French essayist Joseph Joubert said, "It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."
Please answer these questions - honestly. You are also not allowed to respond to other people's answers until I say so. If you respond to a previous commenter before the say-so, I will delete your comment.
For OU fans:
1. What was the key game for you this season in determining #2 or #3?
2. What are your thoughts on the October 11 Texas-Oklahoma game?
3. If you were in Texas' position, what would be your reaction?
4. What did you think of Mack Brown spending five minutes on the phone with Musberger during the OU-OSU game?
5. What matters to you most: style points or competition?
For Texas fans:
1. What was the key game for you this season in determining #2 or #3?
2. What are your thoughts on the October 11 Texas-Oklahoma game?
3. If you were in Oklahoma's position, what would be your reaction?
4. What did you think of Mack Brown spending five minutes on the phone with Musberger during the OU-OSU game?
5. What did you think of Bob Stoops' roundabout way of criticizing Texas for campaigning for the #2 spot?
6. Give me the best reason for you being absolutely insane today.
For neutral fans (and I will know if you are, in fact, neutral):
1. Who has the better argument for #2?
2. Who's the bigger titty-baby: OU or Texas?
3. Who do you hope gets beat by 50 in their bowl game: OU or Texas?
4. Should OU lose to Missouri on Saturday, who should take their place in the National Championship?
My Wife Almost Left Me (And Still Might)
1 year ago
4 comments:
I'm all over this, but I have to work at the moment. Don't worry, I'll be back.
Oh, Constable, you sure know how to get me to write some long comments.
Texas fan, here (in case there was doubt):
1. UT v. Tech obviously. Beat Tech, there's no a non-debatable answer to your question. Sorry, Joubert. Is that a cheating answer though? If so, then the next answer would be the OSU v. UT game in which UT showed they were beatable. You kind of have to couple that with OU's thrashing of OSU.
2. UT's defense doesn't get the credit it deserves for holding OU to 35. A definitive answer to which team should move forward.
3. Elated with some twinges of guilt. But not too much.
4. Eh. Kinda dumb. Maybe even a little beggy at the end. Is that a word?
5. If Stoops was criticizing Texas for campaigning, I think your question implies that Stoops was not. Whether Stoops campaigned directly or not, I don't really know. I do know I heard his coaches doing it for him all week. It was funny to me that he acted surprised and a little flumoxed for words when the first question he got from the sideline gal was regarding who should be ahead in the BCS. He said something like, "Uh...You're not gonna rope me into that one." As if he didn't have an opinion on the subject. Come on. It's ok to campaign for your team a little. Everyone knows who you really think should be ahead. If you don't think you should, what kind of a coach are you anyway? The only good thing I'll say for Brown and his Musburger call was that he pulled the CEO/Diplomat answer (which he always does) and said that every team involved in the debate was a great football team, they deserve to go, blah blah etc...but, really, it should be us.
6. Not insane. Not insenced. Nothing. OU deserves a shot. They played well. Good for them. My biggest argument to be insane would obviously be the on-field action. But, hey, I've argued in this forum and others that I'm a fan of the BCS. How can I not stick with that now? It made for some great drama. The last 2 years have been great college football and I still credit the BCS. It's most likely over for UT this year, though there are some interesting scenarios that could bust out (aka, what if, when UF beats Bama, it's only enough to bump them to 3 and Bama to 4? OU v UT neutral site rematch settles all questions. Not likely, but I'm just saying. It would be fun). Best point I've heard any pundit make is that the Big 12 is really the one that dropped the ball. Not the BCS system. If they had the tie breaker set up like the SEC, where, in a 3 way tie, the one with the higher rank goes, UNLESS 2 TEAMS ARE RANKED IN THE TOP 5, IN WHICH CASE, IT REVERTS BACK TO HEAD TO HEAD BETWEEN THOSE 2 TEAMS (sorry, don't know html for italics), there would again, be no debate, Mr. Joubert. But, everyone knew the rules coming into this year. No one cared about that rule until now. The rule will almost certainly change to contain some language to that effect. Just have to wait until next year.
I'm out.
I guess you could call me a Sooner's fan:
1. If you're asking what game I point to in order to argue for making my team #2, I have to look at Tech. As dominant as we were, against the (although highly overrated) #2 undefeated team. It's also the game that allows a three-way tie to even take place. After all, it is a three way tie and not a head to head discussion. It was by far OU's best performance all year in all aspects of the game, running, throwing, defense, special teams. It was on a big stage against the second hottest (to FLA) and one of two undefeated teams. Second would be the OSU game. Beating a good team (that TX squeezed by, at home) on the road with another big offensive performance.
If you're asking what game should be used to determine who should be #2 or #3, then it should be the cotton bowl on Oct 11.
2. This was the most exciting, back and forth game I have ever seen in person. I think it was MUCH closer than a 10 point game. I think OU was a couple of bad breaks (although this is no way to argue- because we all know TX had it's bad breaks against Tech) away from a W. (If it's called an interception in the end-zone- which it was, if we make a tackle on Jordan Shipley on his return in the first qtr, if we don't get called -twice- for terrible 15 yd late hit calls, if if if, etc. then who knows) I think the biggest thing that is overlooked in this game is the loss of Ryan Reynolds. Since the Stoops era began in Norman, the biggest key to each of his defensive units has been the middle linebacker. Losing him was like losing Sam Bradford, and I'm not kidding. This was a guy who graded a perfect 100 the week before. (I know it was against Baylor, but still) He was the leader and the glue that held that defense together. His replacement, blew coverage on at least 5 plays that I can remember and hasn't seen the field since. (you can argue depth, coaching, whatever) All that being said, a well fought game from both sides and an impressive performance all around for Texas. Best game I have ever been to.
3. Insanity. It's unfair. I would buy a Mizzou shirt and cheer for the over-weight pizza delivery man to pull of the upset of the year on saturday night.
4. I was annoyed. Not at him, but at ABC. I think he owed it to his team and his fans to do what he could to get them there. It almost worked. I think if the roles were reversed Bob might've done the same thing. Bob could claim the "High-road" because he knew no matter what, he had a chance to go out and "prove it" on the field. Texas' win over A&M wasn't impressive, or should I say- it didn't give them an opportunity to make a statement. Not because of how they played, but because it was A&M. The Sooners got the luxury of having the schedule work in their favor (in several ways) and went out and posted another thrashing on offense.
5. I hate the term "style-points". That's why the system sucks. I think a win is a win. The irony is, it was competition that got OU the #2 spot, not necessarily style points. I hate that people claim they got style points for absolutely dominating Texas Tech (who was undefeated and scoring 55 points a game). How is that different than regular points?Their SOS in the computer polls is what pushed them over the hump. (although MOV does help) The human polls actually shifted back to Texas even though the Sooners hung 60 on another ranked team. It was their OOC schedule with wins over TCU and Cinci that helped them. Not to mention Texas' win at home against Mizzou didn't look nearly as good after their loss to KU on Sat.
In the end, it's all subjective. I think both sides have good arguments. I think Texas' argument is better. They were the victim of a brutal stretch and the CFB bermuda triangle that is Lubbock on Saturday night. They were also the only team (of the 3- let's not forget, there are 3 teams tied) to beat one of the others on a neutral field. You can't be mad at OU though. They just went out and handled business. You can be mad at the system though. It blows.
For now, I stick with Bob and argue this: It's a three way tie. It's not a head to head argument. If it is, what made it that way? OU's performance against Tech. Well, then that says something about OU.
Again though, if I'm a texas fan. Hello, neutral field, 45-35, end of argument.
I hear Tempe is nice in January though. I guess we would know...
1. Obviously OU/Tech. We dominated in every sense of the word. Our defense kicked ass (and took some names too).
2. It was a game. We should have played better. We had some bad calls. We lost. Moving on...
3. I'd be pissed.
4. I was utterly annoyed. By that, and the ridiculous display of bitterness flying over Stillwater all day. Say a few words and move on, otherwise you sound like a big whiney baby. Stoops had the opportunity to phone in at the UT/A&M game and he declined. Smart man.
5. I think its about competition, though style points definitely plays into that. You whip somebody to pieces at your home field, and then the next week you take care of business on the road. What more do you want?
*We all knew that somebody would get screwed in this situation. You had to have been prepared for it, hellooo it's the BCS. But that's what we're stuck with, til 2014. If OU had taken care of business on Oct. 13th, we wouldn't be having this discussion, and if UT had taken care of business on Nov. 8th...blah blah blah.
UT fans should really be mad at Baylor. They were up by 14 in Lubbock and blew it. That would have negated the whole 3-way tie.
Post a Comment