i'm watching them execute, that's how. they are executing complex plays with certainty. I've watched Texas flounder several times, and it wasn't their competition, it was them. I hope you see the difference.
if it means anything, this is the measure at this point in the season. sure there are some games where the opponent was beat down or the team in question was beat down. i don't have to look past my Vols to find that. it's my opinion, and i don't expect it to be adopted, that the biggest opponent a team faces on the field is NOT the other team, but themselves. If they can get out of their own way they usually win. it's pretty much that simple in just about every game. it's the opponents goal to take a team out of their comfort zone or to disrupt enough the team can't find it's rhythm or 'groove'.
some teams, ala Bama, OU, and tOSU, haven't been pushed by an opponent.. true story.. but the 'eye' test which is watching execution on both sides of the ball tells me both tOSU and OU are for real. Texas has been pushed- twice. They were taken out of their comfort zones twice, once ending in loss. you can think i'm being negative if you want, but i'm not... what i would suggest instead is that team has margin for improvement and there is a good chance they haven't peaked yet.
OU, on the other hand really can't peak any more than they have- they are clicking... now it's a matter of sustaining, and it's obviously a matter of seeing if they encounter someone capable of taking them out of their groove. the problem with OU's schedule, insofar as their opponents should be concerned, is they may solidify that 'rhythm' into a groove almost impossible to break- which means you've got to really beat them down 'cause you ain't finessing a win out of the game.
it's my observation that one team not capable of breaking the other's groove ends up in high scoring affairs- where when both teams are disrupted it's a low scoring event... and when one team, although just as good as the other most the time gets blindsided by some disruptive force either planned or discovered during the game ends up with a blowout that ought not to have been such... ND found a way to disrupt UGA and why i can't give UGA the appreciation right now everyone else seems to have given. LSU found a way to disrupt Texas.. Texas disrupted oSu... nobody has broken bama's stride (not even bama), nobody has broken tOSU's stride (even tOSU), Wiscy disrupted the hell out of UM's stride, but couldn't get cleanly out of their own way with NW. They almost beat themselves (not really, but it shouldn't have been as close as they allowed). UF, as another example, have been lucky- sloppy ball and broken all over, but still winning. Auburn disrupted the shit out of aTm, but so did Clemson. Oregon pushed Auburn into throwing down- but that was sans Schwartz- they are a completely different animal with that dimension.
all of that said- and i don't have a dog in the fight and could care less who wins at this point (my boys are aiming for somewhere around 2028 i think.. er, something like that... if i'm lucky..), what i'm remarking isn't about 'who is better and how the CFP will happen' which would be a thread played over and over in every forum in the land- what i'm saying is the fashion- the style- these mentioned teams play are interchangeable. you could dress out tOSU in OU's garb, and hardly anyone would notice. Same with Bama and Clemson.. or any combination... they are playing something 'new', (not really but...), they are playing in a bubble that is obviously the dominating 'type' of game we're going to see a LOT of teams adopting.
the title of the thread beckons to a thought i had after Dr.Osborne took both the SEC's better teams to the woodshed with his option- UF and UT.. and those teams responded, and the era that came next was shut down aggressive D's- the components of D's changed where the prototypical players for positions changed- RC Slocum and Joe Lee Dunn both played roles... LB's trimmed down and were expected to cover more- DL's picked up speed and started shifting more. OLB's/DE's began using more flats coverage.. it was answered with spreads and spread options... the game changed in a notable and measurable- maybe 'tangible' is a better term, way. It was something that could be pointed out- THAT changed. THIS changed. THIS is working more against THAT and is ALSO better than what was before against THAT... the SEC led that movement and earned a reputation the rest of the CFB world wants to scoff at, but... it happened.
What I'm saying (or trying to) is the game is measurably- tangibly- RIGHT THERE WE CAN POINT TO IT- changing again in a way that is dominating and the rich get richer with an ability to recruit, develop, scheme, coach and win with- that will take those not privileged (aka the rest of the FBS CFB world pulling from the 'pile of material') a few years to catch up to... and they will... but only after HS coaches move that direction to. The only good news? this time it's not cornered in one conference- it's moved across borders.
the transfer portal further complicates this.
as far as a perceived attack or a prop of one team over another, that isn't at all where i was going... Texas is on the bubble this year and they're in the hunt for making this transition if they already haven't LSU is a parallel... I'd say Auburn and UGA are too... OU, Bama, Clemson, tOSU- they're playing in this 'model' NOW. They have the edge.. teams not adopted or adopting, are going to lose ground....
