The SEC Bias in Polls is Ridiculous

[4down20]

Alright let's get into some real football talk.

LSU is ranked 6th for what? Beating an overrated TCU team?

South Carolina ranked 12th for what? Beating UNC and Vandy at home? Big deal. UCLA, Michigan, Miami, and UW all deserve to be ranked ahead.

Florida ranked 19th for what? That impressive win against that powerhouse Toledo team?

You can make a case for Ole Miss as well. So outside of Bama just Georgia and Ole Miss deserve their rankings

So why is Oregon #2? Because they beat Virginia and Tennessee and a FCS team?

No.

Oregon is #2 because they are expected to win out and beat even better competition in the future. But I don't see people calling Oregon out for it. It's just nothing but SEC hate where ignorant people just spew their stupid bullshit.

 

[4down20]

is this a serious question?

Yep, although rhetorical.

 

[bksballer89]

So why is Oregon #2? Because they beat Virginia and Tennessee and a FCS team?

No.

Oregon is #2 because they are expected to win out and beat even better competition in the future. But I don't see people calling Oregon out for it. It's just nothing but SEC hate where ignorant people just spew their stupid bullshit.

Now you're comparing apple and oranges. Oregon is undefeated and only jumped Ohio State because of a shitty performance in week 1 by OSU. South Carolina should not be ahead of teams who are undefeated with good wins such as Michigan, UCLA, Miami, and maybe Washington. I can understand them maybe being in front of Oklahoma but that's about it.

 

[uncfan103]

sorry forgot the sarcasm font.. I was just pointing out that the wins were over "power conference" but with losses it was just AQ teams.. see the difference there.. look I know we lost to a unranked miami... and I for one hope Miami does well.. because then of course our SOS will be just fine and IF we do well the rest of the season this was just a bad day early in the season.. shit happens.. Im not getting butthurt over polls this early in the season that is all.. I was surprised we didnt drop out of the top 25 when we lost .. and it wouldnt have been a surprise if we had.. but its EARLY.. and a loss to a 1-0 D1 school is a slight bit different then almost losing to a1-1 D3 school.. and if you all can't see the difference then maybe yall need to just leave college football alone and concentrate on the pros..

No, that was just wording. I considered power conferences and Aq schools the same. The SEC is 5-5 against the aac, acc, big 12, big 10 and PAC.

 

[fordman84]

Alright let's get into some real football talk.

LSU is ranked 6th for what? Beating an overrated TCU team?

South Carolina ranked 12th for what? Beating UNC and Vandy at home? Big deal. UCLA, Michigan, Miami, and UW all deserve to be ranked ahead.

Florida ranked 19th for what? That impressive win against that powerhouse Toledo team?

You can make a case for Ole Miss as well. So outside of Bama just Georgia and Ole Miss deserve their rankings

I assume you are thinking all the non-sec ranked teams have all beat NFL teams to deserve their ranking?

It's freakin week 3 people. Get the sticks our of your asses

 

[romeo212000]

I assume you are thinking all the non-sec ranked teams have all beat NFL teams to deserve their ranking?

It's freakin week 3 people. Get the sticks our of your asses

Exactly. These rankings are meaningless at this stage. Just keep winning and your team will get what it deserves.

 

[fordman84]

Exactly. These rankings are meaningless at this stage. Just keep winning and your team will get what it deserves.

yup. Doubt any team has played three ranked opponents, and if they did those rankings were from the same thing people here are bitching about.


Right now rankings are just time killers. But some get all worked up over them like they freaking mean something

 

[occupant]

Yeah...it don't matter when it benefits you.

What's the big deal?

 

[4down20]

Now you're comparing apple and oranges. Oregon is undefeated and only jumped Ohio State because of a shitty performance in week 1 by OSU. South Carolina should not be ahead of teams who are undefeated with good wins such as Michigan, UCLA, Miami, and maybe Washington. I can understand them maybe being in front of Oklahoma but that's about it.

You just skipped over the entire point.

Teams are ranked based on what they are projected to do over the entire schedule, not just the first 3 weeks of the season.

You mention Washington, but how do we know Boise St is any good or what? It's the same reason you think Boise St is a quality win that is applied to ALL teams.

 

[occupant]

Teams are ranked based on what they are projected to do over the entire schedule, not just the first 3 weeks of the season.

:rollseyes:

 

[4down20]

:rollseyes:

So again, you think Oregon is ranked #2 based on beating Virginia, Tennessee and a FCS team? Or do you understand that it's because Oregon is expected to do well across the entire season and beat many more teams.

 

[TexasExes98]

Now you're comparing apple and oranges. Oregon is undefeated and only jumped Ohio State because of a shitty performance in week 1 by OSU. South Carolina should not be ahead of teams who are undefeated with good wins such as Michigan, UCLA, Miami, and maybe Washington. I can understand them maybe being in front of Oklahoma but that's about it.

Dude has a point. I remember a loss was what it used to be: a fucking loss. There never used to be "quality losses". If you lose, you lose and the undefeated teams jump you, plain and simple.

 

[4down20]

Dude has a point. I remember a loss was what it used to be: a fucking loss. There never used to be "quality losses". If you lose, you lose and the undefeated teams jump you, plain and simple.

That's just horrible. How in the world can anyone really think losing to the #1 team in the country is equal to losing to the #125th ranked team?

I mean really?

 

[TexasExes98]

That's just horrible. How in the world can anyone really think losing to the #1 team in the country is equal to losing to the #125th ranked team?

I mean really?

They're still losses. You shouldn't get rewarded for losses, plain and simple. It's kind of like the whole pussification of America where "everybody's a winner" in sports today..........

 

[BTHOtu]

They're still losses. You shouldn't get rewarded for losses, plain and simple. It's kind of like the whole pussification of America where "everybody's a winner" in sports today..........

Dropping 4 spots in the rankings isn't much of a reward

 

[Berkeley_Blues]

While the SEC has some very good teams -- the SEC is also an overblown joke.

I really feel The PAC just might straight up smoke the SEC head to head. The Big 12 might smoke the SEC too -- just look at Texas A&M in 2 short years.

Hell, The MWC conference is almost .500 against the SEC head to head during the BCS era, while playing almost all of those games in SEC country.

 

[trojanfight]

take a team like Arizona...they are 3-0 but vs teams UNLV, northern Arizona, and UTSA...nobody notable..but if that's an sec team they are instantly in top 25...since they aren't they get overlooked.

another thing is losses...a loss in pac 12 or big 12 and a team isn't in top 25...sec they drop just a few spots...with chance to redeem themselves vs another "ranked" team that shouldn't be.

 

[trojanfight]

then a team like UCLA...they have 3 opponents in a row that are pretty winnable games....new mexico st, Utah and cal...if that's an sec team they would move up from current 16 to probably 6...but since its not they probably don't break the top 10

 

[The Crimson King]

Georgia, SC and Florida have all been whipped. TAM got beat.

The only team the SEC has that is a shoe-in for the BCS bowl is Alabama at this point. Everybody else in the SEC is certainly no better than Oregon, Clemson, Ohio State, Stanford, etc.

Georgia wins out and they're in....sad but true

 

[LawDawg]

Georgia, SC and Florida have all been whipped. TAM got beat.

The only team the SEC has that is a shoe-in for the BCS bowl is Alabama at this point. Everybody else in the SEC is certainly no better than Oregon, Clemson, Ohio State, Stanford, etc.

How exactly and when did Georgia get whipped? Are you talking about the 3 point loss on the road to #4 Clemson due to a mishandled field goal snap? Yeah, don't think so.

The polls show exactly what you say ... Alabama is the only SEC team that is ranked ahead of Oregon, Clemson, Ohio State, and Stanford, and no one here is arguing that the rankings should be otherwise, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

As a one loss team, I am well aware that UGa has to win out, and then hope that there aren't two or more undefeated teams. Personally, I don't care where we are in the polls. We win out, we win the SEC ... that's goal 1, and the only goal we can control. If there are less than 2 undefeated teams, then we might get to the NC game. If not, we play in a BCS Bowl.

The only people who have a bitch are the no loss teams who are ranked behind UGa, USCe and TAMU, and who have actually played decent teams. Unless the teams that beat them all fuck up, those 3 team's losses to Clemson, UGa and Alabama are better than a team that beat three chumps. For those that want better OOCs you better support that idea ... otherwise you are penalizing teams for playing tough OOCs.

OkSU - MissSt, Lamar and TexasSA - with only UGa in front of them, they have no complaint.
UCLA - strikes me as the one team that has a gripe with a win against Nevada and Nebraska ... all based on Nebraska showing up for the rest of the season. They should be ranked in front of USCe, but not UGa or TAMU.
OU - maybe ... but WVu looks to be way down.
Michigan - no way with the game against Akron
Miami and Washington - they might have a reasonable bitch

Honestly, if any of these teams are from 9 - 16, it's about the same. And, they all have to win out to make sure they get to the NC.