By Pete Fiutak
1. You can spin it, massage it, and lobby it any way you want, but there?s one simple reality involved in the Big 12 South debate: Oklahoma doesn?t really have a case. (Before you fire off that angry e-mail, full disclosure, the fan in me is actually happy about how this shook out. For fun's sake, I really do want a Florida ? Oklahoma national title, even if it offends my sense of justice. One other item of note, by the CFN Season Rankings, our formula that?s all about the strength of schedule, Oklahoma wins this debate by a HUGE margin thanks to the wins over TCU and Cincinnati.)
Had the situation been reversed, we would?ve had the mother of all hissy fits on our hands. Bob Stoops would?ve gone ballistic ? ballistic. You wouldn?t be able to get him off the TV because he?d be screaming and lobbying to anyone who?d listen, and everyone who wouldn?t. Politicians would?ve gotten involved, just like they did in the embarrassing aftermath following the 2006 instant replay controversy at Oregon, and you?d hear screaming and yelling all across Oklahoma about how the Sooners beat the two teams playing in the Big 12 title game.
Instead, OU has to hide behind the weak, ?well, you have to count Texas Tech? argument, which has nothing to do with the Texas vs. Oklahoma debate. The one thing Stoops is going by is that his team throttled Tech, but when asked to give the pro-Texas argument, he started out by mentioning that the Longhorns beat his team head-to-head ... done. Over. Texas beat Oklahoma. Texas beat Oklahoma. Texas ? beat ? Oklahoma. If you want to make this a Texas Tech over Texas debate, let?s roll, but if this is just about Oklahoma and Texas right now, which it is, then it?s over.
If you still want to bring up the Texas Tech side, then at least use your head and be rational about this. It took a dropped interception with 11 seconds to play, and the greatest pass play in the history of Red Raider football, to beat the Longhorns with one second to play. Remember, that was in Lubbock. (You know, the place where Oklahoma lost last year.) That was worse than losing by ten on a neutral field? Also remember that in the three-team equation, Texas didn't get a home game.
So what?s the answer, point differential? So what if a team tacked on a garbage time touchdown or two? Oklahoma is better than Texas because it scored 61 on Oklahoma State rather than 54? If that?s the case being made, then why not go by the Kansas game? Oklahoma beat KU by 14 at home, and Texas won in Lawrence by 28. Why not go by Texas A&M? OU beat the Aggies by 38, and Texas beat them by 40. You can?t do it because it?s silly. You don?t need to go by a third standard when you have one iron-clad tie-breaker when we?re breaking down two teams ? 45-35.
So really, what is the answer? In a case like this, bring in the Big 12 athletic directors and commission to make a ruling. If you're going to use opinions for the tie-breaker, use the people in the know rather than coaches and Harris types who don't know the difference between a Joe Ganz and a Robert Griffin.
No, Oklahoma isn?t playing better than Texas right now (remember, defense and special teams are part of the game, too); Texas has won its last three games 129 to 37. Yes, Oklahoma's offense is putting up ungodly stats, but that's partly because it has to thanks to its mediocre defense. No, it isn?t a given that Oklahoma would beat Texas in a rematch. And yes, sadly, the season is now tainted.
In the end, Texas beat Oklahoma on a neutral field. All the bells, all the whistles, and all the 60 point performances can?t change that Texas was the better team on that day on the field. If you?re arguing for anything else, and if you?re going to debate me on this, then you already know what the answer is.
1. You can spin it, massage it, and lobby it any way you want, but there?s one simple reality involved in the Big 12 South debate: Oklahoma doesn?t really have a case. (Before you fire off that angry e-mail, full disclosure, the fan in me is actually happy about how this shook out. For fun's sake, I really do want a Florida ? Oklahoma national title, even if it offends my sense of justice. One other item of note, by the CFN Season Rankings, our formula that?s all about the strength of schedule, Oklahoma wins this debate by a HUGE margin thanks to the wins over TCU and Cincinnati.)
Had the situation been reversed, we would?ve had the mother of all hissy fits on our hands. Bob Stoops would?ve gone ballistic ? ballistic. You wouldn?t be able to get him off the TV because he?d be screaming and lobbying to anyone who?d listen, and everyone who wouldn?t. Politicians would?ve gotten involved, just like they did in the embarrassing aftermath following the 2006 instant replay controversy at Oregon, and you?d hear screaming and yelling all across Oklahoma about how the Sooners beat the two teams playing in the Big 12 title game.
Instead, OU has to hide behind the weak, ?well, you have to count Texas Tech? argument, which has nothing to do with the Texas vs. Oklahoma debate. The one thing Stoops is going by is that his team throttled Tech, but when asked to give the pro-Texas argument, he started out by mentioning that the Longhorns beat his team head-to-head ... done. Over. Texas beat Oklahoma. Texas beat Oklahoma. Texas ? beat ? Oklahoma. If you want to make this a Texas Tech over Texas debate, let?s roll, but if this is just about Oklahoma and Texas right now, which it is, then it?s over.
If you still want to bring up the Texas Tech side, then at least use your head and be rational about this. It took a dropped interception with 11 seconds to play, and the greatest pass play in the history of Red Raider football, to beat the Longhorns with one second to play. Remember, that was in Lubbock. (You know, the place where Oklahoma lost last year.) That was worse than losing by ten on a neutral field? Also remember that in the three-team equation, Texas didn't get a home game.
So what?s the answer, point differential? So what if a team tacked on a garbage time touchdown or two? Oklahoma is better than Texas because it scored 61 on Oklahoma State rather than 54? If that?s the case being made, then why not go by the Kansas game? Oklahoma beat KU by 14 at home, and Texas won in Lawrence by 28. Why not go by Texas A&M? OU beat the Aggies by 38, and Texas beat them by 40. You can?t do it because it?s silly. You don?t need to go by a third standard when you have one iron-clad tie-breaker when we?re breaking down two teams ? 45-35.
So really, what is the answer? In a case like this, bring in the Big 12 athletic directors and commission to make a ruling. If you're going to use opinions for the tie-breaker, use the people in the know rather than coaches and Harris types who don't know the difference between a Joe Ganz and a Robert Griffin.
No, Oklahoma isn?t playing better than Texas right now (remember, defense and special teams are part of the game, too); Texas has won its last three games 129 to 37. Yes, Oklahoma's offense is putting up ungodly stats, but that's partly because it has to thanks to its mediocre defense. No, it isn?t a given that Oklahoma would beat Texas in a rematch. And yes, sadly, the season is now tainted.
In the end, Texas beat Oklahoma on a neutral field. All the bells, all the whistles, and all the 60 point performances can?t change that Texas was the better team on that day on the field. If you?re arguing for anything else, and if you?re going to debate me on this, then you already know what the answer is.
