If Texas played USC tonight they would get there ass handed to them too, because thier secondary is worse than OU's. Last time I checked Texas won there bowl game. OU lost 2 straight championship games that they didn't belong in.
I am not going to argue with you as you have yet to make a point. OU went 12-0 in what many consider the toughest conference. They belonged in the Orange bowl as much as any other undefeated team. Simple stuff.
[url=http://sites.google.com/site/bmdsooner/]My place for games![/url]
bkrich83 wrote:Well I thought OU was the best team in the country and would win this game. HAppy to say I was wrong.
There is no doubt in my mind, USC is the best team in the country. They are on a different level from everyone else.
BK hats off to USC for the asskicking it put on my Sooners. Enjoy National Championship #2 and let me be the first to say congrats in advance on winning three in a row next year. If Leinart stays I don't see how anyone can hang with them.
[url=http://sites.google.com/site/bmdsooner/]My place for games![/url]
Whether OU would've won or not is getting answered right now, very loudly. Loudly enough for me to question their validity in the game in the first place.
Using that logic (and I say that as loosely as possible)
California did not belong in the Holiday Bowl since they got shredded by Texas Tech. Why we should not let the 1 loss team, whose only loss was to USC in a game they could have won play in that bowl game. They play the games for a reason. Sometimes you lose close ones and sometimes you lose big.
Teal I was congratulatory of your Tigers when they won. Even if it was only by three points on the final tally, there were many factors into why the score ended as it did. I was the first to bring that up in the Auburn thread. It could have easily have been a blowout by Auburn. They could have also blown the game as Va Tech had chances of their own which they failed on.
The only sour grapes are those you keep rehashing for your Auburn Tigers and the evil that is the BCS. How OU does not belong, blah, blah, blah. We get it already but that does not change the fact that OU deserved to be in the Orange Bowl. Unless you know someone named McFly and can figure how to get that flux capacitor working properly you will just have to let teams play it out on the field.
You have alot of class Teal - too bad it's all third.
[url=http://sites.google.com/site/bmdsooner/]My place for games![/url]
Isn't it refreshing that we don't have these kinds of arguments after the Super Bowl?
I don't blame you cats for arguing. Not ripping you -- I'm ripping the ridiculous system the NCAA uses to determine its Division I-A football champion.
Again, isn't it refreshing that we won't be having these same arguments on the evening of Feb. 6?
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
bayousooner wrote:I have to ask myself is enough to at least be in the championship game. Now I know how Florida St fans and Nebraska fans fell.
Wow I would ask you to tear up your Sooner fan card but from that statement I question how much of a Sooner fan you really are. Would you rather be a Husker fan right now? Would you like to go back to the Sooners of the early to mid 90's? I don't get that line of thinking. Support your team win or lose and be glad you got there two straight years to have a chance at the title. In 5 years you have had 3 chances to play for it and have a title. They do that and you think OU needs some staff changes?
BK I made you an updated avatar.
[url=http://sites.google.com/site/bmdsooner/]My place for games![/url]
pk500 wrote:Isn't it refreshing that we don't have these kinds of arguments after the Super Bowl?
I don't blame you cats for arguing. Not ripping you -- I'm ripping the ridiculous system the NCAA uses to determine its Division I-A football champion.
Again, isn't it refreshing that we won't be having these same arguments on the evening of Feb. 6?
Take care,
PK
55-17 settles all bets this year. Even Auburn is going to have a tough time trying to convince the media that they should have been in the championship game. I could see if USC barely beat OU but what is Auburn going to say that we could have made it close?
Plus I hate to say it but you have to commend the BCS for one thing. Through controversy they are creating a buzz in the game that the playoffs would not produce. Take the Final Four, you get a little heat during the selection but by the time the Championship game is played no one is talking about it.
Could it be that controversy at the #1 spot and rankings is needed in college football?
HipE wrote:I don't think you can say Oklahoma is overrated because they are getting blown out in this game.
I totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread. I mean, that's what happens when teams are overrated, right? Didn't we all predict that Nebraska was going to get destroyed a few years ago by Miami? It's easy to come here and say Oklahoma is overrated *after* the blowout. Oklahoma was an undefeated team from a major conference that is going to put plenty of players in the NFL. They deserved to be in this game as much as anyone in the nation.
I turned it off at 45-10, but what I saw up to that point was an extremely good USC team playing at a high level and an Oklahoma team playing poorly.
I just can't get past the half time show. Honestly, who out there actually thinks Ashlee Simpson has talent? Not kids and certainly not adults. And who thought it was a good idea to have a half time show that ranges from Simpson to U2? If I want to see a music video, I will turn on a music channel. Call me old school, but you have 2 big schools with great bands. Have them do their halftime gig and talk about the first half with the talking heads and after 15 minutes get the game going again.
I also think that there is a direct connection between big buildups for games and big blowouts. Some of the best Superbowls were the ones played with only a week between the championships and the SB. Having over a month between games is just absurd. Who honestly thinks that these athletes spend the month of December concentrating on their studies??
One thing is very clear. Watch out USC. The press is about done building you up - time for them to drag you down. Once you win a championship it is time to dig up some dirt. Get ready for the SI/ESPN cover story featuring the disgruntled ex player.
HipE wrote:I don't think you can say Oklahoma is overrated because they are getting blown out in this game.
I totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread. I mean, that's what happens when teams are overrated, right? Didn't we all predict that Nebraska was going to get destroyed a few years ago by Miami? It's easy to come here and say Oklahoma is overrated *after* the blowout. Oklahoma was an undefeated team from a major conference that is going to put plenty of players in the NFL. They deserved to be in this game as much as anyone in the nation.
I turned it off at 45-10, but what I saw up to that point was an extremely good USC team playing at a high level and an Oklahoma team playing poorly.
Leebo, I said OU was overrated over a month ago. I also said they will get blown out.
JRod wrote:Take the Final Four, you get a little heat during the selection but by the time the Championship game is played no one is talking about it.
Maybe that's the case in Colorado, where no quality Division I college hoop teams reside.
But I can assure you that the Final Four generates a hell of a lot more buzz than the BCS games here in Syracuse, and I think that's the case in other parts of the country, too.
The NCAA hoop tournament provides endless office pools and water cooler talk for three weeks. People moan about the BCS for about three days.
I know people who could care less about sports who get into the NCAA Tournament because of office pools.
There are two cornerstone events in American sport that transcend sports and bring in non-fans -- the Super Bowl and the NCAA basketball tournament. To put the BCS games into that equation is sheer folly.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
HipE wrote:I don't think you can say Oklahoma is overrated because they are getting blown out in this game.
I totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread. I mean, that's what happens when teams are overrated, right? Didn't we all predict that Nebraska was going to get destroyed a few years ago by Miami? It's easy to come here and say Oklahoma is overrated *after* the blowout. Oklahoma was an undefeated team from a major conference that is going to put plenty of players in the NFL. They deserved to be in this game as much as anyone in the nation.
I turned it off at 45-10, but what I saw up to that point was an extremely good USC team playing at a high level and an Oklahoma team playing poorly.
Leebo, I said OU was overrated over a month ago. I also said they will get blown out.
You win some, you lose some.
Well, to be fair, you also said before the OU/Texas game (just pointing this out before Bdoughty does):
"Vince Young will have a big game against the overrated OU defense and shut up a lot of critics of Mack Brown and Texas."
And a little over a month ago you said the final BCS rankings would be:
USC, CAL, Texas
My point was that everyone wasn't predicting Oklahoma to lose. That's what you would see if a team was obviously overrated. Many knowledgeable fans and analysts had it as a close matchup.
In 5 years you have had 3 chances to play for it and have a title. They do that and you think OU needs some staff changes?
...............................................................................................
I am happy they were there, but to be embarrassed like that and to not be prepared two years in a row, someone is not doing their job.
HipE wrote:I don't think you can say Oklahoma is overrated because they are getting blown out in this game.
I totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread. I mean, that's what happens when teams are overrated, right? Didn't we all predict that Nebraska was going to get destroyed a few years ago by Miami? It's easy to come here and say Oklahoma is overrated *after* the blowout. Oklahoma was an undefeated team from a major conference that is going to put plenty of players in the NFL. They deserved to be in this game as much as anyone in the nation.
I turned it off at 45-10, but what I saw up to that point was an extremely good USC team playing at a high level and an Oklahoma team playing poorly.
It's interesting that Herbstreit said the Sooners seem to have lost the fight in them after the fumbled punt return. It was still a game at that point but supposedly the body language on the Sooners indicated they were shellshocked. Stoops tried to keep up the players' spirits in that second quarter, kept clapping after each setback.
Still, it was somewhat surprising that they didn't put more points on the board in the second half.
Pete Carroll kind of implied that they weren't that surprised by the results. Leinart also said something about how much they prepared when asked if he was surprised by the outcome. But USC was smart enough not to give bulletin board material like that OU player.
On paper though, this was suppose to be one of the best matchups ever.
kevinpars wrote:Call me old school, but you have 2 big schools with great bands. Have them do their halftime gig and talk about the first half with the talking heads and after 15 minutes get the game going again.
totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread.
You said you were searching for someone who said OU was overrated so I just helped your search a little . Yes I was wrong about Cal and wrong about Texas beating OU. I was right about OU being overrated and I said it over a month ago.
totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread.
You said you were searching for someone who said OU was overrated so I just helped your search a little . Yes I was wrong about Cal and wrong about Texas beating OU. I was right about OU being overrated and I said it over a month ago.
No, in the quoted section above I wasn't searching for someone that was predicting OU to lose big. I said I was looking for the posts where everyone <<<<<====== KEY WORD was predicting a USC rout. That to me is the definition of overrated: when it is obvious that a team shouldn't be in the game. Not if a lone Texas fan picks them to lose big.
While I think USC would likely beat either Auburn or Utah, or any of the one-loss teams for that matter, we will never know. That's what happens when you use a championship system that resembles a figure skating competition.
totally agree. I'm searching through some posts here to see where everyone was predicting a USC rout. I can't seem to find that thread.
You said you were searching for someone who said OU was overrated so I just helped your search a little . Yes I was wrong about Cal and wrong about Texas beating OU. I was right about OU being overrated and I said it over a month ago.
No, in the quoted section above I wasn't searching for someone that was predicting OU to lose big. I said I was looking for the posts where everyone <<<<<====== KEY WORD was predicting a USC rout. That to me is the definition of overrated: when it is obvious that a team shouldn't be in the game. Not if a lone Texas fan picks them to lose big.
Like I said I just helped your search. I dont know what EVERYONE else said.
Brando70 wrote:While I think USC would likely beat either Auburn or Utah, or any of the one-loss teams for that matter, we will never know. That's what happens when you use a championship system that resembles a figure skating competition.
I agree. The system is ridiculous.
But I don't buy the argument from Auburn fans AFTER the game that:
"Auburn right now is at LEAST the second best team in college football, that much is apparent. Boy, this is making the BCS look even more foolish."
I don't agree with this logic at all. The main reason it is wrong is because Auburn fans are using the same flawed logic that the "foolish" BCS and poll voters use in the first place. Auburn fans are using USC's "style points" as a benchmark for how bad Oklahoma is. I didn't hear a lot of people, even Auburn fans, say that Oklahoma didn't deserve to be in this game *before* it was played. If anything, I heard that Auburn deserved a spot just as much as anyone else, which is true. Just because Oklahoma lost big to USC is no indication to me that they would lose to Auburn or that Auburn would have faired any better had they played USC the way they were playing last night. I just can't tell. It isn't apparent to me. If we shouldn't penalized Auburn for not decisively beating Virginia Tech then we shouldn't diminish Oklahoma's accomplishments by losing big to USC. If a victory is a victory no matter what the final score then a loss is a loss no matter what too.
It's the system that is flawed. It really just depends on what team you are rooting for. If USC wins by one point then Auburn fans would point to the fact there was not a decisive winner and they are as good as anyone. If USC wins big then they state that they should have been there instead. I don't blame Auburn fans, but they should recognize that it is the same flawed logic that is used in human polls and the BCS.
Brando70 wrote:While I think USC would likely beat either Auburn or Utah, or any of the one-loss teams for that matter, we will never know. That's what happens when you use a championship system that resembles a figure skating competition.
I agree. The system is ridiculous.
But I don't buy the argument from Auburn fans AFTER the game that:
"Auburn right now is at LEAST the second best team in college football, that much is apparent. Boy, this is making the BCS look even more foolish."
I don't agree with this logic at all. The main reason it is wrong is because Auburn fans are using the same flawed logic that the "foolish" BCS and poll voters use in the first place. Auburn fans are using USC's "style points" as a benchmark for how bad Oklahoma is. I didn't hear a lot of people, even Auburn fans, say that Oklahoma didn't deserve to be in this game *before* it was played. If anything, I heard that Auburn deserved a spot just as much as anyone else, which is true. Just because Oklahoma lost big to USC is no indication to me that they would lose to Auburn or that Auburn would have faired any better had they played USC the way they were playing last night. I just can't tell. It isn't apparent to me. If we shouldn't penalized Auburn for not decisively beating Virginia Tech then we shouldn't diminish Oklahoma's accomplishments by losing big to USC. If a victory is a victory no matter what the final score then a loss is a loss no matter what too.
It's the system that is flawed. It really just depends on what team you are rooting for. If USC wins by one point then Auburn fans would point to the fact there was not a decisive winner and they are as good as anyone. If USC wins big then they state that they should have been there instead. I don't blame Auburn fans, but they should recognize that it is the same flawed logic that is used in human polls and the BCS.
It's also foolish to say any team is overrated because of one game, too. If OU and USC played 10 times, I don't think OU would get blown out most of the time. It was just one of those nights.
There is no question that Auburn should have had a chance to compete for the national title. Utah and Boise State should have also had that chance. What you essentially have is a system of tiebreakers deciding who gets to play for the championship. People say that playoffs would reduce the meaning of the regular season. Well this system completely obliterates it. Hey, you won all your games, but since you didn't play as hard of a schedule, you're going to the Astroglide Lube Bowl.
No other sport would tolerate this kind of stupidity. By this logic, right now we would skip the NFL playoffs, and the Steelers and Patriots would be playing for the Super Bowl. Both of those teams may deserve it. One of them will likely win it. But it would ruin the NFL.
(BTW, I know this is not what you meant)
