Remember when we had a slow start to this season? And then we just took off and starting destroying teams? How Colt was untouchable till about a few hours ago? One close game (which we won by the way) and everyone, Longhorn fans included, are down on the team and the guy? That's just bandwagoning. I hope this is just instant reactions and by sun-up everyone will have cleared their heads. This still is a terrific team. Colt still is a fantastic player. I'll take him to battle any day and he had one hell of a season.

Also, other than Suh, that team sucks. They had their third first-down of the game late in the fourth quarter. A fistful of yards. If you feel dirty for winning that game, I don't know what you tell you because we did deserve to win that game. We had them beat in every single statistical category. If we lost it, it would have been because of their own end-of-the-game drive, not because they had been outgaining us all night long but had tacky calls.

As for the officiating, sure the horse-collar looks bad but hey, it was a penalty. It wasn't imagined, it wasn't a phantom call. The foul did occur.

So please, everyone, just stop hating on the Horns and Colt. We wouldn't be in contention for the MNC if not for Colt. And if you look at the entire season and not just one single game (which, I remind you again, we won) Texas is still fantastic. And undefeated!!!! Bring on whomever, I know who I'm rooting for.

Guys, I'm a Longhorn stuck in India (in Pune in particular) for an year. Any ideas on how I can watch UT games over here. And while you're at it, how about the NFL?

I managed the OU game by watching the gamecast but I'd obviously prefer to watch the actual game. The OU game was worth it even though I had to sit in my balcony all night to get good internet speed on my card. Any suggestions?

How do you define one player as being either a clutch player or a choker? Particularly in something like Football which, more than any other sport, is a team sport. If you listen long enough to people, you might be let to believe that there are some players who are extremely "clutch" and some who just cannot "handle the pressure". I for one don't believe that one bit.

My favorite book (non-fiction) ever is Moneyball in which Michael Lewis talks about how you define "clutch" performance. The player need to elevate his performance in a measurable manner (and do that consistantly) - if you're a hitter, your batting average must be higher in the playoffs every year than it is in the regular season, if you're a basketball player then your field goal percentage goes up in the playoffs. When they tried to measure clutch performance in baseball thus, they couldn't identify such behaviour. Fact is, people like Derek Jeter (who I do like) have been labeled with this tag because people remember the times he did come through and forget the times that he failed.

Now if you couldn't measure clutch behavior in a relatively straightforward situation like hitting, how can you even measure clutch behavior (for a QB) in a sport like football where a 100 things could affect whether or not a ball is caught successfully? The left guard could have missed a blocking assignment, the WR could have run a route wrong (the other team could have videotaped your walkthrough!) there could have been a sudden gust of wind.

Here's a fun factoid - guess which QB has the most overtime victories in the NFL? Tom Brady. Impressive? Maybe. But answer me this - why did those games have to go to overtime in the first place? As Manning said, "You hear about how many fourth quarter comebacks that a guy has and I think it means a guy screwed up in the first three quarters." Manning doesn't have comeback and overtime victories because he wins games in the first three quarters.

This makes it the third consecutive entry into the playoffs that Tom Brady has failed to convert into a Super Bowl. Manning was called a choker for a similar performance earlier. Does that make Tom Brady a choker then?  If Brady is truly the son of God as everyone claims (sorry couldn't resist that dig) and HE led the team to the victories, then isn't he also to blame for the losses?

Or maybe individual performance of a QB in Football should not be tied to wins and losses and instead, if at all he is to be judged, then he be judged purely on his stats alone. Even those can be flawed (like Eli Manning's INT in the SB, which was clearly not his fault) but it's better than the Win/Loss record which is much less in control of the QB.

Truth is, and you can disagree if you like, Brady has had the luxury of a terrific coach, a great defense and an outstanding O-line. I'm not saying  he's mediocre but we saw what happened when you removed some of those away from him - he became "human".

BTW, I am not suggesting that "choking" doesn't exist. There are definitely some players for whom the big stage can cause problems. But I don't believe that there are players who necessarily (and consistently) elevate their play in key situations.