Correct. This year, undefeated teams from conferences that are down like the SEC, Pac 10, and Big 10 get CRUSHED in the computers when they lose. Examples: Florida, USC, and Penn State ALL dropped significantly in the computers once they lost.
Conferences that are UP like the Big 12, however, don't suffer nearly as much when their undefeated teams lose. Example: One-loss Texas Tech who was just absolutely HUMILIATED only dropped from #1 in the computers to #4 right now. I mean, Florida is #6 and USC is #8 in the computers right now FAR BELOW TTech. If that doesn't say it all, I don't know what does. Also, when Texas, OU, and even Okie Lite lost, each only dropped a few spots in the computers.
Conferences that are UP like the Big 12, however, don't suffer nearly as much when their undefeated teams lose. Example: One-loss Texas Tech who was just absolutely HUMILIATED only dropped from #1 in the computers to #4 right now. I mean, Florida is #6 and USC is #8 in the computers right now FAR BELOW TTech. If that doesn't say it all, I don't know what does. Also, when Texas, OU, and even Okie Lite lost, each only dropped a few spots in the computers.
I'm talking purely computers here. TTech was hardly punished in the computers.
Again:
TTech is #4 in computers at 0.890
USC is #8 in computers at 0.710
This is right after TTech lost by 44 points and should've lost at home against Texas as well. Meanwhile 'SC lost by 6 on the road against #17 BCS Oregon State and thrashed #10 BCS Ohio State at home.
USC lost to UNRANKED Oregon State. The same Oregon State that got beat by 4 Tds + by Penn State and lost to Utah. Yet USC is ranked ahead of Penn State and Utah based on what? A projected pointspread? Is that what rankings have become? All pointspreads are are numbers to draw the moronic public to bet a certain way. Wasn't USC favored by 24 at Oregon State? Texas TEch was supposed to lose to Oklahoma were they not?
LOL at your sour grapes.
USC will beat whoever they play in their BCS game. Whether it's PSU in the RB, Utah, Texas Tech, Alabama, whoever. Give Carroll a month to prepare for a game and he will more times than not deliver. Unfortunately you are too much of a clown to realize this. Just wait until SC whoops on whoever they play in a BCS game. I can't wait to hear more pathetic sour grapes from you.
Slow down. You're changing the subject now. All you asked me was how it's justified that Texas Tech is ranked below USC and I then showed you how, in fact, TTech still ranks 4 spots higher than USC in the computers. All I was discussing in this thread was the computer portion of the BCS equation when you stepped in to ask your question. What I showed you supports my argument that the Big 12 doesn't get "punished" (as you put it) nearly as much as any other conference when they lose. Afterall, TTech just lost by 44 points, something 'SC would never do, and also should've lost at home against Texas, but still ranks 4 spots higher than 'SC in the computers.
Now you're jumping back to the subject in your other thread about why USC is ranked higher than Penn State and Utah, yet I've never commented on that issue because even if I did, I know what type of answer I'd get from you anyway... the typical, emotionally-filled, nonsensical reply that lends no potential for reasonable discussion unfortunately.
IMO. If OreSt wins, Boise is out (as is OhioSt).
If OreSt loses, Boise should be in (OhioSt out).
Sure sure..OhioSt can beat up on the weaklings of he big 10. Wisky, Minny, Illy, Indy....etc. Excluding PennSt, the big 10 is WEAK!. OhioSt has proven time and time again they suck in these BCS games. Put a team that can be competitive in for a change like Boise, who has proven they can show up for a BCS game.
If OreSt loses, Boise should be in (OhioSt out).
Sure sure..OhioSt can beat up on the weaklings of he big 10. Wisky, Minny, Illy, Indy....etc. Excluding PennSt, the big 10 is WEAK!. OhioSt has proven time and time again they suck in these BCS games. Put a team that can be competitive in for a change like Boise, who has proven they can show up for a BCS game.
The only thing non-sensical is USC's ranking. You or anybody can't give a valid reason that USC is ranked above Penn State or Utah other than to say they would (hypothetically) beat those teams or be favored over them. Their ranking is certainly not based on anything they've done on the field (struggle past Az and Cal, only "key" win over Ohio State, and play in the worst BCS conference). USC honks are even resorting to "Oregon was ranked when we beat them". Are you kidding me? And who's to say USC wouldn't have been creamed the way TT was? If they have struggled with pathetic teams like Stanford, Az, and Cal, Oklahoma probably wouldve beaten the poop out of them ON THAT NIGHT IN THAT SETTING as well. But I don't deal in hypotheticals. I know USC has 1 loss (as does Penn State) and it was to a team Penn State and Utah both beat (and Penn State whooped). I know TT has 1 loss and it was to a great team.
Again, you're changing the subject of what I was talking about here. We go from talking about the computer rankings portion to me suddenly needing to justify USC's overall BCS ranking? I've never understood your vendetta against 'SC, but why is their BCS ranking suddenly MY responsibility to explain to you? In fact I can give you THREE valid reasons why 'SC should be ranked above Penn State but, again, as I said earlier, I'm hesitant to even go there with you knowing what lies ahead.
But to put this to bed:
First off, the Pac-10 isn't "the worst BCS conference" (as you claim) even this year when the Pac has suffered its poorest year since BCS inception. In fact, the Big East, ACC, and Big-10 are all MUCH worse statistically and as proven by the conference rankings.
Second, USC has a tougher SOS than Penn State, including a tougher OOC schedule.
Third, USC has the higher quality loss than Penn State. #17 BCS Oregon State vs. #30 BCS Iowa.
So that's why they're ranked above Penn State. There, I've given you your answer. You're obviously not going to accept it, but I'm not expecting you to. But if you can slow down, let go of your emotions, and read what's written, the facts speak loudly. Better conference strength, better SOS, and better quality loss, simple as that really. No one's here to argue that 'SC deserves a title shot or anything of the sort, this is a merely a discussion of which teams would lose a BCS bid should Oregon State and Florida win out.
1) Maryland 35, Cal 27 Penn St 45, Ore St 14 it took Oregon OT to beat Purdue. And the Pac's record against Mt West????? How can you say they are better than any BCS conf?
2) Again, computers might spit out a # for SOS, but USC other than Ohio State, USC hasn't played ANYBODY, and Wash, Wash St, ASU, & Stanford are pathetic.
3) Can't say USC has the higher quality loss. Oregon State was UNRANKED when they played and would still be unranked had USC beaten them. Penn State led the entire game against Iowa and gave the game away and lost last second. USC was dominated for 60 minutes by Ore St, and didn't lead for 1 minute of the game. And Iowa Stadium is BY FAR the tougher venue to win (in fact Ore State had a ton of empty seats for USC game as school hadn't even started). OSU's ONLY quality win is USC.
Good point BTD and it always makes me laugh when you see everyone begging for OU to get the NCG when they get their asses handed to them every year in the BCS except when they played a team from the WAC. Yet Ohio St. gets pounded in the media and all over the nation for getting beat twice.
I'm not saying OU doesn't deserve it this year but I like pointing out the perception of closed minded college football fans that love to bash the other conferences.
Oh, I forgot it's because the Big 10 doesn't have a conference championship game. Even though the CCG has only helped teams in the past get to the NCG.
