Harris Poll?!

[Collier11]

When does this come out, if we somehow snuck into the top two in this poll that might be the big "surprise" they were just talking about on the Fox NFL contest(if you havent seen my post in a diff thread the commentators said "you may be surprised who the top 2 are")...as everyone else, im not holding my breath but with the way this year has went, ya never know!?

[KHS Sooner]

bump

[ClintonSooner]

I'm not sure but I thought it came out around 7ish???

[Collier11]

Thats when the BCS is revealed, not sure about the Harris but you may be right?

[KHS Sooner]

Please let us jump to #2 in the Harris

[tbl]

I'll take #1 in the Harris as well...

Dude, how SWEET would it be to get a chance to play LSU?!??!

[ruf/nekdad]

Dang it guys. Just about the time I resign myself to #3 and the Fiesta Bowl, you guys get my hopes up again. Whatever the result, its been a fine football season and a pleasure to be a Sooner fan. But what if.....

[Collier11]

I would never trust these people to willingly vote us #1 but we can dream cant we!!

[Sooner Eclipse]

Dang it guys. Just about the time I resign myself to #3 and the Fiesta Bowl, you guys get my hopes up again. Whatever the result, its been a fine football season and a pleasure to be a Sooner fan. But what if.....

I feel the same way. I don't necessarily feel we deserve to be in it because of the 2 losses and all, but if we don't, then LSU doesn't either. That's the part of this that really irks me. Same goes for USC and tOSU. They ought to scrap the whole thing this year.

Oh well. :pop:

[illinisooner]

I think the FOX guys just said that to keep people interested and to make sure people actually watch the show. The Harris poll isn't even out, how do random NFL announcers know the BCS standings?

[Collier11]

the only reason I thought it might be worth repeating is cus they work for Fox...like I said though it is probably nothing although it does add a little excitement to my Sunday even if it is misguided

[Geekboy]

Supposedly confirmed by WJBO.
http://wjbo.com/pages/breakingnews.html

[colleyvillesooner]

Vomit

[Stitch Face]

DAMN YOU TENNESSEE!!!

[KHS Sooner]

That'll be a good game Les can't choke like always.

[Mr. Poon]

DAMN YOU Erik Ainge!!!

I corrected that for you. The rest of the team played well enough to win.

[KHS Sooner]

So there is no way we jump LSU in the BCS poll?

[emoinwinter]

Are those the same sources that confirmed Miles is going to Michigan?

[Stitch Face]

I corrected that for you. The rest of the team played well enough to win.

I actually thought about putting that first.

[RedstickSooner]

Since we have two losses, I wouldn't want us playing for the crystal football.

That being said, putting LSU ahead of us in the polls is annoying as hell. They won their conference championship, against a mediocre Tennessee team, by only one touchdown.

We made Missouri our bitch. And Missouri is an undefeated team, if not for our Sooners. Every pundit out there says it's harder to beat the same team the second time around -- and we made it look easy.

LSU campaigned hard as hell for the national championship game, using the line that "they were the only team to not lose in regulation", implying that losing in overtime means they're such a bad-assed team.

What they don't mention is that it took 5 fourth-down conversions for them to barely beat Florida at home, and a hefty fourth-quarter rally to get past Alabama.

LSU's ONLY impressive win all season was their rout of Virginia Tech early in the season, in a game where Virginia Tech looked like the mediocre team in a mediocre conference they truly are.

Margin of victory tells a lot about a team. Shame voters can't be bothered to look any further than the win/loss column.

Here's LSU's margin of victory info:

Patsies:
45 (Mississippi State)
44 (Middle Tennessee)
12 (South Carolina)
25 (Tulane)
48 (Louisiana Tech)
17 (Mississippi)


Real teams:
41 (Virginia Tech)
4 (Florida)
-6 (Kentucky)
6 (Auburn)
7 (Alabama)
-2 (Arkansas)
7 (Tennessee)

**************

Here's ours:

Patsies:
69 (North Texas)
38 (Miami)
51 (Utah State)
41 (Tulsa)
-3 (Colorado)
10 (Iowa State)
31 (Baylor)


Real Teams:
7 (Texas)
10 (Missouri)
28 (Texas A&M)
-7 (Texas Tech)
32 (Oklahoma State - borderline "real" team)
21 (Missouri)

*************

Now, if I got any patsies / real teams wrong, I apologize. I didn't feel like researching to make sure every team I called a patsy had a losing record, or that every "real" team had a winning record.

Still, LSU has won by a touchdown or less against EVERY decent team they've played, other than VaTech. And I think Tulane probably could've beaten VaTech when LSU beat 'em. That early-season VaTech team was downright horrible. LSU shouldn't be rewarded simply becasue a team they got early on their schedule managed to learn how this new-fangled sport, "foot-ball", is played by the end of the year.

I'll admit, the fact that one of our patsies beat us really sucks. Everything about the Colorado loss sucks ***. And, frankly, we *deserve* to be punished for that game. It never should've happened. Our squad is far too talented to have had the implosion we had that day.

Still, stuff happens. And I still say our overall body of work is far more impressive than that of LSU.

[bringit]

I think we're a #3-5 this year. The CU loss is just too hard to sweep under the rug.

[RedstickSooner]

Also, I just want to say, I think one of the absolutely WORST traditions in ranking / reporting on college football currently in place is the way that they do rankings of foes in schedule results.

What I mean by this is, if you go to LSU's schedule results on ESPN.com, it lists, for example, South Carolina as being ranked #12 (because they were at the time).

This is effing retarded. Poll rankings are always flawed, and are *more* flawed, the earlier in the season you go. So, to leave that earlier, more flawed ranking in the schedule, rather than replacing it each week with the current ranking for a given team, means that you help perpetuate the inaccuracies of those standings even after they've been a bit improved.

South Carolina, in spite of all the hype given to Spurrier, has ended the season with a 6 and 6 record. The fact that they weren't yet fully exposed as a fraud back in September shouldn't matter. By using old poll rankings, the schedule results allow the part of the college football system which most of us (fans and pundits alike) believe to be the most biased, the most faulty, and the most flawed to exert some modicum of influence in its least accurate form.

Leaving those figures in place that way is like deciding where to invest your IRA by asking your ten-year-old to look at daily price swings, and pick out the one which looks "coolest" -- but only allow him to work from market reports that are two months old. It's a fairly bad idea to begin with, and when you use old data, you just make it worse.

Anyhow. I just needed to vent. Ironic thing is, someone more familiar with ESPN than I am will probably come along and tell me that I can adjust my preferences so that they use current rankings in schedule results, or somesuch, and that the only reason they default to the way they do is that historically, that's how they did schedule data. Back before computers allowed us to adjust data on the fly 'n whatnot.

[RedstickSooner]

I think we're a #3-5 this year. The CU loss is just too hard to sweep under the rug.

I agree, really. But, it still bugs me how some other teams are being ranked. Like the fact that we're just *barely* ahead of Georgia.

We lost to a 6-6 team (Colorado).

They lost to a 6-6 team, too (South Carolina).

And unlike them, we not only won our division, we won our whole damned conference!

We have the same number of losses, but we've got one more win, and our win came with *hardware*. We should be heads-and-shoulders above them.

What's worse, some jackarse voter out there in the AP actually voted Georgia #1. Which is why these votes should be public. And why they should remove voters who make such assinine uses of their ballots.

Georgia deserves to be #1 in all the land about as much as I deserve to be elected King of the Pimps.

[bluedogok]

Georgia deserves to be #1 in all the land about as much as I deserve to be elected King of the Pimps.
No, they don't deserve to be #1 but the main question is would you have goldfish in your shoes?

[OUGuf]

I agree, really. But, it still bugs me how some other teams are being ranked. Like the fact that we're just *barely* ahead of Georgia.

We lost to a 6-6 team (Colorado).

They lost to a 6-6 team, too (South Carolina).

And unlike them, we not only won our division, we won our whole damned conference!

We have the same number of losses, but we've got one more win, and our win came with *hardware*. We should be heads-and-shoulders above them.

What's worse, some jackarse voter out there in the AP actually voted Georgia #1. Which is why these votes should be public. And why they should remove voters who make such assinine uses of their ballots.

Georgia deserves to be #1 in all the land about as much as I deserve to be elected King of the Pimps.

Your the king of the pimps??? I need to place an order....

The LSU love-fest is sickening at best. The media, and voters are falling all over the "We never lost in regulation" entirely too much. They don't look at quality of win but now they sure are looking at quality of loss which is crap.
They had 2 shots at #1 earlier this year and lost it both times to unranked teams. The coaches took away the small margin we were trailing them which is completely reduculous. We won convinsingly against #1.. they had a hard time vs Tenn... With that alone we should have closed the gap, and jumped them for the #2 spot.
It's not rocket science.

[stoopified]

If this Bama (6-6) team is real so is Tulsa(9-4).