[iggymcfly]

[ QUOTE ]
iggy,

How many more losses before you realize Auburn is not a top 25 team?

If the Jayhawks wore maroon and had "Oklahoma" on their jerseys they'd be #1 right? Putting Oklahoma above Kansas is downright laughable. You know that the W/L column is the most important stat, not SOS. You punish Kansas for beating nobodies each week, but not Oklahoma for losing to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, if Oklahoma wore blue and had "Kansas" on their jerseys, they'd probably be #1 right now because they'd be 10-0. They were getting everybody's best shot all season due to their reputation and still just barely got beat by Colorado on the road when they were looking ahead to Texas.

The thing is that we know that Oklahoma was giving nowhere near maximum effort against Colorado and that if they played the Buffaloes again, they'd win about 98% of the time. I don't think you have to make too big of a deal out of that loss. It's enough to keep them behind LSU and Oregon, but behind a Kansas team who's only beaten one BCS conference team with a winning record (6-5 Texas A&M)? Not so much.

If it was Oklahoma that had played Kansas's schedule, I might give them a little more credit because when you don't get an adequate evaluation of a team through the games they play (because they don't play anyone in the Top 30), you have to use talent evaluations to fill in the blanks a little. Still though, once they play Missouri and Oklahoma, that's what they'll be judged on.