Reply to Texas Whining

[htownsooner7]

Down here in Houston, I continue to hear the whining and moaning of how OU shouldn't be in the championship game. Much of it is still on talk radio. If any of you are confronted with same, I suggest the following response:

OU is ahead of the whorns in:

(1) the Coaches Poll;
(2) the Harris Poll;
(3) All 5 Computer Rankings;
(4) the AP Poll; and of course
(5) the BCS Standings.

I'm not saying that the BCS system is perfect, but how is that not clear???

[A-M]

It sounds good to me! However, as long as the TV announcers keep saying that Texas should be in the big game over us, we will continue to hear them whinning about it. Doesn't matter what they say, we are in and they are still out!

[BoulderSooner79]

What is this Texas of which you speak ?

[1890MilesToNorman]

It doesn't do any good to respond to them any more, we are in and they aren't. It's a done deal. :D

[bri]

Down here in Houston, I continue to hear the whining and moaning of how OU shouldn't be in the championship game.

Tell 'em to try putting three guys on Crabtree next time.

[Hot Rod]

Texas: "We are the professional whiners. We do it in style and with banners and planes."

[sooner n houston]

Hate to post this in two threads, but oh well: :D

Stole this from Red Dirt Kings web site:



Big 12 -- Official Rulings

Divisional Tie-Breakers: Beginning with the 2009 season, the following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:

- If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.

- If three or more teams are tied, Texas wins.

- If Texas is not one of the three teams tied, Texas wins.

- If one or both of the divisional winners lost to Texas at some point during the season, Texas wins.

- If three teams are tied, but Texas beat the North winner, Texas wins.

Thanks to the RDKer that sent this in. They must have a solid source inside the Big 12 Conference Headquarters in Irving, Texas.

[sooner518]

Their only response to anything you say is :
"45-35!!!!!1"

to which I respond: "39-33"

"but...but....we're Texas!!!!"

[DreamZ22]

Should of beat TT, that opened the door for OU and we took advantage of your F-up!!!!!!!!!!

[cjames317]

How about "Thanks horns"? Y'all showed Stoops that he needed to get OUr team stronger in the 4th quarter and be more prepared for a key injury. If not for that, we might've tripped up in Stillwater.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

http://www.antonline.com/images/076731100722.jpg

Texas has a whorehouse in it.

[GrapevineSooner]

Tell 'em to try putting three guys on Crabtree next time.

Or to not use the How to catch a football like Brent Parker drill.








And yes, that was a bit of a cheap shot toward Parker and Gideon. Parker's a good guy (coaches pee wee football here in the DFW area) and Gideon's a good kid. It's not fair that the biggest play in his football career that people will remember is a drop.

But it's not fair to Cowboys tight end Jackie Smith that he's remembered for a drop in the Super Bowl.

[Boomer Mooner]

I live in Houston too but I just quit argueing with them because there is no point. I just tell them 'it sucks being you, now please go down the hall and talk about "blow u" and "mobilehomea" with the rest of the Texas tittybabies because the rest of us have big boy things to take care of'.

[Soonersince57]

Hate to post this in two threads, but oh well: :D

Stole this from Red Dirt Kings web site:



Big 12 -- Official Rulings

Divisional Tie-Breakers: Beginning with the 2009 season, the following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:

- If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.

- If three or more teams are tied, Texas wins.

- If Texas is not one of the three teams tied, Texas wins.

- If one or both of the divisional winners lost to Texas at some point during the season, Texas wins.

- If three teams are tied, but Texas beat the North winner, Texas wins.

Thanks to the RDKer that sent this in. They must have a solid source inside the Big 12 Conference Headquarters in Irving, Texas.

AND if Texas beats OU, the remainder of the season doesn't count.:rolleyes:

[oupride]

Down here in Houston, I continue to hear the whining and moaning of how OU shouldn't be in the championship game. Much of it is still on talk radio. If any of you are confronted with same, I suggest the following response:

OU is ahead of the whorns in:

(1) the Coaches Poll;
(2) the Harris Poll;
(3) All 5 Computer Rankings;
(4) the AP Poll; and of course
(5) the BCS Standings.

I'm not saying that the BCS system is perfect, but how is that not clear???
Why would anyone want a LOWER ranked team in the Championship game?

[Jacie]

Any fan base that is as prepared as the Texas fans are to completely embarrass themselves, their school and state repeatedly is beyond listening to reason, dealing with logic and using common sense. They choose not to deal with the results of actions that their team lost control of as soon as Crabtree walked into the endzone in Lubbock that night. The incessant whining is only remarkable due to it's volume and the sheer number of what should be adults who continue to prove that they are incapable of understanding the consequences of refusing to STFU and move on! What started off as only mildly amusing has morphed into blatant disrespect not just for everyone subjected to it, but in particular for the horn fans en masse. Quite frankly, I am surprised the Texas athletic department and Mack Brown have not tried to deal with this as it only serves to paint UT football in a bad light and since it is not doing anything positive for their image, it should ultimately impact recruiting and not in a good way.

Texas fans = crybabies

[Soonerus]

Just respond with a chorus of "pppoooooorrr tteexxaass !!!"

[Mobits]

In the final coaches' poll...

Of the seven coaches in the Big 12 with votes, five placed Oklahoma ahead of Texas. All five had Oklahoma at No. 1. The two coaches who put Texas ahead of Oklahoma? Mack Brown (who had Texas No. 2, and OU No. 3), and Iowa State's Gene Chizik - who worked for Mack Brown as Texas' offensive coordinator in 2005-2006.

Source: www.39-33.com (http://www.39-33.com)

[picasso]

I'm sick of hearing about the dropped INT in the Texas/Tech game. What if Lamont Robinson comes down with that INT in Dallas? Who knows? That's why they play the entire game.

bitch.

[mdklatt]

OU is ahead of the whorns in:

(1) the Coaches Poll;
(2) the Harris Poll;
(3) All 5 Computer Rankings;
(4) the AP Poll; and of course
(5) the BCS Standings.

I'm not saying that the BCS system is perfect, but how is that not clear???

If Texas played in the CCG game, they would undoubtedly be ranked ahead of us right now. But they didn't, so yeah, STFU Lognforn fans.

[Dan Thompson]

Correct me, if I'm wrong, but Texas had no way of getting into the CCG.

If we won the OSU game, we're in.

If we lose, TT is in (remeber the head to head argument)

[badger]

Everybody point and laugh at the latest ESPN.com poll! (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=ncf&pollId=64664) :rolleyes:

[mdklatt]

Correct me, if I'm wrong, but Texas had no way of getting into the CCG.


They were ahead of us in one of the poll components after the OSU game. If Mack's whining had flipped the other one as well, they could have been ahead of us.

[Overtime]

Everybody point and laugh at the latest ESPN.com poll! (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=ncf&pollId=64664) :rolleyes:

If only ESPN paid attention to their own polls... or archived rather than deleting the ones they don't like. The best was the one that asked "In the event of a 3-way tie, which team should represent the Big 12 South in the Big 12 CCG?" 49 states said Oklahoma. I think that was up less than a day.

[badger]

If nobody's already posted it, here it is:
http://www.collegegameballs.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/weretexas1.jpg

[Czar Soonerov]

http://butbutweretexas.ytmnd.com/

[olevetonahill]

:texan: s Bringing New meaning to the term " Shat for Brains " :rolleyes:

[bluedogok]

ESPiN still can't get it right, on the Poll sidebar it shows 53% FLA-OK wrong choice for title. Click on the link and it is shows something different.


Is Florida-Oklahoma the right matchup for the BCS Title Game?
52% Yes
48% No
159,125 votes

[douxpaysan]

Without a doubt Texas Tech has the biggest argument with the BCS. Texas is going to the BCS Fiesta Bowl while Tech settles for the Cotton. What happened to "let's settle this on the field." If Mack were a man of his word he would have given that Fiesta Bowl bid to Tech, taken the noble road and gone back to Dallas. It's 7:39 pm and texas still sucks.

[Hornlaw]

It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

[Okla-homey]

Scru 'em! This Okie says we went 11-0 this year, since everyone with a pulse who can still fog a mirror outside of texass has decided that game didn't matter. At all.

[Cam]

Personally, no, I wouldn't be mad if TT got in. That would mean that they'd played somebody with a pulse OOC, since the season is 12 games long, not 1. Figure out how the game's played, and play it.

Maybe, just maybe, you and your horn brethren should be pissed at DeLoss Dodds for scheduling the likes of UTEP, Rice, and any of the other old SWC schools. Get over the past affiliation with the SWC, you'll be better off. Your big road test next year OOC, Wyoming. Seriously, WTF is that about???



It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

[Judge Smails]

Except the tie breaking rules had been agreed to in advance by each team in the conference. These rules weren't pushed onto each team unilaterally by the Commisioner.

Did anyone from Texas formerly challenge these rules before the season started? I doubt it. I doubt any team did.

Each team played by the same rules. Don't like them? Change them.

Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma each had the chance to win the conference outright. After that, those rules were all we had to go by. Oklahoma moved on by the slimmest of margins. I'll admit that. Texas has a very good team. I'll admit that too. I'll admit 45-35, if you admit 39-33. We both screwed up. We both should have won. But we both lost. And now all we have are the rules.

I'm very proud of the Big 12 Conference, especially the South division. I don't know about you, but I'm sick of hearing about the SEC and the PAC-10. I hope EVERY Big 12 team wins their bowls, and wins big.

If only people would get this angry about the things in life that REALLY matter.







It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

[aero]

hornlaw, why don't you go over to hf and count the threads congratulating us and count the ones laced with insane profanity and name calling from our "brethren". Did Texas deserve to go to the B12CCG? NO MORE THAN OU! Texas says apparently every game does NOT count? Yeah they do. That TT game counted just as much as that OU game. Texas says the computers screwed them and the human votes should matter more. What are they saying now? Check out the polls now. I suppose texas now says the computers are right and the humans are stupid. Its' the same old thing. Texas feels ENTITLED just because. Not because they deserve it more, or because that was the rule we all played under at the start of the season, but just because they say it. And then go and act as AGGIE as any team I've ever seen to sway voters and public opinion. Don't come here and spew that crap. When texass starts showing some "humility" maybe they'll start getting some respect back. I've seen a bunch of threads from the junior high posters on hf talking about karma. Well, karma is what texass has been getting for a long time and duly deserved.

[herecomedajudge]

It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

I agree with you that no one should denigrate anyone for expressing an opinion, that doesn't mean the opinion is not fair game to criticism. Moreover, because of the nature of these boards, overstatement and flaming is part of the price you pay for participating.

To be honest, I don't have any problem with Coach Brown's "politicing." When the Big 12 decided to use the BCS standings as the fifth tiebreaker, it was inevitable that campaigning for votes would occur. So, I disagree that Mack was not playing by the rules. In addition, his complaint that the rule resulted in an "unfair" result because Texas had defeated both teams in the CCG did not misstate the facts, it just overlooked his team's loss to TT in reaching the "unfair" conclusion.

The members of the media are another matter. With few exceptions they have attacked the rule itself and urged that it not be applied, without ever considering the common sense basis for the rule --- if the tiebreaker goes that far, we want the team with the highest BCS ranking, and thus the best chance to go to the MNC game, to play in the CC. Under the vaunted SEC approach, if Mack's "politicing" had been more successful and Texas was the highest rated but TT was second and within 5 spots of Texas, TT would go, despite the fact that they were embarrassed on national TV by the Sooners.

With regard to your concern that there was no "equity" court to correct this alleged injustice, I hope you never make such an argument in court. For almost 200 years in this country, court's have held that "equity follows the law." I hope you learned in law school (from your screen name I presume you are member of the bar, but perhaps that is not a valid assumption) that Chancery Courts (courts of equity) were first developed as part of an alternative court system run by the Church to avoid the technical and biased system presided over by the King's hand-picked judges.

In common American jurisprudence in effect today, the primary differences between "courts of law" and "courts of equity" are the type of relief that is available and whether a jury trial is required. Any judge who takes the position that an unambigous rule or "law" can be ignored after the fact because it is perceived as "unfair" simply because it is an "equity" case is a judicial activist of the first order.

This is my first post, and I realize it is probably too long. I hope to do better in the future. BOOMER SOONER!!

[SoonerBacker]

It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

Lack of humility? Go through here and check out the number of your Whorn brethern who have been here (and on Gator boards, I might add) spouting that they hope we lose, that the Gators rip us a new one, that our coach sucks, and that they got screwed. The only thing that is beyond reproach is a Whorn coming here and trying to lecture us about a lack of humility!

Finally, you claim that Bob Stoops was just as guilty of politicing as Mack was. You obviously missed the fact that Bob REFUSED an ESPN interview during the tu/aTm game on Thanksgiving night. Mack was on ESPN every chance he got to plead his case to the voters. You obviously missed the fact that OU fans were not hiring planes to haul banners around the country flying over stadiums where football games were being played that did not involve your team. We did not even hire the planes to fly over stadiums where our team WAS playing! And we sure as hell did not print of a bunch of lame-a$$ signs for our fans to wave around at the OU/oSu game......or in the Big XII CCG.


AS has been pointed out, ALL of the coaches knew the rules going into the season. No one complained BEFORE the season began. All teams played by the same rules. Don't like it? Don't drop an interception that is thrown into your lap, or tackle Crabtree and there is no argument. But when you lose, and then claim that it doesn't matter, you sound like................


well, you sound like a Whorn! :cry:

[jwlynn64]

Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

Reading your quote just reminded me of how our country is becoming more and more screwed every day because it is being run by people like you.

Are courts supposed to figure out what is fair? I thought they were just supposed to administer the laws passed by our duly elected officials.

I look forward to the day when my offspring will go to court and argue their case with "Your honor, the defendant is guilty and ****" and the judge will admonish anyone spouting the crap that you do with "Quit talking all faggy!" (Idiocracy alert for anyone that hasn't seen it.)

[Doged]

Hornlaw, while I agree with most of your post, the part about holding a hearing prior to the application of the rule is pure Longhorn hogwash. You don't get to change the rules at the end of the game because you don't like who won. What are you, 5 year-olds? If you don't like the results you 1) work harder next time to win within the same rules or 2) try to change the rule to something you like better before the next season, then try again to win within those rules. I'm all for reviewing the 3-way tie rule after the season, though I've yet to be convinced any of the other options presented thus far are any better.

Losing and then trying to change the rule so you win just doesn't cut it, sorry.

[47straight]

It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

You know even less about the law than you do college football. Turn off the computer and pull your head out of your ***.

[soonermeteor]

Tell them they shouldn't get in when they are only the second best team in Texas.

[Half a Hundred]

Reading your quote just reminded me of how our country is becoming more and more screwed every day because it is being run by people like you.

Are courts supposed to figure out what is fair? I thought they were just supposed to administer the laws passed by our duly elected officials.

I look forward to the day when my offspring will go to court and argue their case with "Your honor, the defendant is guilty and ****" and the judge will admonish anyone spouting the crap that you do with "Quit talking all faggy!" (Idiocracy alert for anyone that hasn't seen it.)

Dude, the guy is an ***, but the courts are supposed to decide what's fair based on the supreme law of the land. If a law goes against it, then it's overturned. The executive administers the law.

The problem with that is that the tiebreaker rules ARE the supreme law of the Big 12 land. You don't get to argue over whether the Constitution is constitutional... it is constitutional per se.

Finally, guess what whorn? I like it that you took it royally in the backside. It makes it feel that much better. Why? Because yet again, your smug, supercilious, stubbornly superiority-complexed silly squad of a fanbase got the reminder that yes, your **** does stink. Basically, even when you win, you're still OU's bitch, and don't you forget it. Our tradition is better, our coach is better, our offense is better, our quarterback is better, our 41 conference championships are better, our seven national championships are better, our four BCS Championship Game appearances are better, even when we lose; our Heisman Trophy winners are better, our gameday is better, our band is better, our mascot is better, our campus is better, doing much more with less; our colors are better, our athletic director is better, our rivalries (Nebraska) are better, and at the end of the day, our program still is the envy of the Big 12. You just mistake that sheer disgust for your school and program for envy.

See you in Dallas next October, friend-o

[jwlynn64]

Wow. Are they teaching kids that now? The courts are supposed to apply the law and the hierarchy of courts can rule if a law is in violation of the constitution but no court (judge) is supposed to be ruling on what they think is fair. Don't be fooled by what the Dems want you to think.

Just remember, Andrew Jackson disobeyed an order of the Supreme court and replied that if the court wanted to enforce their ruling, they could send their army to do it. (paraphrasing)

Getting back to football, if the Big XII wasn't in the balance, OU would have easily been in front of Texas all along. What we had was a bunch of Supreme Court Justices trying to bend the rules to get what they thought was a fair result and not actually ranking the teams by who they thought was the better team at the time of their vote.

[SicEmBaylor]

I wish they would STFU and sit in a corner sucking their thumb and take up a sport as full of p*****s as they are -- soccer.

[BoulderSooner79]

I too wish the conference fans would ban together and wish each other the best now that the family feud is over for this season. I haven't seen many horn well wishers come over here tell us to tear up the gators and prove that any of the 3 big12 teams could have done the same. I have seen horn posters wishing us to lose 70-0 or worse. Personally, I was almost burnt orange myself watching that '05 Rose bowl and cheering for VY and the horns to take down that greatest college team ever in their own back yard. But after the anti-sooner venom I've seen from horn fans to last couple of weeks, having done that makes me feel dirty. OU didn't make the rules, the big 12 did. If the situation had been reversed and we won in Dallas, but lost in Stillwater and had a 3-way tie with OU/UT/OSU I guarantee that UT would have had the BCS nod because we would have lost last and you wouldn't give a crap about head to head or a "court of justice". You would have gone to KC for the CCG as you should have.

[Hornlaw]

47straight: You know even less about the law than you do college football. Turn off the computer and pull your head out of your ***.

Well, that's an intelligent response.


jwlynn64:Reading your quote just reminded me of how our country is becoming more and more screwed every day because it is being run by people like you.

ahhhhh, if only I were king for a day; or even better, go to sleep for a few centuries and wake-up the smartest man in the world. Yep, that's the ticket!


Doged... : If you don't like the results you 1) work harder next time to win within the same rules or 2) try to change the rule to something you like better before the next season, then try again to win within those rules. I'm all for reviewing the 3-way tie rule after the season, though I've yet to be convinced any of the other options presented thus far are any better.

Losing and then trying to change the rule so you win just doesn't cut it, sorry.

Can't really argue with that. That's commonsense reasonable.


HerecomedajudgeWith regard to your concern that there was no "equity" court to correct this alleged injustice, I hope you never make such an argument in court. For almost 200 years in this country, court's have held that "equity follows the law." I hope you learned in law school (from your screen name I presume you are member of the bar, but perhaps that is not a valid assumption) that Chancery Courts (courts of equity) were first developed as part of an alternative court system run by the Church to avoid the technical and biased system presided over by the King's hand-picked judges.

In common American jurisprudence in effect today, the primary differences between "courts of law" and "courts of equity" are the type of relief that is available and whether a jury trial is required. Any judge who takes the position that an unambigous rule or "law" can be ignored after the fact because it is perceived as "unfair" simply because it is an "equity" case is a judicial activist of the first order.

Had to brush away a few cobwebs, but I seem to remember reading Cardozo in Graf v Hope Building Corporation during my first year. You are right, as a criminal defense attorney I've never had an occasion to argue equity in a trial except in the broadest sense of the word. I spend my days arguing against reasonable suspicion, probable cause, partition ratios, retrograde extrapolation and such. I do know that a trial judge in a criminal case may invoke her equitable powers and disregard a jury verdict if she so chooses and impose her own verdict, as well as disregard the jury's punishment recommendation.

[Hornlaw]

I will admit that I was very angry for the past couple of weeks concerning all this tiebreaker business. After reading the following post on Hornfans the anger is gone and I am looking forward to the Horns kicking *** in the Fiesta Bowl as well as all Big XII teams returning home with a victory in hand.


I go back to the 60’s, okay? To the 60’s. But the rivalry is older than that. It didn't start really heating up until the 1950s with the OU teams under Bud Wilkinson. They ran off something like 49 straight wins, broken by a defeat against, of all teams, Notre Dame. Then Royal as a new coach beat OU in about his second season I think it was, by a score of 15-14. Royal dominated for a number of years then started losing ground to Barry Switzer due to a change in recruiting that heavily favored OU.

The rivalry matters because of... get this ... mutual respect. Without that, the rivalry is like UT vs. A&M., or UT vs. just about anyone else. Classic story telling will tell you this: all Heroes are based on a valid Opponent. The Opponent MUST be on an equal stature with the Hero. Otherwise, there is no Glory. OU IS a valid and respected opponent. It has been that way for a hundred years. This is why all things in the rivalry matter.

What happened this year was a strange occurrence. The 3-way tie allowed a kind of off-set to the regular season head-to-head competition. Also --and this is important -- neither OU nor Texas lost a second game. Hence the tie. IF... and a big IF... the division had ended straight-up with two 1-loss teams between OU and Texas, then it's a no-brainer. No harm. No foul. The loser takes it on the chin looking forward to next season. All the power to you, as the saying goes. Either way, you accept the destiny of the season. But there was an off-setting situation that is rare. A 3-way tie of three one-loss teams. BUT ... Texas fans feel the deal is only between OU and Texas. The 3-way tie does not count. Only the noble ones... OU and Texas ...matter. So it was down to head-to-head. The winner of the Cotton Bowl Classic gets the nod. But ... that did not happen.

Were it a 3-way tie between any other grouping of Big 12 South teams, then no big deal. Just an unfortunate situation where the tie goes to someone else. But this was not the case, the critical tie ended up being with ... Oklahoma. A 3-way tie between, say, Oklahoma State, Baylor and Texas ... and the tie going to Okie-State. Okay. Disappointing, but no big deal, **** happens. BUT .. .the tie went to OU, and the rival game was in the mind of the Texas fans. Winner of that game holds a special "nod" for the season. The tides of the polls and the way OU's schedule allowed them to make a statement the rest of the way in, went against the Horns. AND .. get this .. it took four straight 60+ point scoring outbursts to offset the polls and computer rankings. It took everything OU could muster, including fielding a leading Heisman Candidate -- to overcome the head-to-head loss back in early October in Dallas.

I'm a Texas fan from a long time ago, and I can only tell you that the honor and caliber of the Tx-Ou game is such that the outcome of that game MEANS A HELLUVA LOT!!! It means everything. When Texas loses to OU, there is a sense that you basically yield the season to OU. Only a real downfall of losing another game offsets it. But a tie? Never. The game itself, in Dallas ... BREAKS the tie! That is the truth of it all. That game breaks all ties. It's in the hearts and minds of Texas fans. Over the years. Over generations. Again, why? Because you respect the other team! If it means a lot to beat OU -- it's because it means a lot to LOSE to OU. And vice versa.

This year, the events conspired to make the winning or losing of that game, not quite the same. Did it take a second loss? No. It only took performance on the field against the schedule. And that was it. Performance and schedule. BUT not losing a second game, or even the outcome of that particular State Fair game. And OU's athletic program was more than happy to take a favorable schedule in November and ride the polls to a ranking position in the polls that overcame that unofficial tie-breaker. The score of that game in Dallas. That's all this is about. And I think it's what makes the sport good. As a fan, I welcome the outcome. I'd rather be on this end of it than on OU's end of it. Just my nature.

I don't want any gifts from the polls if OU wins that game. Never. Not in a million years. Why? Because I respect that game, and even though I can't stand losing to OU, I have respected their football capabilities and their spirited rivalry for many years. I've been to OU dances on Friday nights. I've played touch football on Friday afternoons in a Dallas suburb with school friends while a student. I've slept over at friends houses in Dallas for OU-Weekend, and been to the games, and gotten drunk, and pissed in beer bottles in traffic near the Cotton Bowl, and lost my tickets on the Ferris Wheel and still got into the game, and have been to OU games in four different decades. I've lived through a lot of it. I love that rivalry. And think about this... in the end... this year... it still came down to OU vs. Texas. AIN'T IT GREAT!!! Yahoo!!!! YAHOOO!!!!!

Life will go on. Advantage to OU this year in a strange year, but the future will be good. The game from now on will have an added excitement. And this is for sure ... this is for certain. The University of Texas Longhorns know full well that it's a full season. Beat OU ... and then ... then finish. Finish strong and don't look back. …

[Half a Hundred]

Wow. Are they teaching kids that now? The courts are supposed to apply the law and the hierarchy of courts can rule if a law is in violation of the constitution but no court (judge) is supposed to be ruling on what they think is fair. Don't be fooled by what the Dems want you to think.

Just remember, Andrew Jackson disobeyed an order of the Supreme court and replied that if the court wanted to enforce their ruling, they could send their army to do it. (paraphrasing)

Getting back to football, if the Big XII wasn't in the balance, OU would have easily been in front of Texas all along. What we had was a bunch of Supreme Court Justices trying to bend the rules to get what they thought was a fair result and not actually ranking the teams by who they thought was the better team at the time of their vote.

Umm... let's just say that the last 60 years of jurisprudence disagree with you. It's not what's "fair", it's what's "fair in regard to the Constitution". That is, "equal protection under the law", aka the Fourteenth Amendment. It's still what the Constitution says, along with the understanding that a full reading of the Common Law brings. While Lochner seems to be what you're conjuring, needless to say, since the Warren court, that's been the decidedly minority reading. It has nothing to do with a political party, it has everything to do with expansion of rights based on guarantees of Constitutional protections.

Andrew Jackson was the closest thing the US ever had to a military dictator (Sic em's opinion notwithstanding). Of course he thought that way. Doesn't mean he was right. See Charles I of England, for example.

[wileyousooner]

Hornlaw, I am a huge supporter of the Big Twelve. I will even swallow a little hard and root for the Texas Longhorns. I want the Big Twelve to be the best conference in the nation. I would love nothing better than all the Big Twelve bowl eligible teams to win. But after reading some of the posts from OU haters it sure makes it a little hard to take. OU doesn't get much respect and won't until they beat Florida in the NC game? And if we don't win, then we will have to wait another year to try to earn it yet again. The pressure is really on Bob this year, but I believe he will find a way to win. After all we are underdogs. That is the only thing that seems to movitate us. People will be saying we don't deserve to be there until we win. Only then will they be forced to choke on every word. BOOMER SOONER!!!!!!

[Sooner70]

Yeah, I guess we could grind on this thing forever. I live & work near Houston, so I've got to face a lot of 'Horn fans. What surprises me, but it really shouldn't, is the venom & hate toward OU on this thing. So far, my straw poll says the 'Horn fans want the Gators to wipe the field against OU. They're like OSU fans. If OU was playing the Devil's team, OSU would be for the Devil. What a myoptic view. I'd think that we'd all want to the Big 12 to show well in all these Bowl games. BUT, if I was on the 'Horns side of the fence.....

Anyway, the venom & hate is misplaced. All OU did was play the best ball they could after a setback, which is what Florida did. It worked out, mainly because of the BCS computers. The 'Horns should place their venom & myoptic world view on the system that caused this, and work for change, not the recipient of the system. Of course, there's all kinds of peripheral accusations....like Stoops "runs up the score", while they conveniently forget about Colt still being in the game 4th qtr against a hapless aTm team, Mack's incessant lobbying (which he did in 2004), etc.

I'd like to ask all 'Horns to "rise above it" and support the conference teams in the bowls. Heck, even as avid a non-Longhorn fan as I am, I'll pull for them against Ohio State. Mainly, 'cause I want the Big 12 to show good. Oh well, probably too much to ask. Maybe I'd be the same way if the roles were reversed....at least for awhile.

[GrapevineSooner]

Here's the thing...

I've heard from many critics of the Big 12 three way tiebreaker that the BCS rankings should not be used to break ties.

Nevermind that that's exactly what the SEC and ACC do in their own three-way tiebreaker scenarios in one form or another. In some cases, they use it to eliminate teams while in other cases. In other cases, they do exactly what the Big 12 does and use it to decide who wins a division.

And I have yet to hear a feasible solution to this.

The ACC/SEC tiebreaker was used by Horn fans for entirely self serving reasons, IMO. And it's also a bad tiebreaker. Had it been in use this season, you can bet your *** Stoops wouldn't have dared hang 65 on Texas Tech for fear of bringing the head to head tiebreaker back into play against Texas. Which messes with the very fabric of the game.

[htownsooner7]

It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?
Blindly following the “rules” can sometimes produce an unfair result. It is an axiom in the legal profession that strict application of the law (rules) can sometimes produce an unjust (unfair) and unintended result. This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity. Unfortunately, neither the Big XII nor the BCS have a grievance apparatus, in place, which would have allowed for a hearing on the contested rule prior to its application. Thus you have the unseemly spectacle of fans, and coaches (yes both Brown and Stoops), courting public opinion with their arguments. For the members of this board to denigrate fans, and coaches, of other schools for publicly airing their grievances because they felt that an injustice was/is being perpetrated, is beyond reproach.

You must be a law student and have no knowledge of the real legal world. The axiom is "bad facts make bad law." There are no "courts of equity" in Texas. Maybe you should get past Property I before you start lecturing us on the law, okay?

[cjames317]

You must be a law student and have no knowledge of the real legal world. The axiom is "bad facts make bad law." There are no "courts of equity" in Texas. Maybe you should get past Property I before you start lecturing us on the law, okay?

Or, "Posting on Soonerfans.com for Dummies" from Professor Lid.

[47straight]

Well, that's an intelligent response.



ahhhhh, if only I were king for a day; or even better, go to sleep for a few centuries and wake-up the smartest man in the world. Yep, that's the ticket!



Can't really argue with that. That's commonsense reasonable.



Had to brush away a few cobwebs, but I seem to remember reading Cardozo in Graf v Hope Building Corporation during my first year. You are right, as a criminal defense attorney I've never had an occasion to argue equity in a trial except in the broadest sense of the word. I spend my days arguing against reasonable suspicion, probable cause, partition ratios, retrograde extrapolation and such. I do know that a trial judge in a criminal case may invoke her equitable powers and disregard a jury verdict if she so chooses and impose her own verdict, as well as disregard the jury's punishment recommendation.



You need to go ask Dean Sager for your money back, *********. Arguing equity when this situation was contemplated (that's why there is a 5th tiebreaker) and provided for explicitly will get your butt laughed at.

Ugh, I actually had to engage this tripe on its merits. I'm going to go throw up and take a shower.

[TexasLidig8r]

You must be a law student and have no knowledge of the real legal world. The axiom is "bad facts make bad law." There are no "courts of equity" in Texas. Maybe you should get past Property I before you start lecturing us on the law, okay?

You know, I was going to pass on this thread and not even read it figuring it was the typical sooner fan attempting to complain about ESPN or how the media hates you, or demonstrating the usual lack of graciousness about being where you are or conversely, some of my fellow Texas faithful throwing barbs and bemoaning the system.

(as an aside, I believe our concerns should be more with Florida being there instead of the Land Thieves... nonetheless, I momentarily digressed)

The posts on courts and the law was fairly interesting though. Yes, most courts exist ostensibly for the purpose of "enforcing laws passed by the legislature." In reality, that is not always the case.

More often than not, the case goes to the better prepared lawyer who is more polished and seasoned. If the facts are against you, you embrace the facts that support you and argue the law. If the law is against you, you argue how the facts of the case mandate a good faith extension of the law. You grind the other side down.

Issues of equity? Issues of law? I'll take the better attorney every day.

[Soonersince57]

"Horn" and "law" = 2 strikes.

Royal dominated for a number of years then started losing ground to Barry Switzer due to a change in recruiting that heavily favored OU.

I believe it was called recruiting black players.


Issues of equity? Issues of law? I'll take the better attorney every day.

I'll take fewer attorneys every day.

[badger]

You know, I was going to pass on this thread and not even read it figuring it was the typical sooner fan attempting to complain about ESPN or how the media hates you, or demonstrating the usual lack of graciousness about being where you are or conversely, some of my fellow Texas faithful throwing barbs and bemoaning the system.

Hi Lid :) It seems so long ago that you had control of my avatar and sig. It's like that time just doesn't matter anymore to matter what the score was to that game, or what the outcome to that game was, or what the polls were before November. It's like the entire month of October was just wiped from existence and New Year's came a month early for those wanting a clean slate and a clear conscience on the football season.

:P Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that I've recovered well from my rehabilitation period and will make it just fine.

[Hornlaw]

You must be a law student and have no knowledge of the real legal world. The axiom is "bad facts make bad law." There are no "courts of equity" in Texas. Maybe you should get past Property I before you start lecturing us on the law, okay?

On the surface you are correct, there are no separate courts of equity in Texas. That does not mean that equity does not exist. Given your extensive legal training and decades practicing law, I shouldn't have to tell you that Texas courts have combined powers. Where do you think the power to grant an injunction comes from? I hope you are not out in "the real legal world" practicing law when you have such obvious gaps in your legal training.

[Jacie]

The fact that a Texas fan can come onto this board and refer to OUr team and by association, all of us as Land Thieves and not get banned has to say something about the patience Sooners have with those with whom they disagree.

There's not a Texas fan message board to be found on the interwebs that would accord us the same courtesy.

[htownsooner7]

On the surface you are correct, there are no separate courts of equity in Texas. That does not mean that equity does not exist. Given your extensive legal training and decades practicing law, I shouldn't have to tell you that Texas courts have combined powers. Where do you think the power to grant an injunction comes from? I hope you are not out in "the real legal world" practicing law when you have such obvious gaps in your legal training.

Traffic court boy, this was your exact quote, "This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity." If I have to break down your use of the disjunctive (to make it easy for you, your use of the word 'alternately') or use of the possessive (to make it easy for you again, your use of the phrase 'we have . . .Courts of Equity'), then I highly doubt you could have graduated from law school. Secondly, we simply do not 'have' Courts of Equity. It cannot be debated. Thirdly, your understanding of injunctions is a utter failure. One of the grounds for an injunction comes from the "principles of equity." BUT, injunctive relief is also authorized by the express provisions of various statutes. By way of example, one statute provides that a person may bring an action to enjoin an act likely to injure a business reputation or to dilute the value of a registered trademark or of a common-law trademark or trade name. Fly away to another forum, better yet, go attend a CLE. As someone said, you have failing knowledge of football and the law.

[47straight]

Traffic court boy, this was your exact quote, "This is why we have Courts of Law and, alternately, Courts of Equity." If I have to break down your use of the disjunctive (to make it easy for you, your use of the word 'alternately') or use of the possessive (to make it easy for you again, your use of the phrase 'we have . . .Courts of Equity'), then I highly doubt you could have graduated from law school. Secondly, we simply do not 'have' Courts of Equity. It cannot be debated. Thirdly, your understanding of injunctions is a utter failure. One of the grounds for an injunction comes from the "principles of equity." BUT, injunctive relief is also authorized by the express provisions of various statutes. By way of example, one statute provides that a person may bring an action to enjoin an act likely to injure a business reputation or to dilute the value of a registered trademark or of a common-law trademark or trade name. Fly away to another forum, better yet, go attend a CLE. As someone said, you have failing knowledge of football and the law.


At least if I ever need a criminal defense lawyer, I know who I won't be referring.

[Vaevictis]

What the craphell. This is a football board. Take this **** to the SO.

[htownsooner7]

Agreed. I'm out, just couldn't take the incorrect rants from someone who doesn't know what they're talking about. Come to think of it, I guess that summarizes my whole thread anyway.

[TexasLidig8r]

The fact that a Texas fan can come onto this board and refer to OUr team and by association, all of us as Land Thieves and not get banned has to say something about the patience Sooners have with those with whom they disagree.

There's not a Texas fan message board to be found on the interwebs that would accord us the same courtesy.

LAND THIEVES
LAND THIEVES
SIS BOOM BAH

YOU STOLE THE LAND
YOU STOLE THE LAND
RAH RAH RAH...

It's a term of endearment.

[badger]

blah blah lawyer blah blah Colt blah blah BCS blah blah AP title

CRY BABY
CRY BABY
SIS BOOM BAH

FIESTA BOWL
FIESTA BOWL
HA HA HA

:D

[Soonersince57]

All my land thief ancestors came from Texas.

[bri]

Does anyone else ever chuckle when Texans call us "land thieves"? I mean, I don't remember Mexico going, "You know what? These guys are annoying *ssholes. You take it."

[TexasLidig8r]

Does anyone else ever chuckle when Texans call us "land thieves"? I mean, I don't remember Mexico going, "You know what? These guys are annoying *ssholes. You take it."

That's because... instead of cheating against rules established by the United States government and acquiring squatters rights over property...

after absorbing a valiant defeat at the Alamo... kind of comparable to being behind 14 - 3.. or... 21 - 10 for example, we came back and whipped their ***.

One was cheating.
One was kicking their ***.

You're comparing apples and turnips.

[Soonersince57]

That's because... instead of cheating against rules established by the United States government and acquiring squatters rights over property...

after absorbing a valiant defeat at the Alamo... kind of comparable to being behind 14 - 3.. or... 21 - 10 for example, we came back and whipped their ***.

One was cheating.
One was kicking their ***.

You're comparing apples and turnips.


Makes perfect sense as usual. :rolleyes:

[Jacie]

Of course, no discussion of land thieves would be complete without mentioning the genocide inflicted on the original inhabitants of Texas by that upstanding group of guys who called themselves the Texas Rangers . . .

[47straight]

I'd rather have people butcher the history of the term sooners to mean land thieves than have my mascot be an obsolete walking side of hamburger.

[Half a Hundred]

That's because... instead of cheating against rules established by the United States government and acquiring squatters rights over property...

after absorbing a valiant defeat at the Alamo... kind of comparable to being behind 14 - 3.. or... 21 - 10 for example, we came back and whipped their ***.

One was cheating.
One was kicking their ***.

You're comparing apples and turnips.

Or you could interpret it as...

Cheating against rules established by the Mexican government, and performing various terrorist acts against the legitimate government. After getting a thorough ***-kicking in a police action, sort of like how you aren't Big 12 Champions this year, another terrorist act was undertaken by which the lawful president of Mexico was kidnapped and forced into illegitimate terms.

One was bending the rules in your favor
One was killing thousands of fellow countrymen.

There's two sides to every history, you know ;)

[Frozen Sooner]

That's because... instead of cheating against rules established by the United States government and acquiring squatters rights over property...

after absorbing a valiant defeat at the Alamo... kind of comparable to being behind 14 - 3.. or... 21 - 10 for example, we came back and whipped their ***.

One was cheating.
One was kicking their ***.

You're comparing apples and turnips.

Let's see:

Immigrants to the Empire of Mexico lied about their desire to convert to Catholicim, then made war on a legitimate government to protect their right to buy and sell other human beings.

Very noble, that.

[picasso]

http://butbutweretexas.ytmnd.com/

looks like Mack did that walkin ball twister thing. yyyowwwch.

[picasso]

I really don't honestly think anyone is blaming Texas fans for being extremely upset and pisseddd over this controversy. I think what irks us the most is that you somehow seem to think that we cheated or Stoops influenced the system.
We simply finished with impressive victories and by that we did all that we could do.
Texas didn't.

[DUCKHUNTDAVE]

[QUOTE=Hornlaw;2522282]It's amazing the lack of humility or introspection on this board. Yes, under the rules, you were declared the winner of Big XII South Division and you then won the Big XII championship game by dominating a hapless Missouri team that the Horn’s dominated as well (35-3, at the half). You have been invited to play Florida for the MNC. Congratulations are in order from your Big XII brethren. Your response should be to say thank you and tell them that you would support them if the tables were turned and it was OU on the outside looking-in. Yes, hold your head high when you walk into Dolphin Stadium, but don’t deny that Texas and Texas Tech fans have a legitimate argument that the “rules” are not fair. I mean, can anyone on this board honestly say that they wouldn’t of flipped-out if by some freak calculation of the BCS polls/computers Texas Tech was declared the winner of the BIG XII South Division?QUOTE]

"Pot meet Kettle."

[Okla-homey]

I really don't honestly think anyone is blaming Texas fans for being extremely upset and pisseddd over this controversy. I think what irks us the most is that you somehow seem to think that we cheated or Stoops influenced the system.
We simply finished with impressive victories and by that we did all that we could do.
Texas didn't.


There's that, and if the last eight years have taught us anything, the US probably has a case of "texas fatigue." That was probably working against those folks down there on the trashy side of the Red River in the minds of the hooman poll sender-inners.

[TexasLidig8r]

Let's see:

Immigrants to the Empire of Mexico lied about their desire to convert to Catholicim, then made war on a legitimate government to protect their right to buy and sell other human beings.

Very noble, that.

That's because the Empire of Mexico was an illegitimate government to begin with.

Spain illegally took over the country from the Aztecs, forced Catholicism on the poor, oppressed Aztecs and forced the land we now know as Mexico, to become what it is today.. a third world country with the occasional good resort.

It was a war to attempt to restore the rightful claims of the Aztecs and in the abscence thereof, to rid the Republic of Texas from the illegal claims made by oppressors and the Taliban.

[Soonersince57]

That's because the Empire of Mexico was an illegitimate government to begin with.

Spain illegally took over the country from the Aztecs, forced Catholicism on the poor, oppressed Aztecs and forced the land we now know as Mexico, to become what it is today.. a third world country with the occasional good resort.

It was a war to attempt to restore the rightful claims of the Aztecs and in the abscence thereof, to rid the Republic of Texas from the illegal claims made by oppressors and the Taliban.

and also to make Hawaii the 57th state.:pop:

[OKLA21FAN]

best thread jack evar! :pop:

[Frozen Sooner]

That's because the Empire of Mexico was an illegitimate government to begin with.

Spain illegally took over the country from the Aztecs, forced Catholicism on the poor, oppressed Aztecs and forced the land we now know as Mexico, to become what it is today.. a third world country with the occasional good resort.

It was a war to attempt to restore the rightful claims of the Aztecs and in the abscence thereof, to rid the Republic of Texas from the illegal claims made by oppressors and the Taliban.

1) It was as legitimate as any North American country in existence as of today (with the possible exception of that one province in Canada) inasmuch as right of governance was established by conquest.

2) Of course, the Aztecs were pretty fond of sacrificing anyone who wasn't an Aztec in religious rites. I may occasionally express disagreement with Christianity, but it's pretty preferable to Quetzlcoatl.

3) I'm going to need to see some historical documentation to back up the claim that the Texans were fighting for the Aztecs, particularly as I don't think the Aztec Empire ever claimed much land north of the Rio Grande. Could be wrong on that one, though.

4) Be that as it may, you'd be hard-pressed to blame the currect state of Mexico on the Empire, as the current government overthrew the Mexican Empire.

So I'm going to stick with "A bunch of apostates who hid in the cellar to protect their right to own slaves." :P

[picasso]

Does anyone else ever chuckle when Texans call us "land thieves"? I mean, I don't remember Mexico going, "You know what? These guys are annoying *ssholes. You take it."

or how about the Comanche, Apache or Wichita?

steal this, bitch.