FSU VS. OU, Who Wins?

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by PonyMan

And as for "modern era of college football", who has most recently played for and won the National Championship in football?

Alabama. You played for and LOST the most recent national championship. I'll credit your five generations of Tejas education for that one.

[PonyMan]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Alabama. You played for and LOST the most recent national championship. I'll credit your five generations of Tejas education for that one.

Let me slooooow it down so your OU mind can understand, what's next, sign language and stick figures!!

And as for "modern era of college football", who has most recently played for (2009), and won (2005) the National Championship in football? Can't get more modern than that!!!!

[CamaroSkooter]

True, but 1 out of 2 aint bad in the last 10 years. Oklahoma is 1 for 4 since 2000 and two of the losses were pretty bad, weren't they?

We can go round and round with statistics all day long. The fact is, both schools are powerhouses in football. I still think OU should have been put in the Big XII North so that the Big XII championship games would have meant a lot more. This also would have had the additional upside of letting the OU and Cornhusker nations keep their yearly match-up.

But, it'll all be coming to a close soon enough and it'll just be round-robin play after the 2011 season. Unless the Big XII can find a couple of schools to add to the roster, but I doubt that'll happen anytime soon...

[PQ]

Originally Posted by PonyMan

Let me slooooow it down so your OU mind can understand, what's next, sign language and stick figures!!

And as for "modern era of college football", who has most recently played for (2009), and won (2005) the National Championship in football? Can't get more modern than that!!!!

One fact that kills me is that between Texas and OU, we are responsible for 100% of the NC game losses the passed two years.


Another fact that tears me up is since 1990 my Sooners and Bills are 1 for 8 in Championship games.

I actually heard a guy on local radio recently refer to the Sooners as 'the Buffalo Bills of college football'. DOOOOHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

True, but 1 out of 2 aint bad in the last 10 years. Oklahoma is 1 for 4 since 2000 and two of the losses were pretty bad, weren't they?

We can go round and round with statistics all day long. The fact is, both schools are powerhouses in football. I still think OU should have been put in the Big XII North so that the Big XII championship games would have meant a lot more. This also would have had the additional upside of letting the OU and Cornhusker nations keep their yearly match-up.

But, it'll all be coming to a close soon enough and it'll just be round-robin play after the 2011 season. Unless the Big XII can find a couple of schools to add to the roster, but I doubt that'll happen anytime soon...

[CamaroSkooter]

Originally Posted by PQ

One fact that kills me is that between Texas and OU, we are responsible for 100% of the NC game losses the passed two years.


Another fact that tears me up is since 1990 my Sooners and Bills are 1 for 8 in Championship games.

I actually heard a guy on local radio recently refer to the Sooners as 'the Buffalo Bills of college football'. DOOOOHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ouch, that's just a bit harsh...but funny

I still think the whole three-way tie from 2008(?) between Texas, Texas Tech, and OU was a rediculous gaff by the Big XII tie-breaker system. Oh well. This weekend should be fun for college football again...

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by PonyMan

Let me slooooow it down so your OU mind can understand, what's next, sign language and stick figures!!

And as for "modern era of college football", who has most recently played for (2009), and won (2005) the National Championship in football? Can't get more modern than that!!!!

Only a horn would change the question because he didn't like the answer. Read the question you asked in post #42 and tell me how you arrive at an answer other than Alabama?

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

True, but 1 out of 2 aint bad in the last 10 years. Oklahoma is 1 for 4 since 2000 and two of the losses were pretty bad, weren't they?

2004 Sugar Bowl lost to LSU by 7
2005 Orange Bowl lost to USC by 36 (ouch)
2009 Lost to UF by 10

I'll admit one of those losses was abysmal, but what other loss are you referring to?

By comparison, Texas lost to Alabama by 16

True 1 for 4 isn't a record we're proud of but ask how many schools (Boise State comes to mind) would kill for a title shot 4 times in one decade!?

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

We can go round and round with statistics all day long. The fact is, both schools are powerhouses in football. I still think OU should have been put in the Big XII North so that the Big XII championship games would have meant a lot more. This also would have had the additional upside of letting the OU and Cornhusker nations keep their yearly match-up.

I think what you're trying to say is that the Big8 never should have rescued Tejas from the fledgling SWC. On that we agree! Nebraska and Colorado had enough of Tejas pushing their weight around - they were wise to leave.

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

But, it'll all be coming to a close soon enough and it'll just be round-robin play after the 2011 season. Unless the Big XII can find a couple of schools to add to the roster, but I doubt that'll happen anytime soon...

And we'll be criticized like the PAC10 and Big10 for not having a conference championship game. I wish we would have gone to the PAC10 or split between the PAC10 and SEC. I just never developed warm fuzzy feelings for the Big12.

[CamaroSkooter]

The Big XII could have been set up in a much more lucrative way, but hindsight is 20/20 really. At the time, Colorado, Missouri and Nebraska were much better teams than they are now, and so it made sense at the time to put OU and Texas in the same division.

But as with anything, power shifts amongst the schools...unless you're K-State or Baylor...

[PQ]

I say let's go get Arkansas back, and invite TCU in.

South;

Texas
A&M
TT
Baylor
TCU
Arkansas

North;

Oklahoma
OSU
K-State
Kansas
Colorado
Iowa State (Boise would have been a real good fit here)

TCU deserves a big conference. Arkansas is a throw in, old big 8 team, and you keep the 12 team conference.

[CamaroSkooter]

That would be fun, but who does Oklahoma have in the North to compete with on a regular basis? (also, replace Colorado with Missouri )

[PonyMan]

Originally Posted by PQ

I say let's go get Arkansas back, and invite TCU in.

South;

Texas
A&M
TT
Baylor
TCU
Arkansas

North;

Oklahoma
OSU
K-State
Kansas
Colorado
Iowa State (Boise would have been a real good fit here)

TCU deserves a big conference. Arkansas is a throw in, old big 8 team, and you keep the 12 team conference.

PQ, I agree!!! Looks good on paper.

[PonyMan]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

I think what you're trying to say is that the Big8 never should have rescued Tejas from the fledgling SWC. On that we agree! Nebraska and Colorado had enough of Tejas pushing their weight around - they were wise to leave.

See, when your sports programs are powerhouses in not only football, but baseball and basketball, you can "push your weight around"! If your mens and womens programs bring in the money, "we gotta get paid"! Nebraska and Colorado are just tired of getting their asses kicked by Texas & OU across the board, so they don't want to play in our Big-12 sandbox anymore!!

[PQ]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

That would be fun, but who does Oklahoma have in the North to compete with on a regular basis? (also, replace Colorado with Missouri )

Right. Forgot which meaningless team it was that bolted. lmao

BUT, Idealy it would have been cool to see Boise State and or Utah BYU in the north. Or kick Iowa State and Missouri out. If I had my way it would be different. Becaue you are right, OU would only have OSU to challenge them. Just had to make it logistically make sense and also possible with the current contracts.

But if there weren't already deals recently done, I'd have proposed it this way;

North

Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
BYU
Utah
Boise State
Kansas

South

Texas
Texas Tech
A&M
TCU
Arkansas
Baylor



K-State could piss off at this point.


OU and UT offset.
OSU and A&M offset.
Utah and TT woud offset.
Boise State and TCU would offset.
BYU and Arkansas would offset.
And Kansas and Baylor would offset.


I think it would make for a perfect balance of divisions, and create interest while rewarding teams from the smaller conferences.

[CamaroSkooter]

All we need is to get rid of Baylor and replace them with...well...I dunno, anyone else that's not Baylor

UTSA is getting an FBS football team in a couple years...