First BCS rankings

I went to high school with Paul Smith's brother, and my brother and Paul were the same year. So, I also like seeing Tulsa on the list.

 

When did the BCS take losses out of the equation?

 

I think losses went away when they began expressing things as a percentage.

 

I bet John Swofford is happy to see this.

 

I assume most people with brains were. That game could have been 50-0, or worse. I guess that's what you get for having class and taking your foot off the gas. Wow.

Any system than can have Cal ahead of Tennessee at this point in the season is completely ridiculous. But the season ain't over yet.

 

USC has the hardest schedule in the country...What else you want?

 

I believe the consensus would be convincing wins. That, and I think people are just plain tired of USC from the past three seasons, so you're not going to see many people in the Trojans' corner these days.

 

For one of those "hard" teams to finally beat the Trojans

 

Every year on this site the early BCS rankings spark debate. To me, it's like arguing about who's going to win the 2008 New Hampshire primaries. The rest of the season will resolve 99 percent of the absurdities and points of dispute.
Ohio State and Michigan play each other. USC will play Cal and Notre Dame. There cannot be three undefeated Big East teams by season's end. There will be an SEC conference title game. Knowing all this, why pay the slightest attention to the rankings as they now stand?

 

give us something to bitch about

 

Hell yeah.

 

USC could run the table, but I really don't see W. Va losing.