 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| Unless of course, USC loses to Oklahoma by foolio 12/12/2004, 2:02am PST | ||||
 |
 |
|||
| I'd like to point out at this point that if we were purely using strength-of-schedule BCS rankings like last year, Oklahoma would be ranked #1 and USC #2. But we're not, and USC just might win the championship game. But I am saying that OU could easily be ranked #1, and when they win the championship this year I will RUB THIS IN (e.g. BOO YA!).
I actually prefer the strength-of-schedule rankings over the human polls, because that allows for the media to overexpose on any team they want without skewing the votes, i.e. it ignores polling idiocy. As it is, I think 1)Utah/Louisville/Boise St. are overranked, 2)Texas deserves to be ranked above Cal and therefore given the BCS bid, and 3) I think Auburn should be ranked above USC. Yeah, I wouldn't have USC playing in the major bowl this year, at least not over Auburn. The smaller bowl games look like lots of fun. |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
Well, well, well, a forum dedicated to the greatness of USC by 12/11/2004, 8:39pm PST  Damn it feels good to be a Trojan NT by 12/11/2004, 10:09pm PST Unless of course, USC loses to Oklahoma by 12/12/2004, 2:02am PST lol eat shit fat ass by 03/23/2025, 9:27pm PDT |
