LONGHORN MESSAGE BOARD SWARM, INITIATE
It’s a national holiday and a drowsy news day besides—the kind of afternoon that makes you want to curl up on the couch with a cup of coffee and the Monday Bourdain marathon on the Travel Channel, and watch a large, ardently devoted online fanbase absolutely lose their shit.
In marginally related news, please enjoy Tulsa World’s interview with Oklahoma linebacker Ryan Reynolds (emphasis ours):
Q: A lot of people thought your absence from the second half against Texas was the difference in the game. Even though you lost to Texas, you played in the Big 12 title game and the national championship game. Did it feel good to know that your knee wasn’t the difference in the entire season?
A: Well, I don’t know about the Texas game, but as the season went on, I felt our team got a lot better. I felt if we were to play Texas later on in the season, or had a tie-breaker game or something like that, I think we would have won that game. I think we were a better team than Texas at the end of the year. I mean, I’m glad that loss to Texas didn’t have any effect on us going to the national championship. But I don’t feel like me coming out of the game was the reason why (Texas won).
Oh, where to begin? The implied statement that mid-October is too soon to evaluate the prowess of a team? After all, it’s only what, seven games into the season? The idea that losing the national title game (only the latest in an admirably solid streak of postseason choke-jobs) leaves one’s team somehow superior to a team it lost to by 10 on a neutral field, a team that went on to win its own BCS tilt? We just can’t decide. Angry Texas hordes, over to you. Arise, Army of the 45-35.
Loading ...
1
BurritoBrosShits says:
When, you’re busy making shitty movies on the side, how on earth do you expect to play Division I college football?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
2
CincySooner says:
yawn… it happened… get over it.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
3
DrBundy says:
@ BBS –
I had to think about that one for a minute. Mardi Gras has caught me early this year…brain still foggy this AM. +1 for the funny.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
4
bevonyc says:
Must….not….take….the bait…..35….45..big game stoopsie loses another one. October 17 cannot get here soon enough. \m/
February 16th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
5
Holly says:
Now where’s the fun in that? It’s the offseason! DANCE, PUPPETS. DANCE FOR OUR ENTERTAINMENT.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
6
jacketexan says:
39-33
February 16th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
7
ClemsonHorn says:
So I was combing hornfans and shaggy bevo to see what sort of responses this was getting over there … and not a one. Though this probably has less to do with an okie talking trash and more to do with the fact that Tulsa World has a readership of about 6.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
8
Holly says:
Yeah, I looked this morning and didn’t see a peep of it anywhere. Muchas gracias to EDSBS Supreme Tipster Dave.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
9
yoyofutbawl says:
John Steinbeck lied. Crap like this is the real reason why the Joads left Oklahoma.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
10
Stacy Keibler Luvs Me says:
Here is an Idea Dept:
Holiest of Holy Moly Holly: Here is an idea (now that the Fearless one is off the reservation, probably without access to the internets):
How ’bout?????????:
Bunda Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thurs and Friday!
To take it to the enth degree, on Friday feature Ms. Sterger and her Florida State fiends(this spelling was intentional).
February 16th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
11
CPL says:
I don’t know what you are talking about. Texas never played Oklahoma last season. The year before there was a game, and the year before that. But not last year.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
12
sb says:
Stacy…@#10…do you think that is wise? Its one thing to have excessive bunda, but quite another to dedicate the Fraiday (spelling intentional) spot to the current single largest media whore…I mean, really…and its Ms. Keibler that luvs you, not Jen.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
13
Stacy Keibler Luvs Me says:
#12: OSwindle got sick of Bunda Friday because of variuos reasons. And, obvioulsy, he hates Ms. Sterger more than Bunda Friday. I think it would be funny. Sort of like borrowing the car and returning it without any gas.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
14
Holly says:
You’re forgetting, though, that this would involve me having to look at pictures of Ms. Sterger long enough to post them, which, gross.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
15
sb says:
Yeah, uh, no.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
16
Stacy Keibler Luvs Me says:
well…at least I tried to get the big shiny ones back on here while bozilla is away…
Now, back to our Regularly Scheduled Programming (or De-Programming)…
February 16th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
17
HeadThief says:
I like to think that if we got to play teams from the Big 10 we could win our bcs game also. But we keep playing the ess-eee-cee. And the WAC. And the Big East. Wait, never mind.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
18
NP says:
What’s the big deal? Texas wins a nailbiter to a crappy tOSU team and Oklahoma loses a nailbiter to a spectacular Florida team and now Texas automatically is better at the end of the season? OU ended the regular season hanging 60 on anyone that walked near them, and Texas ended it losing to Tech. I think it’s a fair argument, but the fact remains that they lost and it doesn’t matter.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
19
PatronSaint says:
No. Texas is automatically better because at the end of the season, they beat OU, had a better record, and finished higher in the polls. Only in bizarro Oklahoma world would OU be deemed the better team. /successfullybaitedintostupidintertronargument
February 16th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
20
Charles says:
Ryan Reynolds and Matt Leinart should hang out. And we could have Thayer Evans chronicle all the “yeah, they beat us but we’re still better” goodness.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
21
Aaron Welch says:
Bob Stoops eats his cherios on a plate… if they were in a bowl, he would lose them.
On another note, 45>35. Scoreboard.
And another note, being ranked 3rd (USA Today) or 3rd (Harris) or 4th (AP) is all better than being ranked 5th in every poll.
Having a 12-1 record is better than having a 12-2 record.
Having a winning streak in your bowl games is better than having a losing streak in your bowl games.
Having the #4 ranked recruiting class is better than having the 11th ranked recruiting class.
Having an indoor toilet is better than having an outhouse.
Having shoes is better than not.
Having an actual house is better than having a trailer without wheels.
Being able to read and write is better than having tornadoes.
This could go on and on, but I’ll stop here.
Hook ‘Em, bitches.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
22
Rc didn't offer says:
@18
I would hardly call OU’s loss to Florida a “nailbiter”. Also, Texas didn’t end their season losing to Tech, they ended it beating A&M 49-9. Don’t let these little facts dissuade you from attempting persuasive arguments.
After the 3 way tie, the country wanted to see OU and they got it. So screw em. It is clear now they picked the wrong team. Congrats to Florida; they beat the 2nd best team in the Big 12. By double digits. Sounds familiar?
February 17th, 2009 at 3:43 am
23
J.R. Cagle says:
The Vegas oddsmakers had OU ranked higher than TX at the end of the season (www.vegassportsconnect.com). But hey, they’re probably just a bunch of homers who recently moved from Norman to Vegas. You can be a better team and lose the game, just ask USC (vs Oregon St.), Penn St (vs Iowa), Florida (vs Ole Miss), Texas (vs Texas Tech), etc. That’s the nature of any sport: sometimes the better team loses. Plus, I’d hardly consider playing Ohio State in Tempe the same as playing Florida in their home state. That might have something to do with TX having a better record than OU in the end. As it is, TX was one play away from losing to Ohio St. What reason do we have to believe they would have done any better against Florida than OU did?
February 17th, 2009 at 11:56 am
24
Charles says:
@ #23: “What reason do we have to believe they would have done any better against Florida than OU did?” Ummm, 45-35 ring a bell?
Did I miss the memo in which OU fans are now resorting to Vegas odds as the arbiter of who is better than whom rather than head to head, neutral field? By your rationale, we have no evidence that Florida is better than OU.
Only OU fans would claim to be better than a team with a better record, that beat them, by double digits, on a neutral field.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
25
J.R. Cagle says:
# 24… so by your “logic” OU should have lost to TT. How’d that game go? Also since TT beat TX, I assume you certainly feel that TT is better than TX right? 39-33 ring a bell? And since Ole Miss beat Florida AT Florida I guess it’s fair to say you feel Ole Miss is better than Florida right? Fill me in here as to your “logic.” Also I guess since USC lost to Oregon State who lost to Penn St., you feel Penn St would beat USC… oh wait, that game was played.
As for the Vegas odds, you’re right, what do they know? They only make a living handicapping games. I’m sure they’ve got nothing on you. Same goes for Phil Steele right? He also had OU higher in his power rankings (at the end of the season) than TX.
Of course if your team can just barely make it by that powerhouse Ohio State team, I’m sure they would have easily handled Florida. Please man, try to use an ounce of thinking other than “Team A beat Team B, thus there is no possible way team B could be better.” I can give plenty of examples where the better team lost other than just in the OU/TX game.
Tell me, were TX A&M and Kansas St. both better than TX in the 2006 and 2007 seasons? TX did lose head to head to both of them in both seasons. I’m curious as to your take on this. Don’t forget, two of those 4 losses were at Texas.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
26
J.R. Cagle pretends he's logical says:
“What reason do we have to believe they would have done any better against Florida than OU did?” UT had a good defense. OU did not. UT’s offense was underrated in relation to OU’s because OU acted like no lead was safe–scoring TDs when kneeling would have won the game (OSU) and throwing in a blowout (Mizzou).
You know those Vegas odds were from before the bowls right? That’s kinda old news–TT 10 spots above Ole Miss? With another game played since then, it’s naive to think that those ratings wouldn’t have changed if there were any point to setting odds after bowls. Also, I know lots of football fans are in love with Steele but color me underwhelmed by his picking ability. Steele’s amazing preseason picks: #1 UGA, #2 Ohio St.,#6 Mizzou, #7LSU, #8 WVU, #9 Clemson, #10 Auburn.
“I can give plenty of examples where the better team lost other than just in the OU/TX game.” OU vs. UT was not nearly as clear cut as you act like it was. You conveniently ignore that they had the same record and UT had the head to head (yeah 3-way tie I know, I’m not talking about that) which isn’t the case in any of your other examples. You’re also ignoring that all of your examples were by less than a touchdown. UT beat OU by 10 points. Not 1 point and not 6 points. 10 points.
What do KSU and A&M in 06 and 07 have to do with UT vs OU in 2008? You’re really reaching into the bottom of the barrel for logic. UT in 07 was horrendous–the secondary gave everyone a cushion of about 15 yards. In 06 Colt’s injury really lowered UT’s level of play. I personally think that UT in ‘07 was not much better (if any better) than KSU or A&M and UT in ‘06 with an injured QB was not much better than UT & A&M. If UT played any of those games again I wouldn’t be betting on UT. If OU had played UT again in ‘08, I would have been far more confident in us winning that game.
“/successfullybaitedintostupidintertronargument” me too.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
27
J.R. Cagle says:
Cute name you came up with there. Oh, I could respond to your entire post, but I do have better things to do with my night, so I’ll address part of it. In the case of the Vegas odds, yes I know they were before the bowls. However, anyone who pays any attention to college football knows that playing OSU is not the same as playing Florida. Thus, even though I haven’t seen the final Vegas poll, I’d bet they keep OU ahead of TX if they do release the final one. Secondly, Phil Steele had Georgia at #9 in his preseason rankings, not #1. I don’t remember if all the other rankings you had there were accurate, but you may be thinking of someone else.
To answer your question about the 2006 and 2007 seasons with the A&M and KSU games, I was seeing if you’d actually admit that the better team (Texas) lost or if you’d stick with your guns/logic and say that since TX lost head to head that they were not as good as A&M or KSU. So while that had nothing to do with the 2008 season itself, it was a matter of seeing whether you would stay true to the stuff you are saying about head to head and such or whether you were just making homeristic statements.
One thing about TX this last year, is that they were a good team. I’m not saying they weren’t at all worthy of a NC game shot, because they were. However, so was OU. Both were very good teams and I could make an argument for either team. I also do believe though, as did many, that if TX and OU had played again, OU would have won. It’s not like that hasn’t happened to TX before with Colorado in the 2002 season or whichever season it was where they beat CU in the regular season and lost to them in the Big 12 CG.
I do agree with you that TX had a better defense than OU, although OU’s defense was underrated and held Florida (and I think maybe TT too) to it’s lowest point total of the season. However, despite TX having the better defense, OU had the better offense. If you think TX would have scored at will on that Florida defense you’re crazy. I know you didn’t actually say they would, but I assume you figure they’d score enough to win… however much that may be. Also, TX’s defense would have had their work cut out for them against a good Florida offense. Like I said, TX barely beat Ohio St. They hardly convinced anyone with that performance that they would have beat Florida.
Finally, while yes TX ended with the better record, once again, I will point out that playing OSU is not the same as playing Florida. If OU had played OSU and TX had played Florida, OU would be 13-1 while TX would be 12-2. Who you play matters, that’s why even though Utah had a better record than TX, I still would have put TX ahead of Utah if I had a vote. Yes, record matters, but you have to take into account who each team played (and didn’t play).
Anyway, have a nice night. Dang, I got baited into this argument too.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:19 am
28
ponderos says:
Aaron Welch says:
Bob Stoops eats his cherios on a plate… if they were in a bowl, he would lose them.
On another note, 45>35. Scoreboard.
And another note, being ranked 3rd (USA Today) or 3rd (Harris) or 4th (AP) is all better than being ranked 5th in every poll.
Having a 12-1 record is better than having a 12-2 record.
Having a winning streak in your bowl games is better than having a losing streak in your bowl games.
Having the #4 ranked recruiting class is better than having the 11th ranked recruiting class.
and having three straight Big 12 championship trophies is better than not having three straight Big 12 championship trophies.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:30 am
29
D.B says:
Why is this such a big deal? An OU player feels like the Sooners were better than Texas at the end of the year? Shocker. When the team that beat you mid-season loses later and then you beat that team 65-21, yeah, I can see a player feeling that way. I bet Tebow and his disciples thought they would beat Ole Miss at the end of the year.
Notice that Reynolds shied away from attributing the October loss to his absence in the second half. He simply said the team got better as the season went on. Critics jumped on the Sooners for their lack of defense. A lot of those box scores were garbage points. Down the stretch, OU held Tech, Missouri and Florida to season lows in points.
Texas had a shot to beat Tech but people talk as if Tech was lucky to win. Texas led for a total of 1:28 of the entire game. OU came out ahead in the coaches poll and the computers – largely because Texas has gone soft in their non-conf since the great UT-OhSt series. They certainly didn’t learn their lesson because their non-conf is even worse this year. The Fiesta was hardly a performance that proved Texas could hang with Florida.
One thing is for sure – October 17th is the THE day in college football in 2009.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:41 am
30
Charles says:
@ #25
You still don’t get it. None of your examples apply to the Texas vs OU scenario. In every one of your examples, one team has either head to head OR a better record. Never both. If we can’t look at head to head, and we can’t look at their respective records, what would you suggest?
February 19th, 2009 at 8:28 am
31
J.R. Cagle says:
Charles, with all due respect, I think you are getting too caught up in the specifics of my examples (which do apply to the OU/TX scenario, even if every little specific detail is not the exact same). I could bring up more examples and make sure every little detail matches, but what’s important are the concepts, not every specific little detail. Besides that, we both are just rehashing the same things now and looking like the character in Orson’s cartoon that goes with the edsbs post. It seems we may not end up agreeing on this, but two of my main points/concepts, I do hope we can agree on. Those two points are:
1). Sometimes, in every sport, the better team loses—– You are a sport’s fan I assume, so I figure you’ve seen this happen many times. I’ve already given multiple examples from last year in college football.
2). Sometimes a team can lose the first game but win the 2nd game (if it is played)—— we see this happen all the time in all sports, especially sports that allow for a 2, 3, 4, 5, or 7 game series. It is not at all uncommon for Team A to win game one and then for Team B to win game two, even if games one and two were on the same field (or court).
Obviously OU and TX didn’t and won’t get to play each other again with last year’s teams so all we can do is speculate what would happen. I have my opinion, you have your opinion. Unfortunately, we will never get to find out what would have happened had they played again or even gotten to play a 3 game series.
To answer your above question as to “what would I suggest;” if by that you mean how would I determine the “better” (not the team that necessarily deserves to be ranked higher, since upsets and timing obvioulsy affect a team’s ranking) team I think one just has to evaluate the details of the team’s season and look at the talent on a team and come to a conclusion. I’m not saying you can’t learn anything from one head to head game, but one game is just that: one game. That’s why we have the saying “Any given Sunday.” In ONE game, anything can happen.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:45 am
32
Holly says:
Good lord, fellas, that’s an XKCD cartoon. Were you raised by wolves?
February 19th, 2009 at 11:53 am
33
Charles says:
J.R.,
All I want you to do is give me an example of two teams…
Team A has a better record than Team B.
Team A has a head to head double digit win on a neutral field (or road game will work as well) over Team B.
Team B is the better team.
Let me know when you find that.
Of course I can agree that sometime the better team loses. Of course I can agree that neither of us has any clue as to who would win a rematch.
What I don’t agree with is your agnostic view of college football. You’re essentially saying that we can’t KNOW anything, and that results on the field are irrelevant. The two things that I’d like us to agree on are as follows…
1.) That when trying to determine the “better” football team, head to head, neutral field is the best method available.
2.) That the first two factors in determining the champion of anything are overall record and head to head competition. The beauty of college football is that since not everyone plays head to head, there is a lot of ambiguity, however, if a team has head to head AND a better record, I mean Jesus, what else do you want?
Damn you Holly for posting this.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:26 am
34
J.R. says:
Sure, OU vs TX. That one aside, and the following two are basically off the top of my head: Possibly Ok St. vs Oregon this year in the Holiday Bowl (11 point margin of victory). Obviously that’s debatable, but Ok St. might have been the better team. However, I don’t think it really makes much difference whether a loss was by 3, 5, or 10 (unless maybe it’s a really low scoring game). A 7 point swing can happen very easily, and a loss that would have been by 3 could easily be by 10 and vice versa. Take the OU/Florida game. OU left 10-14 points on the field in the first half due to Florida stopping them twice at 3rd and goal on the 1 or 2 yard line and also stopping them on that interception at 1st and goal at the end of the half. I’m not saying OU should or even would have won, I’m just saying that the difference in 7 or more points sometimes can be very very slim. Credit to the Florida defense though for those stops. They were impressive.
Aside from the Ok St vs Oregon example, (and you’re going to disagree with me on this next one) I would say the TX/USC Rose Bowl NC game. Although it wasn’t by double digits, when a game consists of almost 80 points scored the extra amount needed to make it double digits can simply be the difference in one or two plays. Now, before you accuse me of hating on TX, let it be known that I was cheering very hard for Texas in that game as I strongly dislike USC. I was thrilled that Texas won. However… they were very fortunate to come back and win that game and I think if it was played in say a best of 7 game series, USC may win the series 4-2 or 4-3. Maybe I’m wrong on that, and even though I was happy TX won, I am not sure they were the better team. Don’t forget if Lendale White gets the first down on 4th and 1 or Vince Young doesn’t run in for that touchdown on 4th and goal, USC wins.
I figure there are multiple other examples from last year alone, possibly at least one in every conference. Ole Miss might fit the bill in one of their losses and in the Pac 10, Arizona losing to Oregon St (at Arizona) might be able to work as an example (as far as head to head and record). That’s of course debatable, but Arizona was an underrated team and Oregon St. was probably at least a bit overrated. Even though they beat USC, their other games weren’t all that way… like the Oregon St/Stanford game.
Oregon lost to Boise St. (at Oregon) and Boise St had a better record, but I’d say the argument could be made that Oregon was better. Also, I don’t remember who all West Virginia lost to, but they might work as an example in one of their losses. I’d have to look up all their results to verify that however. I remember the PAC 10 got beat up on by the Mt. West conference, so you could maybe find an example in one or more of those losses. At any rate, even if I do take the time to go find 5 or so examples for you (even ones with 10 point or more losses), you’re still not going to agree with me on the OU/TX issue.
Now I do agree with you that a neutral field is most fair and the best available way to determine the better team. Of course though, as in the case of the New England Patriots vs the New York Giants in the 2007 NFL season, it’s possible for one team (NY) to win on a neutral field and have the other team win both the home and away games (NE). This goes back to my “Any given Sunday” point from my last post. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying OU would have won in Norman and at TX if they played 2 other games (home and away), but it is true that anything could have happened if they did… even including TX winning both.
I partially agree with you on point 2. I say partially partly because in a playoff format that doesn’t always happen. Take the case I just mentioned of NY vs NE. New England was 2-1 head to head and 18-1 overall, yet the Giants were the national champions. Frankly, I do think New England was the better team and yes, you usually can get an idea of the better team from head to head and record combined. Even then though, I do think sometimes you get exceptions to the rule, as in the examples I gave earlier, along with the possible examples that could be found if I looked up all the records and results of teams I think might possibly have a loss that fits your criteria.
Anyway, I don’t think I’m going to change your mind on this and I don’t see you changing my mind so perhaps we should wrap this whole thing up. Besides that I am heading out of town in about 1 hour and don’t plan on being on the internet much if at all so I may wrap it up here. Hopefully those examples will suffice for you. I didn’t look through a ton of results, and there may be at least a few (besides OU/TX and Oregon/Ok St.) from last year that could include the 10+ point margin of victory you mention. Are such examples that fit all of your criteria rare? Probably. It’s possible you only get two or three a season, although maybe it’s a lot more if you look through all the 1,500 or so NCAA Div IA games that are played throughout the season. But, whether there are only two or three per season or maybe something like 15-20, regardless of the amount, examples that fit your criteria perfectly do happen from time to time.
Take care and have a nice weekend.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
35
J.R. says:
Just a side note: My above post currently says “your above comment is awaiting moderation.” I didn’t type that, so disregard that. I guess it might disappear, but if it doesn’t, it wasn’t something I typed. So disregard that one part.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
36
J.R. says:
It disappeared, so I guess my post may have been okay’d by the mods. I really didn’t mean to type a post that long, my apologies.
February 20th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
37
charles says:
So let me make sure I’m following you…
If you’re an Oklahoma (even Okie Lite?!?) team, lose to whoever you want, J.R. still thinks you’re the better team. If you’re Texas, it doesn’t matter if you are undefeated and beat USC in the Rose Bowl, you’re not the better team. J.R., you’re a bit of a homer, my friend, and if you can’t see that, I don’t know what else to tell you.
As far as your other examples, I’m not sure what you’re basing your assessments on, but that’s ok. Some of the examples with the winning team being from a non-BCS conference even have some validity. The Pats v Giants thing, dude, preseason doesn’t count.
You’re right, we should both walk away. Can’t wait for Red River.
Good chatting with ya. Peace.
February 20th, 2009 at 6:59 pm