I've now seen several national voices say the Michigan - Army game was MUCH worse than Oklahoma - Army. The standard excuse, the Oklahoma - Army game was excusable because Oklahoma's defense couldn't stop Army's offense from executing 10 minute drives, but Kyler Murray scored every time so no big deal. Meanwhile, the Michigan "win" was terrible because Army's defense shut down Michigan. The Army game actually ended up being a strength for Oklahoma's resume last year, some how, as Army was viewed as a quality out of conference win.
Why are historically bad defenses (especially when they are attached to a team from one specific conference..) completely excused but a woeful offensive showing is a complete black mark?
This is a larger point with Oklahoma, it seems they are teflon, no amount of bad close wins or big game blow out losses matter. Meanwhile the B1G and especially OSU wear every single big game loss as a scarlet letter for over a decade. What has Oklahoma done to earn this status? Is it just Lincoln Riley and Baker / Kyler are "fun" and everyone has OSU fatigue?