This thread needs put out to pasture BTW

Kansas threw for only 16 more yards against Oklahoma than I did.

Dude don't make me laugh. Any poll that rated that turd (from an elite perspective) VaTech team as #1 in anything but it's joke of a league isn't worth the paper it's written on. I watched that OB. There isn't a computer poll alive that can put enough makeup on that pig. The only place KU lept ahead of Mizzou in 2007 is in the minds of those who want them to. Just for fun I looked them up anyway, lost to LSU by 6 tds as well as Boston College at home. Anyway...

That OU team was as talented as any Stoops had. Kind of a weird team that would just not show up certain weeks (Colorado, Iowa State, WVA). Also it should be noted a big driver in their loss to Ttech IIRC was Bradford getting hurt and missing a good chunk of that game. There is no doubt in my mind they were the best team in the league although there were a few nights they didn't play like it. MU and KU were certainly more consistent.

Well, I can't argue speculation. That's what irrational folks do. I can only go by the basis of the data so if you don't like the data I won't be much help. Both the computers and the pollsters equated Va Tech and Oklahoma so if they're all wrong, the discussion is moot.


Either way one cannot assume a victory over Va Tech while assuming a Kansas loss to OU. Neither is knowable and neither is proveable whatsoever.

I guess I'll just go with the fact that Mizzou won the North, smoked Kansas head to head, and finished ranked higher in the polls, then.

You finished behind KU in the computer polls.

I never gave VaTech a second thought until you brought them up. But since you did, they played in a cream puff league that routinely gets beat like a drum in bowls and lost to a team MU beat. So while it is correct to say we will never know for sure I do think the Tigers would have beaten them that year.

Having said that it's irrelevant to who was better between MU and KU that year. The H2H along with the other common opponents those schools play tell us all we need to know. You're right though the margin isn't big, I never said it was, but it is definitive.

As far as OU is concerned the only thing I did w/ them is not necessarily penalize MU for losing to them since KU didn't play them. I did the same thing with the league heavies and relative door mats in other years as well. That's not the same as assuming KU would have lost to them (although I think they would have). Since they played each other and have a sample of several common opponents we can look at it isn't necessary to get into any of that.

...and that was factored into the final poll...where Mizzou finished ahead of Kansas.

Both were 5-0 against common opponents so I'm not following you. +25 margin for Mizzou and +19 for Kansas (3 home games for Mizzou, 2 home games for Kansas).


That couldn't be more even.

What are you talking about?

Actually, I show Mizzou finished 5th and Kansas 7th in the computer polls.

Mmm hmm. And then we played and won.

And the scale tipped.

KU was very good. Top ten IMO. We were a little better.

So...moving on from 2007...

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013...u-blowout-low/

The other thing about about FOX Sports is their production is awful and their analysts are atrocious. I like looking at Erin Andrews and think she's good at her job as well. 'Bout all I can say for them.

I just looked up the BCS computer rankings. It was 4th & 5th respectively prior to the bowl games, and Kansas moved past you afterwards. I could only find five of the six BCS computer rankings and KU had an average final rank of 3.2 and MU 3.8.


I couldn't find Billingsley's final report but given that it had KU ranked ahead of Mizzou prior to the bowl games anyway, it won't change the final BCS result:
http://www.cfrc.com/Ratings_2007/WK_15.htm