a newer member who was trying to understand Oklahoma City and Tulsa's sibling rivialry. I am a member of both forums. I posted on the TulsaNow forum as TStorm. I am not here to blast away at Tulsa, just to clarify differences between districts in both cities.

Of course it's not a big deal, however anytime people on this forum posted their opinions about what they did and didn't like about other cities. It was never long before someone (and not you specifically) responded as though we have no room to talk. Just wanted to shed some light on that matter.

Kansas City had an NBA team: the Kings. They have since decamped for Sacramento.

(In fairness, I should point out that the same team, which started in the Forties, did time in Rochester and Cincinnati, and during the first part of its tenure in KC, about half the home games were played in Omaha.)

Swake, I also have read this post...it doesn't bother me either...
-Paul

Well of coarse, good marketing is to try to consolidate as many as you can. With Tulsa hopes are high of winning loyal Arkansan fans.

None the less, here in OKC we are split over whether to consider ourselves Southern, Midwestern, or Western. I think of us as the leg of Little Dixie. Others like the reputation we have going of plains, I do not however.

What happens in the Midwest, stays up there.

Oh, and renffahcs is right. Patrick ought to check out the new art museum, I can tell you from experiance it is great. And even though the stockyards aren't as big as OKC's, they ARE more of a tourist attraction.

Not everything IS bigger in Texas, but everything does allude to be bigger.

And Swake, thank you for the info on Tulsa, we would gladly welcomes you to create Tulsa threads here. I would be active in them, but my activity is sadly limited. I have pushed for a state-wide forum but I don't know if it will happen anytime soon.

And I actually consider Omaha to be our sister city, even if it IS Midwestern with no doubt. Fort Worth is the city we shares the second most in common with.

Hey Renffahcs, what part of FW do you lives in?

I am just south of the Texas Motor Speedway. If I am not mistaken didn't you say your bro lives in Azle?

Yup. Do you know where Covered Bridge Canyon is? You live right by the new United Artist movie plex then, sorta just south of Decatur. Now I gotcha.

What is Tulsa's brother city? Austin? Memphis?

Not Austin!!!

Probably Little Rock or KC. I personally am fond of Little Rock for being stunning, or more so than it's state, but not as stunning as Tulsa. KC is the city of fountains, but even that reputation can't match Tulsa for aesthetics.

Tulsa seemed to have the musical history---cains ballroom, brady theater, bob wills, tommy alsup (who played with buddy holly), countless other GREAT musicians.

Little rock isnt as large as Tulas but still not a bad place to be..........KC i guess i would call it Tulsa's sister city.....both are having developmental problems but both have GREAT potential.

uhhh.... KC is booming! What are you talking about?

Maybe the Kansas side of KC?

Actually the Kansas side has more people. 1.3 million, I think. Most likely more.

The Tulsa metro area has about 900,000+ people.....sorry OKC tulsa isnt that small anymore.