If anything, they proved my point that pre-season rankings in NCAA FBS football are ridiculous. Do they serve a purpose? Yes, they provide the lazy MSM sports media with something to talk about, and they over-hype early season matches (Alabama/Michigan) and make it harder for really good teams to make a push toward the B(C)S championship game. (This year: Michigan St looks like an early contender.)
For the most part, early season rankings are based on t he prior season's results, how else do you explain an average Arkansas team being ranked in the top 10, or Oklahoma State (who lost almost every offensive weapon to the NFL) being ranked at all?
Not surprisingly, both teams suffered bad losses and readjusted in the rankings to where they should have been in the first place (outside of the top 25). The biggest injustice, as I see it, is Kansas St. being ranked at #15. All they've done is wallop a bad team (after a slow start granted) and then ambush a major-college team in Miami, making the latter look like an FCS program in the process.
I still think Michigan St is ranked too low, and OU, Georgia and South Carolina are ranked way too high.
This is why I don't do any type of ranking until after (at least) week 5, and I don't think the media outlets should either. Let's get rid of the ridiculous pre-season rankings and just vote with our eyes. If anything, LSU and Oregon should both be ranked above USC based on results right? It's not going to happen and, unless USC loses, the major media outlets and the coaches poll will continue to be a joke.
