I think UAT and OK State both have legitimate arguments. If AU was in either school's situation, I could see myself holding fast to the argument that puts me in that game over the other team. I forget what radio show I was listening to (might have been Tim Brando), but some guy from Wyoming actually made a good point. If college football still had the rule in which there was no overtime in football, you would have a straight up three way tie between UAT, LSU, and OK State because all would be undefeated with a tie. The tiebreaker would probably be who tied the better team and that nod would go to LSU and UAT. Made sense to me and kind of goes along with the "better loss" argument that UAT is using. Then again, the "regular season is a playoff" argument is very strong for Oklahoma St. because LSU basically eliminated UAT.
I think of all the arguments, Oklahoma State has the best with the fact that they played for their conference championship and blasted a #10 Oklahoma team while UAT sit at home because they did not even win their division. Sorry UAT fans, but I think that fact trumps the "better loss" argument. Also, count me as one of those that thinks if OK State does not have the tragedy just a couple of days before the Iowa State game, I think we would not even be having this debate. When something that real hits that close to home and is still very raw and fresh, it is hard to get motivated for something that seems so inconsequential as a game. You try to get motivated and win, but the mental toll along with the adrenaline dump from trying to get yourself psyched up can be too much to overcome.