Micro vs Macro..............On the macro level....
If there was a program out there who could challenge OUs reign wouldn't there be a clear 2nd team rather than a revolving door of teams facing them in every title game? This conference can't even find that definitive 2nd best team in conference much less a challenger to OU.
OU has superior talent without any real coaching/scheme deficiencies. Challenging OU will mean you got to recruit close to their level and you got have a superior coach with an inventive scheme. Someone who can match wits with LR.
- UT has the talent but continues to lay an egg in the coaching/scheme department. They're in a tier by themselves because they are the only one that can challenge OU size/athletically. They should be embarrassed that even though they aren't close to OU, they can't even consistently get to the title game.
- TCU, OSU, ISU, and Kst have good coaching but are way to far back in recruiting. To consistently challenge OU, a school will need to recruit in the top 15 every year. TCU has finished 5 straight years in a row with the 3rd best class in the B12 and is still a massive distance behind both OU and UT in talent. I do think TCU is probably the only program capable of closing the recruiting gap and while they have made fantastic strides, it would take an incredible amount of luck to get to the top 15. The difference between a top 50 class and a top 30 classes isn't all that great but top 30 to top 15 is light years. (Look at the OL/DL trenches and you'll see the biggest difference between # 28 and # 14)
- Baylor, TT & WVU have had coaching changes making them a question marks and none of those schools are going to hit the talent markers either
- Kansas is Kansas.
Its OU/UT and a 4-5 Team 3rd tier and it will take a radical redistribution of talent wealth for that to ever change. So the answer is.yah on the micro level someone is going to face OU in the B12 with a chance to knock them off but on a macro level they are much better than everyone else in this league.
