I don't want it both ways; I just want a firm precedent and standard. I thought it was a joke because of the precedent in previous years that had been set. Polls don't follow precedent. They are a compilation of writers' / coaches' <I>opinions</I> of how good teams are. After the OU/A&M game, most coaches still thought OU was better than UT. I have no problem with that. After UT's loss to TT, most people thought KSU was better than UT. Again, I have no problem with that. If you want precedent / objectivity, look to the computers, not the polls.
From a logical standpoint, for a head to head loss to be overridden, the other team's loss should be pretty bad (like to an unranked team). How our loss to Tech was any less impressive than OU's loss to A&M I will never understand.
From a logical standpoint, for a head to head loss to be overridden, the other team's loss should be pretty bad (like to an unranked team). How our loss to Tech was any less impressive than OU's loss to A&M I will never understand. Except you can't just look at losses, or Bowling Green would have been ranked way high too. Instead, you look at wins as well. K-State: dominated ISU and NU, beat USC OU: beat Texas, Alabama, dominated ISU and CU UT: beat NEB, KSU, ISU, dominated no one
