CATCH17;2471773 said:
I would love to debate your opinions but since you are someone who gets sucked in by style points and have faith that Okie State and Mizzou had the talent to beat OU than I can't take anything you say seriously.
But if you would like, i'd love to hear your reasons for believing Tech has the depth of Texas and Oklahoma since my opinion is so flawed.
I never once said that Tech has the depth that OU and Texas have. It's no secret that OU and UT dominate recruiting in the conference.
However, a win is a win, and a loss is a loss. UT lost to a team with far less depth, while ou lost to a stacked, highly ranked UT.
ou didn't go to Stillwater and lose like Texas did in Lubbock. ou also raped the team that made UT look average at best. At least when OU lost to UT, they looked somewhat impressive in their passing game, and didn't look horrible until Reynolds went down.
It's all about playing a schedule that can boost your ranking. OU's schedule provided them with a better argument. Many things factored in on the decision to place OU over UT.
And trust me, I'm not one who gets sucked in by style points. I am however one who gets sucked in by quality wins and quality losses, S.O.S. and whatnot.
You don't give anyone that disagrees with you the time of day because in your mind, you are the CFB genius, and in most other's minds, you're not even close to a fraction of that.
I have tried and tried numerous times to let you know that I respect your stances, even if faulty which is mostly the case, and that you make good points, but you absolutely refuse to acknowledge that you are not the only one with a good case, and are not the only one that knows *** he/she is talking about.
It's not all about one game. That game alone (RRS) was enough to keep UT CLOSE to OU, because OU has proved to be more of a quality team from start to finish.