Lost amongst all the what ifs is this simple question. Is OU better now than they were when they played Texas? I believe the answer is NO. I truly believe that losing Reynolds really hurt their defense. Their offense is the same. Their offense is REALLY good, but their Defense has given up the following totals since the RRS. Kansas 31 KU avg 34.5 ppg at Kansas State 35 KSU avg 35.3 ppg Nebraska 28 NU avg 33.8 ppg at Texas A&M 28 ATM avg 27 ppg Before the RRS (and Before Reynolds injury) Chattanooga 57-2 avg. 12.5 ppg Cincinnati 52-26 avg. 26 ppg @ Washington 55-14 avg. 14.7 ppg TCU 35-10 avg. 34 ppg @ Baylor 49-17 avg. 26.7 ppg I would say that OU has played slightly better teams since TX than they did before TX but I think the stats still show that their Def. was better with Reynolds. Why is this all important? Well Reece Davis said that he thinks when it comes down to Ties and who goes to CCG and who doesn't, you have to look at not only head to head but who is better now than they were before. I think it's hard to argue that OU is better now than they were before due to their defense giving up lots of point to not so good teams. The bad news is that this bodes well for TTU going into Norman. I don't think OU can stop Tech. They better hope to outscore them. We'll see what happens. But for the sake of the OU/Texas argument, nothing has changed since October. Texas was the better team then and is the better team now. OU is still a top 5 team but they are not better than they were in October.