By the way, speaking of Simms, I have a hypothetical question to some of his bashers on the BBS: If Texas goes out and just dominates tomorrow like 35-10, or something, will you give Simms credit for leading his team to victory in a big game, or will Oklahoma become "overrated"? I'm not saying this is what I think will happen at all... just throwing that question out there beforehand since so many Texas fans like to change the definition of a big game after it happens.
alright, time for my official prediction. We're about 30 hours from game time... and I'm gonna officially put this down: TX - 20 OU - 13 Simms: 220 yds passing 1 TD, 2 INTS Benson: 95 yds rushing, 1 TD by the way, is the FSU v. MIA game on at 11:30am? what a freakin' great appetizer for the Texas game! and then i'm going to the texans game on sunday! this is shaping up to be the best sporting weekend of the year for me!
Haha, oh yeah. I wasn't being serious, just preparing myself in the unlikelihood of a loss tomorrow. Plus, I was drunk after watching my Pack beat up on the Cubs, er, Bears.
If Texas goes out and just dominates tomorrow like 35-10, or something, will you give Simms credit for leading his team to victory in a big game, or will Oklahoma become "overrated"? I'm not saying this is what I think will happen at all... To me, big games have many different meanings. A game is big for Texas if the opponent is big or the consquences are huge. For that, OU would be a big game for Texas because it would involve beating a top-2 team and setting us up for the B12 South. K-State, Iowa State, maybe A&M fit that bill as well. Personally, I'm not a fan of the "rivalry" aspect of big games. Games are big because they are tough. If A&M sucks, it's not a "big game" in that a win is not really very impressive. Of course games against crappy opponents are big only if you lose. You were expected to win; if you don't, and it costs you something big, then it became big by virtue of that loss. It's a "big loss" but not a "big win". The same applies for crappy teams. Baylor losing to UT is not a "big loss". Baylor beating UT is a "big win". Big games for the Offense are games against good defenses. That would certainly include OU as they are unquestionably a good defense. Last year, big games for the offense included OU, A&M, and North Carolina. This year, K-State, A&M and OU fit the bill. Maybe Nebraska if they can turn things around. These are the games that say how good the offense is. Big games for the Defense are games against good offenses. To me, OU isn't a big game for the defense. Shutting down OU won't tell me too much new about our defense. Of course it's important to winning the game, but in terms of judging the quality of the defense, it doesn't say much. Tech, Nebraska, Iowa State, K-State (?) would fit in this category. As for giving Simms credit for <I>leading</i> the team, that depends on what he does. If he goes 0-10 with 3 INTs but Benson runs for 400 yards, I wouldn't give him credit for leading the team. If he goes 20-30 for 150 yards and no turnovers, and Benson runs for 150 yards, Benson would probably be the leader. If Simms shoulders the load and gets 300 yards, then he would certainly be the leader. It just depends on the role of the players. Who makes the big plays? Who makes the big mistakes? What concerns me with this team is that either Simms or the coaches are afraid of making mistakes and playing not-to-lose. That doesn't let Simms "be the leader" because it doesn't give him the opportunity to make plays. Similarly, if we lose 38-35, the offense is not to blame. If we lose 38-0, both the offense and defense would shoulder the failure. If we lose 13-3, the offense gets the blame. This also changes depending on how the offense, defense and special teams do. If we only score on defense or when the defense / special teams give us awesome field position, then that doesn't reflect much on the offense. If the offense turns the ball over a bunch, that shouldn't reflect as badly on the defense (Colorado II, 2001). All in all, you have to look at each game separately. My criticism of Simms was that he didn't perform well at all against the good defenses. He shot through Colorado I, but they weren't a good defense - that was more impressive on the part of our defense. The A&M game in 2000 was Simm's truly impressive game where he made plays to win, but I don't think he lived up to that standard in 2001. Based on his end-of-2000 performance, I had no problem with Simms starting last year. I thought he should have been benched after early-season bad performances (North Carolina, OU) given that I felt we had a better option on the bench.
DV I respectfully disagree. To run the table going into the NC game Texas would have to win 7 of 8 against probably top 40 schools. Further, many of the games are extra tough, you consider OU is #2 or #3 overall, KSU on the road, plus the Big 12 North winner (NU again, KSU again, ISU again or CU)--I doubt any other team in the land has an ending schedule that can rival that. The two teams I thought that might, Georgia & Tenn, are simply do not as close to as tough schedule left when you look at from top to bottom. If anyone can provide me a top 10 team (or any other team for that matter) with a comparable finishing schedule I would be impressed. With the exception of Baylor, if Texas brings their C- game and the opponents bring their A game (like OSU last week) we can get a fat L ANY of those games. Honestly if Texas can win all those games I like their chances for the NC even if the Canes go in undefeated as well--it would mean our offense and defense are both humming along with great consistency and dominance even on the best days of some quality, emotionally charged, opponents are gunning for you.
Simms has taken a lot of undeserved crap, but it comes with being the son of Phil Simms, # 1 hs recruit, starting at Texas and replacing a popular underdog QB. Chris shouldn't be held responsible for the above since all those things were not in his control. The people who posted his number on the net or spray painted Simms sucks are morons. That went way way beyond the line. I'm not a Simms jockist like those people on Horn fans who praise his every move. He has not performed well in big games...that is the truth despite how some may spin it. I'm going to be critical of him, but also give him props when he does well. Saturday is the day of judgment for UT fans. A win will unite us. A loss will divide us. Another reason why this is a must win.
Yeah, Mack Brown downplaying the game is starting to scare me a little. While I understand that saying what he's saying may get the players loose, in reality, the jitters will be back when game time rolls around. I think he's setting themselves up for what happened last year...a game plan that was trying not to lose instead of trying to win. Major, I agree with most everything you said except for the rivalry part. Rivalry games like OU/UT and UT/A&M will <B>always</b> be big games regardless of the records of the two opponents.
Bleh. I was really confident heading into last year's game. I thought UT was going to kick the **** out of OU. This year, I think OU wins, sadly. The offense has been unimpressive, at best. Simms, surprisingly, looks good. But Benson looks merely above-average. The receivers drop balls like they're on coals. I hope I'm wrong. I think it'll be close, but OU comes out ahead. Incidentally... why does UT - TAMU have to be a rivalry game? TAMU was good for 15 years. Before that, UT didn't care much about the game. Now that TAMU is once again falling into anonymity, I don't see why there should be a rivalry there, any more than there is between UT and Tech. Just a case of one elite team taking on a decent one.
I have the same feeling. A lot of people say we would have won last year if Benson had played. Well, Benson is going to play this year but there have some questions about his health (hopefully that will not serve as an excuse). I'm not going to underestimate the OU defense by saying Benson is the difference. A&M is a rival because A&M is the only other flagship school of the state. For that reason alone, A&M will always be a rival while Tech and Baylor will not. I don't think the A&M game has any significance anymore and should not be considered big. Sure, we want to win for state bragging rights but that has more to do with them being a rival.
I'm starting to lean more this way. I'm trying to think of a reason why Texas deserves to be picked to win this game, and I just can't come up with one. The edge Texas has in talent, OU makes up in coaching and big game performance. I think for Texas to win, Simms has to play very well and not make mistakes. That is what it will come down to, IMO.
I think it's time for the famous Greg Davis quote... "He doesn't have to be spectacular, we just want him to drive the car" Time for Simms to get his driver's license.
I hope OU wins so maybe the final stragglers will finally admit that the treatment Chrissy recieves is deserved. I really don't know how OU will pull this one out though. And yes...OU is overrated is all the Texas fans say. Its a complete joke they can say "oh well, if Texas wins, OU will be overrated "....double standard and just an excuse to use in Chrissy arguments just incase they actually do win.
