We all know that Texas is getting some SERIOUS help from computer polls, while getting the cold shoulder from human and biased polls. Normally, I say that's certainly not something in our favor. HOWEVER, all of the human polls are released before the BCS (go-figure, BCS is based off of human polls as well). What I'm getting at is that the human polls may have very well ranked Texas low, as they would have no idea where the hell to put a #1 team that just got beat by a #7 team. Now that the BCS bowl has been released and Texas is #4 on it, I believe this may sway some earlier nay-sayers about where Texas should be ranked, and Texas should be ranked higher next week due to coaches realizing that they were QUITE off, or just simply reconsidering Texas' rank, and how great they've been in the past. With this turn of voter's minds on how good Texas is, I only see our BCS ranking increasing even more, due to more votes from the pollsters. Simply put: 1.) Texas was voted low due to confusion of where to put them. 2.) BCS came out as sort of an unbiased "guideline" of where Texas is. 3.) Voters may realize they made a mistake, and vote Texas higher than last time. 4.) Texas gets a higher BCS ranking due to changed minds. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just feel that us being at #4 would make some people reconsider, and realize that our loss was to current #2 away on gameday in Lubbock during night, and it was a last-second game. Anyone else agree?
I hope I agree. I pray the voters are that unsure of themselves to be swayed by computers. Mostly, I just hope they come to their senses about where they dropped Tex after what they accomplished. I can understand Fla #4 after last few weeks, but you'd have to put Tex either 4 or 5 ahead of ou and usc. If ou beats TT and o$u then argue for them if you like and it would have merit...
There also has been a good deal of backlash over OU ranked ahead of us. That should sway some votes in our favor, also.
Should have been smart enough to rank us ahead of a team we beat by 10 on a neutral field. If they don't know how to rank a #1 team that lost on the road to a #7 team then the dumbass shouldn't be voting.
The problem is that we played like crap, and we looked like we wouldn't be able to beat OU/FLa/USC, which is a reasonable doubt. (Any of those teams would have beaten us that night) If we come out and dominate Baylor, voters will see that we still have it, and maybe we are better than those teams. The points are so close, it would only take a handful of voters moving us a couple of places to make a difference.
Yes we played like crap... in the first half. We played our C game at best compared to Tech's A++ game and still almost won. Most experts were picking Tech probably based on our 3 tough games prior and the hyped up atmosphere. Doesn't explain how #1 falls to #7 in the coaches poll.
It's computer rankings, not computer polls. I don't know how you would take a non-human poll. ("4 out of 5 cows recommend Chik-Fil-A"? ) I do know that if we take care of business this week and don't look flat and uninspired, there's no excuse for the coaches keeping us below USC and OU (who aren't playing ranked teams, either). If they do, then I'm going to start thinking conspiracy. (Or plain idiocy, to the point where they should lose their voting privileges).
I wonder how many aggy fans saw the title of this post and got REALLY excited. If being ranked low is a good thing. It's REALLY good for aggy.
