I think thats the whole "your opponent's opponents." Teams we played are stinking it up, and us being beaten by a crappy UT doesn't help at all. Bama is in the same boat. Bama is 2-1 against the Top 25. We are 4-1. Out opponents record is 40-29. Bama's opponents are 43-37. Conversely, USuCk's opp.'s are 47-40, Texas 54-33, Miami 41-37, and Penn St 55-33.

Thank you. Finally someone sees this like i do. I rememebr this was the case in 2003 after we beat Georgia....they were saying that depending on how far Georgia dropped would determine if we went to the NCG.

It makes total LOGICAL sense to say you beat the #3 team at THAT time, not what they end up being later in the season. Who writes this computer code anyway??

Sorry, you and I usually agree islstl, but I don't agree with you at all in this one. So you are saying that if Bama would have been scheduled where we played Tennessee instead of at the end of the year, we should get less credit for beating Bama? You're saying that even if a team has been PROVEN later on to not be as good of a team as everyone thought at the beginning of the year, your SOS should not be penalized?

I just don't buy into that theory. If a team is not as good as they were perceived to be, then they just aren't that good. If a team turns out to be better than was expected, then you should be rewarded for that.

I think the best system of SOS would be somewhere in the middle. I think gameday rankings should mean something, but that doesn't mean that you completely throw away the results from the remainder of the season. Our SOS just sucks the year. It's not our fault, but it's the truth. Our opponents just don't seem to be playing like they normally do. Arizona State SHOULD have been a better team this year. So should Tennessee, North Texas (Not talking about BCS buster, but at least in the race for a Sun Belt Title), and Florida. But they aren't as good as they normally are or were expected to be. I think that our SOS should reflect that, even if it doesn't work to our favor this year. In the future we will be on the other side of that argument, and you probably will feel differently.

Teams can be better early in a season than late, thanks in large part to injuries. So if you beat (or lose) to a team that was a powerhouse AT THAT TIME, you should get credit accordingly. Similarly, you shouldn't be punished for making a team drop in the polls, after you beat them.

I agree that a team shouldn't be penalized for CAUSING the drop in the polls, such as with LSU beating Bama this weekend, or in 2003 when we beat Georgia twice to make them look like a much weaker team than they really were.

But if a team over the course of the season isn't as good of a team as they were supposed to be, then I don't think you should get credit for beating a great team. Tennessee obviously is not a Top 10 team (and were overrated to begin with), so I don't think they should be counted as us losing to a Top 10 team.

Oh absolutely. I agree that the solution is probably somewhere in the middle. Obviously Tennessee isn't as good as once thought, but they're also significantly worse w/o Riggs too. A better example would be if Marcus Vick gets hurt and VT starts losing. Obviously they're a much better team w/ him than w/o him (unless playing Miami.)

You have a point. Computers could NEVER account for that. But the question is does it need to be accounted for?

Are you being rated on how good your team is when it's completely together? Or are you rated on how you've actually done with the hand that you're dealt? Personally I think a team should be rated on how they perform, even if they've had to do so with injuries. Injuries aren't fair, and they could happen to anyone, or you could go a whole season without them. USC's a good example of a team that has not had to deal with losing key personel due to injury.

But this all comes into play in a season and no other sport anywhere takes into consideration injuries when standings are released. Think the NFL would give the Patriots a free ride to the playoffs because Bruschi was out half the year? Are the Miami Heat going to have a few games thrown out because Shaq is not playing?

LSU's playing a season without Alley Broussard, and with all kinds of distractions early in the year, but in the end we will be evaluated on what we did, reguardless of the outside factors. The only time I believe outside variables should matter is when all other data is too close to call.