As usual, Pete Carroll really couldn't care less...
Coach Pete Carroll said he addressed the No. 1 issue with his players before practice, telling them, "It doesn't mean anything until we do something, and it takes a long time to do something in college football."
I love SC but one win does not a season make.
I have noted numerous times here on CC that pre-season and early season polls really don't carry a lot of weight with me. There are just too many questions that need to be answered. Most teams play an easy slate of opening games that usually guarantee some easy wins. I am not interested in getting into the conference wars, as I frankly couldn't care less how other teams schedule their games. Their reasoning is their problem, but if it leads to their team being left out of a major post season bowl game then they only have themselves to blame.
The recent jump in the polls by USC over Georgia and Ohio State brings up all sorts interesting comments or opinions. Some are rational well thought out while others simply whine or complain about it not being fair.
Here is the latter:
I submitted this to Stewart Mandel's College Football Mailbag this week.
Last year after week two of the season, LSU had just pounded top 10 VA Tech at home and Miss St on the road. The following week all I heard was how impressive LSU was, yet the pollsters refused to move LSU ahead of #1 USC because "We needed to give USC a chance to prove themselves".
This year, USC pounds an unranked Virginia team and all of a sudden we know enough about USC to move them into the #1 spot, ahead of UGA who, according to last year's rules, hasn't had a chance to prove themselves yet. I understand injuries could be playing a factor into this, but why not wait to see how UGA's injuries will affect them? And, why the double standard for USC?
We'll see if he answers it.
I'm not defending UGA, nor do I care about the polls at this point in the season. I just want to point out the blatent USC bias in the polls. Heck even Kyle himself dropped UGA two spots. I just can't understand what you could have possibly learned after one or two games this year, that you didn't learn last year.
A couple of things stand out here. LSU went on the road and beat a conference rival that has always been known as a bit of a bottom feeder in the SEC. The surprise is that MSU actually had a pretty good season last season so the win looks "better" at the end of the season than it did going into the season. LSU's win over VA Tech was at home against a team that had the weight of college football world on their shoulders after that devastating shooting in Blacksburg. Yes, VA Tech beat ECU at home under some very emotional circumstances but it would not have surprised me if they had a letdown after that very emotional game. The Hokies sure didn't look like a team that should have given LSU a better game than it did.
For some old habits die hard.
Never mind that SC went on the road to play a team from another BCS conference not some patsy from the FCS.
While I may not always agree and because I just can't keep up with his writing, Kyle's thoughtful measured response is always welcome. I clarified my remarks in a subsequent comment but you can see where I am coming from.
As little as it means to me that #1 ranking wasn't just handed to USC. SC has always gone on the road and played a consistently challenging OOC schedule. Those who constantly whine about a double standard need look in their own house before looking at others. SC jumping in the polls happened for a very simple reason.
It seems USC benefited from going on the road and blowing out an ACC team while No. 2 Georgia and No. 3 Ohio State dominated Division I-AA teams at home.
But let’s not forget, USC has also been on the wrong end of the polls. In 2003 the Trojans were left out of the BCS title game depsite being ranked No. 1 in the final regular season ballot of both major polls.
A year ago, USC began the season No. 1 in both polls but dropped to No. 2 in the AP poll after narrowly beating Washington. That was the fourth game of the season for USC, which was jumped by a then-5-0 LSU team.
UVA may not be the class of the CFB world let alone their own conference but they are part of the BCS and NOT an FCS team as UGA, LSU,OU, and tOSU all faced. Competition is king and SC delivers year in and year out. HP as some interesting thoughts on this as well.
The opposite is usually the case when an SEC team beats a Pac-10 team (or any other conference’s team, for that matter). When that happens, it is never because of the merits of that particular team on that particular day. It is almost always due to the ’superiority’ of the SEC or the inferiority of the conference it is playing. And we are constantly reminded of things like ‘SEC speed’ and ‘year-in, year-out the best conference’ and so on.
When an SEC team is beaten, however, the game is usually properly analyzed for what it is–one team beating another. The conference as a whole never takes the hit.
The poor Big Ten has had to answer for Ohio State’s twin postseason drubbings the last two seasons, but has never gotten any credit for Michigan beating Florida or Wisconsin beating Tennessee.
That's pretty dead on.
As I noted in the comments of my blog poll post, I commend those SEC teams that get out on the road outside their region to play tough OOC opponents. My complaint is that there aren't enough of them that do that on consistent basis.
We earned this one...even if it really doesn't mean much.