Allow me to put you in your place.

First of all, you need to stop bashing the sports animal and get a clue. Of course they have Sooner homers...80% of the listeners are Sooner fans!! And, in case you're not paying attention, they happen to have an OSU homer as well. The only thing they need is a TU homer to satisfy the 1% of listeners in this category.

Secondly, you need to stop bashing the Sooners. I know, I know...you do it because it is entertaining and it enrages many Sooner fans, therefore upping the paper's circulation. If you must keep up the Sooner bashing, at least show a little variety. The constant comments about Paul Thompson's passes "putting an eye out" or the like are getting old. I'm also tired of hearing that TU is the best football team in the state. PLEASE. OU has the best talent and the best coaches. Period. They play with a target on their chest every week...they are the hunted. They will get everyone's best shot.

Finally, you need to actually beat enough of the REAL PICKERS out there (that would be a select few of your readers) to warrant some credibility in your arguments. At the rate you are going, you'll need the entire sports section to list all the winners in the near future.

Now...how's that for a little "jab humor"??

BTW, good luck this week! (said with a snicker)

Jeremy's love of homer radio brings up an interesting series of questions.

Why would a fan want to listen to more homers?

Doesn't a fan already know what the homers are going to say?

Couldn't a person learn more from an objective source?

How can you believe somebody who is paid by the team he purports to cover?

Aren't many rabid fans already married to homers?

Jeremy: just curious... which of the national sportscasters do you consider to be the most knowledgeable and objective?

Now I don't want to say that Nebraska coach Bill Callahan is easily amused but....when someone pointed out to him that if Tooti from the "Facts of Life" married the USC quarterback her name would be Tooti Booty--he laughed so hard and long they had to stop practice to see if he was OK. In fact the only way they could get him to stop was when John Blake offered to take over the offensive play calling.

The Louisville-Miami game is a tough one to diagnose...at least it was for me. I will let the cat out of the bag, so to speak, and tell you Mr. Picker that we are on the same side of that game. I took the 'Canes and the points, because I figured that their defensive team speed will give the Cardinals all kinds of trouble...especially with the loss of RB Bush. Miami likely can't win a shootout, so I am banking on them keeping the score down by virtue of their defense harassing the 'Cards into a turnover or two. Also, position by position, the 'Canes certainly have more talent. If the Louisville QB played for Miami, they might be the favorite to win it all.

As for Dallas, I have no clue what to think about them. We happen to be on opposite sides of that one, as I think it will be low scoring, so I took the Redskins and the points. I will say that taking a home team in the NFL after a road loss is usually a solid play (I have seen you refer to this in your column several times as "reversal of fortune", or something to that effect).

How about the Fat Quack on the animal who purports to win over 70% of his picks most years, yet probably can't name half the starting quarterbacks in BCS conferences. Also, I heard John Brooks on the Buzz this morning. The reason I know it was Brooks is because I was able to leave it on for more than 30 seconds, since B. Tankenclip wasn't droning about high school football...

I liked the shot in the paper of the OSU Cowboys team and coaches singing arm in arm to their fans after the Arkansas St. game last week. And I thought Virginia Tech were the Hokies...

Today is a major turning point in Blogville.

You people seem intelligent and witty.

Somebody said they looked over the Aggie coach's shoulder once and saw that he was grading papers in his Theory of Football class.

Didn't Jackie Sherrill start it -- writing in his diary on the sideline.

Not too many good coaches do it, do they?

You make an outstanding point Mr. Picker. I have never understood why people would pay for picks from a sports service. The words "absolute lock" are absurd in football prognostication. When those guys say "this is a can't lose game", you know right away that they are either full of crap, or have the same manager as Michelle Wie (poor leadership/advice). Football games, at least against the spread, are like the horse races...anything can and will happen. I can understand someone paying for INFORMATION that someone else spends hours compiling (like a racing form, or a football magazine), but buying someones "1,000 star-rated lock of the month" and thinking it can't lose is a mistake...