Dawn, I would tend to agree: were the seasons flip-flopped, OU would no doubt be ranked way ahead of OSU.

The voters are pretty much out of it on a regular basis.

Tech, please, that's no top ten team, same old no defense to speak of.

A key game to circle is: Texas at Kansas!

An upset vibe is already filtering through.

One more point: Missouri's Daniel needs to wide up immediately. What a big, and we do mean BIG, spoiled pouter. He's the face of the offense, the team; you take one look at him and think, we're beat.

"Nobody runs out of the spread" - Picker

Tell that to Missouri. Kendall hunter had 154 yards against MU and is in the top 5 in the country in rushing yards. Hunter and Toston are both in the top 20 in yards per carry. OSU has had a 100 yard rusher in something like 15 of the last 16 games. And, last time I checked, OSU runs the spread offense.

I get it. Last week Missouri was decent. They were ranked 3rd in the country and picked by you to beat OSU by 24. That means you thought they were even 10 points more decent than Vegas thought they were. Now, since OSU beat them, obviously everyone was wrong, especially you. They are not a decent team at all.

OU-Texas reminded me of the Houston Oilers at Buffalo Bills back in 1991. Oilers were fine long as they kept throwing it and pushing the pace. Once they tried to go to a grind it out running game, it was over. Couldn't do it. OU was fine long as the hurry up was clicking. But when they needed to run the ball, wasn't happening. Don't know if that's spread related or not, honestly. I submit though, that Murray is looking to be more like an Eric Metcalf type back. It's funny how Darren Sproles from K-State had more power up the middle than Murray seems to some weeks. Not saying the kid doesn't run hard, but he just doesn't seem to have "it" lately...

I'm sorry Pick, but Bixby Jeff is right on this one. You want to brag about how you were spot on about OU yet you won't own up to the fact that you were horribly off-base on the OSU-Mizzou match up? If you want to talk about humility among the OSU faithful, you need to look in the mirror first.

I do agree with you that a huge part of running the ball out of the spread is a mobile QB. With that being said, I believe the success comes down to only 2 types of plays: The zone read and the option pitch. Yes, the option pitch. It goes perfect with your mobile QB argument so why disparage it?

Picker,

New idea to discuss. OU can't run because their offensive line is not built to run a spread offense. Look at how bad OSU was the first year they went from Miles I-formation O to Fedora's spread. Couldn't run or stop pressure.

OU doesn't have the right recruits on the O-line to run the football in the spread. Period.

OSU does, that is why they have a top-3 rushing offense. And that will continue for years at OSU.

What I mean is, is there a particular offense or defense around the country that you would switch to? And is there a particular type of player that should be recruited at certain positions?

Oh and there has to be someone out there that can coach against the pass....someone with a new scheme that works....if you have so much loyalty to BV then keep him with the title Defensive Coordinator (of everything but the secondary) But for the love of god dont let your loyalty keep you from winning NC's! come on Bob! If i had done poor at my job for 6 straight years im pretty sure that i would expect to be fired or demoted. Brent should know its coming...heck he's getting paid 300,000 a year to do that!? Give me a chance!

You summed things up pretty succintly, Pick. The OU offensive line slant blocks without any change-up or creativity. As most of us know, the slant block is used in the spread and in punting situations - it isn't designed to block for runners trekking over tackle. And then Wilson has the unmitigated gall to try to publicly lay the blame on the failure of the run game on the backs 'not running hard enough.' Shades of Gary Barnett. And kudos to Stoopsy for his loyalty to Venables...but you'd think that since he (Stoops) is such a defensive guru he might help Venables save face by affording him some sound tips behind the scenes rather than simply allowing him (and BJ Wright, too) to flounder in the same uncreative, inflexible morass that has allowed decent teams to have their way with OU's philanthropic secondary. Switzer got by in the eighties with winning most of his games while losing the big ones; is Stoops taking the same path?

Thomas, and others who might believe that when OU loses, there have to be reasons other than being out-coached or not having players as good as the other side:

One question for all the homers still crying about the injury to Ryan Reynolds: Did he play cornerback? Was he the one at the corner getting consistently torched, scorched, poached and roasted?

Here are the facts about the spread, plain and simple: If your quarterback isn't mobile and can't run as a consistent part of your offense, nobody can run. Period. Sure, the OSU tailback ran well. That's because the quarterback is a big-time scramble threat himself.

The spread was brought to our attention at some rinky-dink place like Northwestern, the entire premise being, the quarterback was like a fullback. Vince Young perfected the offence. Tim Tebow at Florida was exactly the same kind of spread quarterback.

So: if the quarterback can't run, nobody runs.

How do you stop the spread?

The way it appears is you recruit the best players and coach them well. In this day and age, if you coach to stop the run first, that's your business. But it's debatable strategy.

Finally, our condolences go out to Pitty Pat Jones, whose analyzing chart looked like the Dow Jones Index last week after he said time and time again on radio station KHMR, Homer Radio, that Texas was no good because it didn't have many good players.

Whoa.

The one who yells a lot on that station had the mighty Sooner D holding Texas to a measly 17 in an easy double-figure victory.

KHMR, don't leave your homer without it.

Brent V needs to leave...OU might win the rest of its games before blowing defensively again in a bowl. With the most weapons an OU offense has seen in quite sometime it is hard to guarantee 46 pts in a big game against a quality opponent....or the 49 it would have taken to beat WV....or the 56 it would have taken to beat USC-or the 44 it would have taken to beat boise-come on now....isnt that a bit ridiculous!!!???

Steve, that's just about the dumbest post hoc ergo propter hoc statement I've heard in awhile.