Quote:
Originally Posted by Prison Bitch
That's fair. Kansas was better 3 of the prior 4 years to 2007 and the year after. Proved it.
|
Everything should always be examined in context. By that notion in a vacuum Stanford was better than Southern Cal in 2007 but nobody really thinks that.
In 2007 we played a more difficult schedule, had better record against common opponents including H2H, were more impressive in most of those, and also won the head to head. That's why the head to head separates one from the other in that case.
In 2003 including head to head we went 3-3 against common opponents & KU went 2-4 and finished with an overall better league record. In addition to that we played OU while KU missed both OU & TX. I would argue that we were better.
In 2004 including H2H KU went 2-4 against common opponents while MU went 2-4. In addition the schedule flipped and KU had to play OU and TX while MU played only TX. Furthermore KU's win against MU was in Columbia and was quite decisive. It was one of the lowest points of the Pinkel regime. So while MU had an overall better league record (3-5 to 2-6) I do think KU was better and that's w/o getting into the Troy debacle.
In 2005 MU went 2-4 against common opponents including H2H while KU went 3-3. KU caught again caught both OU and TX while MU played only TX. So while MU finished with a better overall coference record (4-4 to 3-5) two of those wins were against two south schools KU didn't play in OkSt and Baylor who were both awful. I do think KU was better.
Frankly I didn't think KU was better any of those years looking back until I examined all of that. Having said that it's 2 out of 13 years since Pinkel arrived and resurrected our program, so meh.