texas Finally Beats Oklahoma And It Still Isn't Enough: BCS Thoughts
by Beergut
on Nov 30, 2008 4:46 PM CST
texas finally accomplished what few believed was possible this season, beating a #1 ranked Oklahoma team in Dallas, 45-35. Even with their win over Oklahoma, texas is STILL on the outside looking in, enviously watching OU head to Kansas City as Big 12 South Division Champions.
I'm sure there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth in Austin this week, publically or in private. Some will lament that it isn't "fair" that texas isn't representing the South in a year that they beat Oklahoma head-to-head. Well, the flip side of that argument is that it isn't "fair" that Tech isn't going to Kansas City, either, because they beat texas head-to-head. The bottom line is, life isn't fair, and Oklahoma deserves to go to Kansas City and represent the Big 12 South in the Conference Championship Game because of their performance over the last month. Oklahoma destroyed the #2 ranked team in the nation when they played them in Norman; texas lost to a top 10 team on the road. Oklahoma went on the road and beat a top 20 team by 20 points; texas beat that same team at home by 4 points. Oklahoma stated their case by their performances over the last month, and the voters agreed with their body of work on the field.
texas fans may lament that their game against A&M hurt their strength of schedule, but they are ignoring the fact that Oklahoma played us, too. What hurt texas is that while Oklahoma was able to blow the doors off our team in the first quarter while playing us at Kyle Field on our Senior Day, texas was only able to eke out a 7-0 lead in the first quarter on Thanksgiving Day in Austin on their Senior Day. I knew after the first quarter was over that Oklahoma was going to win the BCS rankings and take the Big 12 South Division. It isn't about style points in the first quarter of the game, it is simply about dominating your opponent and imposing your will, and texas was unable to do that early on against A&M. Oklahoma did what they wanted in the first quarter of their game against us; that is the main difference between the two teams.
If anyone has a right to complain about getting screwed by this whole situation, it may be Texas Tech. This is the best season in the history of theiir program, and they're still not going to be playing in a BCS bowl. For better or worse, there will be two Big 12 teams competing in the BCS, and none of them will be named Texas Tech. Granted, after their putrid performance in Norman last weekend against Oklahoma, their exclusion from the BCS is completely justified. Tech had the chance to show that they belong among the big boys of college football, and they failed miserably. Tech will now be relegated to the Cotton Bowl to play Mississippi, or to the Holiday Bowl to play Oregon State. All that hype all season long, and they're still going to end up in San Diego or Dallas.
Conventional widsom has been turned on its head this season. Conventional wisdom says that the winner of the Oklahoma-texas game in Dallas is usually the winner of the Big 12 South, barring any losses to other teams. Well, this year, Oklahoma's only loss on the year was to texas in Dallas, and yet they're still going to Kansas City as the winner of the Big 12 South. Oh, the humanity.
0 recs |
46
comments
|
Read Related
Email
PrintComments
Texas Tech
went and played at Norman. That was a home game for O.U.
Also: texas has NO offensive line. Our defense had NO business getting the sacks we did on McCoy that game. Or the hits (some late but not called). That’s why voters didn’t put them in. A crappy crappy crappy o-line. Hat’s off to McCoy for winning that game for his team, but that doesn’t happen against a Florida or Alabama.
Meat? They're made out of Meat? Meat.
by ihavethemelody on Nov 30, 2008 5:30 PM CST 0 recs
It happened against OU.
I agree with your assessment that McCoy shouldn’t have gotten hit as much as he did, but I think you exaggerate how large a liability it is.
by ajax77777 on
Nov 30, 2008 5:47 PM CST
up
0 recs
finally?
1.pretty sure Texas has won 3 out of the last 4 match ups against ou
2. be honest, if a&m were in the same situation, where they had one loss, beat both the teams playing in the big 12 championship by double digits, and lost on the last play of a 4 game run that was pretty damn tuff……..would you really say, “ou deserves to go from their body of work”….you know you wouldnt. i dont blame ou, its the system.
3. also, to claim voters made a judgment based on the last few dominating performances by ou is ludicrous. please explain to me why Texas was ranked behind ou after the loss to tech then? this was well before ou beat tech. Texas never had a chance because the voters wanted it that way
by wishiwasalonghorn on Nov 30, 2008 5:30 PM CST 0 recs
ah, point #1 is true
but this was the first time texas beat a higher ranked Oklahoma team
I never understood the elation over the ’05 or ’06 teams, b/c the ’05 team was just average, at best, and the ’06 squad was really an average team that just did enough to win games later on in the season. Both times, texas was higher ranked and expected to win.
by Beergut on
Nov 30, 2008 7:02 PM CST
up
0 recs
what about point 2 and 3?
my biggest beef is texas never had a shot. there is still no excuse to have ou ahead of texas after tech beat texas. after ou beat tech there was a valid reson to do that, but not before that. seriously, am i the only person who realizes we dropped to 7 in the coaches rankings after we lost on one play?
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Nov 30, 2008 11:02 PM CST
up
0 recs
if the voters think like I do
they expected OU to beat Tech, so they ranked OU ahead of both texas and Tech.
I do wonder if people looked at this texas team, saw a poor secondary and no real running back, and kept thinking they would eventually lose several games and dropped them in the rankings accordingly.
by Beergut on
Dec 1, 2008 12:19 AM CST
up
0 recs
come on
if thats the case they are voting on what? Intuition? when it comes to the voters its like a mother telling her child" trust me, i know whats best" and the public(the child) just has to swallow it
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 1, 2008 12:47 AM CST
up
0 recs
and you still havent answered
if a&m were in the same position as Texas, would the excuses you have used to send ou to the big 12 title game still be acceptable?
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 1, 2008 12:48 AM CST
up
0 recs
we wouldn't be in the same situation as texas
Our November schedule of OU and texas assures us of that.
Usually, texas playing OU so early in the season is an advantage to them, because the media forgot about their loss and ranked them higher at the end of the season as they kept winning (see 2004). They never have to face OU, Tech, and A&M back-to-back-to-back. This is the first time I’ve seen this schedule hurt texas.
by Beergut on
Dec 1, 2008 3:00 AM CST
up
0 recs
that still doesnt answer the question
there is always the possibilty of a three way tie. so, if a&m were left out in a situation like this, would the excuse of “ou is playning great ball” be enuff for you?
these same reason ur giving to put ou in front of texas, would you put ou in front of a&m?
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 1, 2008 3:01 PM CST
up
0 recs
if we needed to score 60+ in a game against texas
and only scored 7 in the first quarter while OU put up 21 against texas, I would understand why the media would send OU over A&M.
texas needed to blow A&M out of the water early to jump OU in the BCS, and they didn’t do it. I think it really is as simple as that.
by Beergut on
Dec 1, 2008 3:04 PM CST
up
0 recs
14-28
a&m pulled within 14-28 right b4 the half ende….thats blowing someone out? and you know that still wouldnt be acceptable if it were a&m gettn left out
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 1, 2008 3:07 PM CST
up
0 recs
Team Stat Comparison
ou – a&m
1st Downs 29 – 20
Total Yards 653 – 278
Passing 325 – 252
Rushing 328 – 26
Penalties 9-60 – 12-70
3rd Down Conversions 6-13 – 5-16
4th Down Conversions 0-1 3-5
Turnovers 0 4
Possession 28:49 31:11
a&m-Texas
1st Downs 12- 24
3rd down efficiency 4-14 -14-17
4th down efficiency 2-2 -0-0
Total Yards 245 536
Passing 269- 320
Comp-Att 20-35 24-30 43
Yards per pass 7.7 -10.7
Rushing -24 -216
Rushing Attempts 22
Yards per rush 1.1 5.0
Penalties 10-71- 3-15
Turnovers 1- 0
Fumbles lost 1- 0
Interceptions thrown 0 -0
Possession 27:10 -32:50
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 1, 2008 3:16 PM CST
up
0 recs
how was ou's performance more dominant?
texas beat a&m by more and out perfromed ou in every stat…….. btw, dont know how to get those slash throughs taken off, sorry
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 1, 2008 3:17 PM CST
up
0 recs
OU played Tech in Norman. Maybe some of the voters saw that tu did not have a running game and a poor secondary. Maybe that is why they ranked OU over tu (course, it is not like OU’s secondary was good). The voters always penalize you for losing late in the season. BTW, I believe tu had a very good OL. I think their pass blocking was good and their run blocking adequate. tu could not run the ball b/c they have a bunch of spares at RB.
by miketag on Nov 30, 2008 5:44 PM CST 0 recs
Factual inaccuracies:
Oklahoma went on the road and beat a top 20 team by 20 points; texas [sic] beat that same team at home by 3 points.
It was 4 points. (28-24)
For better or worse, there will be two Big 12 teams competing in the BCS, and none of them will be named Texas Tech. Granted, after their putrid performance in Lubbock last weekend against Oklahoma, their exclusion from the BCS is completely justified.
The game was in Norman and after their second “putrid performance” against Baylor there’s more to the argument.
This next one isn’t a fact but I completely disagree with your assessment of the biggest difference between the two teams.
Oklahoma did what they wanted in the first quarter of their game against us; that is the main difference between the two teams.
Texas held A&M to negative yards rushing (if you take out QBs and a trick play it still only totals 18 yards—which is less than OU – not by much, but less) and dominated the game: 42-3 before A&M scores a touchdown? A&M made it 14-28 against OU and wasn’t completely out of the game until the nearly the end of the first half. I’d rather win like UT (dominant defense) than be like OU and let A&M hang around.
Also A&M had 3 more turnovers against OU. I didn’t watch the game so I can’t claim that they weren’t forced by OU, but it’s a factor.
by ajax77777 on Nov 30, 2008 5:45 PM CST 0 recs
Oh yeah and as far as dominating the first quarter.
Didn’t A&M have negative yardage until 26 minutes into the game?
by ajax77777 on
Nov 30, 2008 5:52 PM CST
up
0 recs
dominant defense?
I think giving up over 200 yds passing to our backup QB kind of refutes the argument that you had a dominant defense.
I do believe that the reason OU ended up beating you out in the final poll was b/c you lack a dominant offense like they have.
by Beergut on
Nov 30, 2008 6:54 PM CST
up
0 recs
Yards don't matter nearly as much as points.
Of which A&M scored a total of 9 vs 28 against OU. And considering the rushing total I’d say Muschamp was focused on completely shutting down the run and making A&M try to beat us with the pass.
Also:
A&M 1st downs against Texas: 12
A&M 1st downs against OU : 20
by ajax77777 on
Dec 1, 2008 7:28 AM CST
up
0 recs
who knows
i myself am happy no matter what happens, this has been one of the greatest college fb years in recent memory. any longhorn fan who claims he thought we would be in this position at the beginning of the season is full of it. i thought maybe 8 wins. so every thing after that has been bonus. its just frustrating having this whole thing settled by voters. they have shown they have bias in the past so why would this be any different?. sports, to me, should be settled on the field. this isn’t figure skating. That’s where my frustration sets in. who looks best?? Seriously, if that’s how you pick a champ, the only thing that would matter is recruiting rankings
by wishiwasalonghorn on Nov 30, 2008 11:28 PM CST 0 recs
Jerry Jones scoffs at your recruiting rankings
and says whoever looks best in the shower is the most important.
by Beergut on
Dec 1, 2008 12:17 AM CST
up
0 recs
Musburger
More than Mack Brown’s whining, Musburger is irritating me the most. He has concoted a very specific alternative whereby, of course, UT goes to the Big XII title game over OU. He suggests that the winner should not be decided by the BCS at all because the BCS is heavily influenced by people outside of that conference, and what business of theirs is it to decide the Big XII champ? This I agree with.
Then, he says that the tiebreaker in confence, as opposed to BCS ranking, is to use point differential. That still makes sense as an alternative to BCS rank. I would say, maybe point differential in those three games vs. each team involved in the tiebreak. Total points scored vs. total points allowed in the UT-OU, UT-Tech, OU-Tech games. That would make sense to me, but Musburger then goes on to say that the point differential should be in all 3 teams’ game vs…………….Kansas. That’s right, he picks one arbitrary school where he knows UT wins it. Forget vs. A&M (would go to OU) or Baylor or a team that all 3 play every year or in their division, even. He wants it based on each team’s performance against Kansas, which wouldn’t even work every year if needed.
Sometimes I wonder if Musburger has not gone completely insane.
by FuturePants on Dec 1, 2008 11:00 AM CST 0 recs
Firstly I think you misunderstood the Musbooger,
and I’m with you on the irritation, but I think he was saying use the MOV for all common opponents (which would go to OU because of the 44 point win over TT).
Forget vs. A&M (would go to OU) or Baylor or a team that all 3 play every year or in their division, even.
Actually, UT beat A&M by more than OU did (40>38).
Baylor is where OU would win MOV (the only place other than TT).
Kansas (or OSU) is where Tech (not UT like you say) would win.
You’re wrong all over the place—unless you meant TT was out of the conversation in which case 40>38 (still) and 45>35 (always).
Against common opponents (including OU, UT, & TT)
UT MOV:100
OU MOV:138
TT MOV: 75
removing OU, UT & TT leaves you with:
UT MOV: 96
OU MOV: 104
TT MOV: 113
by ajax77777 on
Dec 2, 2008 12:37 AM CST
up
0 recs
Texas should be in.
I have seen both teams in person and in my opinion Texas is the most COMPLETE team of the two. OU’s offense is the best without a doubt, but there defense is even worse than I thought and their special teams is horrific. Before this weekend I thought OU would win in a rematch, but after watching this weekend I think UT would win again. UT’s defense is getting better by the day, the only thing missing from them is the turnovers, but OU’s defense is regressing. It seems that Tech performance was more of a combination of Tech failing under the big lights then OU’s defensive improvement. Texas’ running game has improved since the game against OU. OU’s run offense has improve as well, but, outside of Murray’s TD run to start the game and Brown’s to finish against OSU, they really did nothing on the ground. Both offenses are getting better while only one defense is getting better, also add in the special teams factor and I think UT wins again. They look like the more complete team than Oklahoma.
by PrimeTime2012 on Dec 1, 2008 5:05 PM CST 0 recs
uh, not sure what team you're watching
texas’ secondary is horrible.
texas has a damn good defensive line, but they are susceptible in the short passing game, which we showed.
texas’ defense is outstanding against the run, horrible against the pass.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 10:23 AM CST
up
0 recs
u make some good points.
. It seems that Tech performance was more of a combination of Tech failing under the big lights then OU’s defensive improvement.
very well said, i am by no means taking anything away from what ou did, but i feel it had more to do with tech choking than ou dominating
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 2, 2008 11:39 AM CST
up
0 recs
Either way you look at it...
…Tech dominated them some Texas Tech.
by FuturePants on
Dec 2, 2008 12:31 PM CST
up
0 recs
Tech lost to Oklahoma for two reasons
OU’s defense kicked their teeth in.
Tech’s overrated defense was completely helpless against OU’s offense.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 12:47 PM CST
up
0 recs
really?
u sure it has nothing to do with the fact that tech is notorious for 1 upset a year, they blow their load in that game, then dont do crap the rest of the season? i just think ou’s dominating performance was more tech playn like crap than ou looking amazing
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 2, 2008 5:19 PM CST
up
0 recs
they usually blow their load and then lose the next game
which was against Okie State.
This was just the latest chapter in a continuing theme of Tech getting smacked when they head to Norman.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 8:03 PM CST
up
0 recs
Love it.
I love how you delete my posts when you don’t have a response.
by PrimeTime2012 on Dec 1, 2008 9:06 PM CST 0 recs
I delete your posts because
I don’t want to take the time to edit them.
It isn’t a matter of not having a response, it is a matter of not seeing what good the appropriate response would do.
You don’t like the fact that I refer to texas as texas. Tough. If you don’t like it, find another blog to frequent.
You seem to forget that this is an Aggie blog, texas is our rival, and as such, you’re going to occasionally see shots taken at them, just like you will see potshots taken at A&M on burntorangenation.
I don’t feel the need to explain myself to someone who hasn’t even completed a single semester at A&M, yet thinks he is qualified to “apologize on behalf of A&M” for the actions of another Aggie you don’t even know. Why don’t you wait until you complete your freshman year before you try to speak for A&M? Better yet, why not let an Aggie who already has two degrees from A&M (Stephen McGee) speak for himself?
Your apparent need for the approval of t-sips is pathetic.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 10:36 AM CST
up
0 recs
McGee was wrong.
Anybody with half a brain knows that McGee’s actions were wrong. It doesn’t matter that he was trying “to fire up the team” as he said. They were wrong. You don’t do that. Its poor sportsmanship. If you seriously try to defend McGee then you will lose all credibility in my opinion. His actions were indefensible. He acted like a clown and embarrassed the school. Every Aggie that I talked to that went to the game were embarrassed that he would do that.
I bet you think that yell leader was not wrong as to what he said about Joe Pa in last year’s Alamo Bowl yell practice?
I understand you can do what you want with the whole “texas” thing and thats fine with me. It just looks really unprofessional. Its fine if you are going to do it in certain posts, but when you do power rankings or Big 12 rankings you say Texas or UT. No other blog says farmers or Agros in their rankings. Its just common sense.
by PrimeTime2012 on
Dec 2, 2008 11:39 AM CST
up
0 recs
?
bet you think that yell leader was not wrong as to what he said about Joe Pa in last year’s Alamo Bowl yell practice?
what did the yell leader say? i havent heard this one
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 2, 2008 11:50 AM CST
up
0 recs
Yell Practice before the Alamo Bowl
some Yell Leader said something about Joe Paterno being too old and he needed get a coffin since he was deceased, something like that.
Yell Leader was very intoxicated at the time, and his remarks were roundly booed by both Aggies and Penn State fans alike. He was sent home, and did not attend the bowl game.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 12:31 PM CST
up
0 recs
It is up to Stephen McGee to answer for his own actions
not for you to beg forgiveness for him.
Until I see Jordan Shipley come out and call out his best friend, I’m not going to worry about it.
We don’t even know what McGee said, we just know that he was yelling. For all we know, he could have said, “Whoa, you get lit up on that play!!” There would be nothing wrong with him saying that. We also don’t know if Gideon was talking crap to McGee all game long, and McGee was just responding in kind. We simply don’t know. You’re just assuming something, and acting off of your assumption.
Every Aggie that I talked to that went to the game were embarrassed that he would do that.
McGee has done too much good in his time at A&M and represented the school too well for me to think one incident somehow tarnishes everything else he has done. The only people who believe this really tarnishes McGee are t-sips desperate to find something, anything, that they can pin on him to cast him in a negative light because of his performances against them on the football field.
I bet you think that yell leader was not wrong as to what he said about Joe Pa in last year’s Alamo Bowl yell practice?
There you go making assumptions again. You know what they say about people who assume, don’t you?
Way to bring up something that has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation. The incident with that YL was handled properly.
If I wanted to be a member of the mainstream media, I would. Since I have no desire to work in the MSM, I don’t need to write objectively, hence my references to my own thoughts in the first person on this blog. Since I am writing it, I will refer to texas however I please, on anything topic I please. Like I said before, if you don’t like it, feel free to leave.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 12:29 PM CST
up
0 recs
Careful
Every Aggie that I talked to that went to the game were embarrassed that he would do that.
Well, I was at the game and it didn’t embarrass me. I think everyone is making WAY too big a deal about it. He got sacked, followed them towards their sidelines, then walked off. That was the end.
Just because the yellow bellies boo McGee for 2 minutes afterwards does not make it a huge deal. It was maybe 10 seconds then it was over, period. I actually was amused by it.
by FuturePants on
Dec 2, 2008 12:34 PM CST
up
0 recs
Deleting People's Posts?
………you should change the name of your blog to “I am Al Jazeera”
by 2001Raider on
Dec 2, 2008 3:34 PM CST
up
0 recs
hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i love it!!!!!!!! laughed my a#@ off at that
by wishiwasalonghorn on
Dec 2, 2008 6:07 PM CST
up
0 recs
find me a video of someone beheading a longhorn
and I’ll consider the name change.
I’m against censorship in general, so in order for someone to have their comment or fanpost deleted, they have to do something really stupid, like personally attack one of A&M’s players or someone on this site.
I don’t care if people think our players aren’t any good, but simply posting personal attacks is inappropriate.
by Beergut on
Dec 2, 2008 8:01 PM CST
up
0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on I Am The 12th Man
Stories From Around 
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
New FanPost
