Not a very impressive weekend for the SEC. Arky loses to Toledo. Auburn should have lost to Jacksonville State. Why are they still ranked other than having SEC on their uniforms? South Carolina is just not good, because there is just no way Kentucky is any good either. Tennessee loss--although they are better than last year. Maybe that Striker guy knows what he is talking about.
LSU nearly lost to Mississippi State which may not count since they are both SEC, but not impressive. Weak.
MSU was driving and only needed FG to win at the end. Their kicker does not have great range and in the last set of downs teetering on FG range, they take a DELAY OF GAME penalty. Gawd, I hate bone-headed football.
He's exactly right - the national media do blow smoke tokin' grass (or something like that). He never said they don't play some d@mn good football. And now three times in a row, we've played better football. How's it feel to be a Sooner?!?!
You obviously haven't received your SEC talking points. If LSU nearly lost to Miss State it's not because they aren't a great football team. It's a demonstration how tough the SEC is top to bottom.
Speaking of which, Lester being Lester wanted to freeze the dude but did it too late and gave him a practice shot. Fortunately for lucky Lester he over corrected.
Every single SEC team except maybe a&m is ranked too high. I guess you could say Alabama too and from watching Ole Miss this week I thought they deserved the ranking they had last week, not 15 and 11, ahead of us in both poles. Georgia, LSU, Ole Miss, and Auburn are all ranked too high. Apparently wins against ranked OOC opponents don't matter all that much. What a load of crap. We should have jumped higher, a&m could possibly be higher, and MSU maybe as well.
This weekends Tech at Arkansas game has become a lot more interesting ... figured the Hogs would roll them before the season began ... now ... good opportunity for Tech.
You can't have it both ways. You cant declare the SEC is overrated on one hand and then ask to get more spek for beating Tennessee on the other.
This is a fan board - laws of math and physics don't apply :bi_polo: But I agree with you and I don't think OU is under-rated. A rating better than 20 is generous given how that game played out and the fact that the Vols don't look like a power house (we un-rated them). The Auburn rating is the only SEC head scratcher I see, other than that, ratings are pretty fuzzy after only 2 games. Besides, BCS doesn't publish until Nov, so who gives a rats azz anyway.
I said every sec team I believe is ranked too high, and every team I believe deserve their ranking. The conference as a whole is overrated, Tennesee was ranked where they should be, perhaps to high. I'm not saying OU should be top 10, but being below teams that have proven nothing thus far does not make a lot of sense. As I said, A&M should be higher too. Oh and let me know when Tennesee needs over time to beat an FCS school or loses to Toledo.
Based on how we finished up last year, and our recent track record of under performing we should be happy to be ranked anywhere this early. If we're a good football team rankings will take care of themselves in the end - a definite benefit of being a legacy program.
Yep. SEC may be over-hyped and sometimes over-rated, but OU has consistently been rated highly during the entire Stoops era. And I don't feel guilty about it
Auburn and LSU finished with the same record last year. Arkansas did even worse. To start the season Arkansas was ranked about where we were while LSU and auburn were ranked far above us. What did they do (excluding Arkansas) last week that they deserve to be ranked ahead of us still? Sure LSU had a win over a ranked opponent you can argue miss st and Tennessee are similar teams (not in my opinion) but that doesn't take away from the fact LSU was ranked too high in the first place. Luckily no name schools are starting to expose this sec myth. You all do make good points, perhaps I'm being too overzealous on our team. Also these rankings don't even matter all that much but they still do. They affect perception throughout the entire season and if last year is any indication they affect the playoff committee as well. However I still believe ranked wins should matter a little more, so even if we don't deserve to be one or two spots higher, I think A&M and MSU do... But what do I know
If you're to look at last year's W/L record and how the team finished, OUr team finished '14 a steaming pile and should not have been ranked going into this year. The OSU and Clemson performances were 2 of the worst played games I saw last year - all games, not just OUr games. Pre-season takes into account what changed since last year - players and coaches. And they are often not much better than a magic 8ball. People thought Muschamp was going to fix their D and send them to the CFP. Turns out their QB play may kill them. Arkie finished the strong and shutout Ole Miss and LSU back-to-back and returned lots of players. Oh well. We are getting tons of cred that Riley is going to charge up our offense in spite of the fact that we came in unsettled at QB and must rebuild the O-line. I always read that early season rankings will influence the final BCS/CFP choices. But looking back at the end of each season, I don't see it. tOSU certainly wasn't ranked high after their loss and the BiG conference in general had zero respect. So much angst over nothing. OUr schedule is back loaded, so the path is pretty clear for us - we can't lose in Nov. or we are out of the CFB. Like tOSU last year, we could have lost to the Vols and recovered as long as we didn't get blown out. If we go into the BU game 9-0, we'll probably be top 5-6 by then. Then we'll have to prove if we deserve it or not.
