World Picker:

Two reasons you are so full of it your eyes have turned brown;

1st: Georgia beat a team from the "joke" conference (your words, not mine)-explains why their win got so little credibility
2nd: OU is not the best team in the Big 12 until they win the Big 12; ergo, Georgia is not the best team in the SEC until they win the SEC.

If you weren't such a hack you would realize how lame your analysis is.

Not to mention that you have missed the biggest poll mis-ranking in modern times.
I'm certain you are too wrapped up in OU bashing to see it though.

You should be fired.

PS. I'd give a slight edge to waiting until the games are played before declaring a winner....as well as a loser.

Picker,

Seriously, Stafford over Bradford at QB? One is a darkhorse Heisman Trophy candidate. The other is still working on living up to his high school press clippings. I think right now OU and Georgia are interchangeable at the #2 spot. Give Georgia the edge at the running back spot. This OU team is reminding me somewhat of 2003....great passing offense, serviceable running game. It'll shake out in the wash. If Georgia goes undefeated in the SEC, or takes only one loss, that's going to hold more weight right now than OU losing one in the Big 12.

Looks like the TU QB has different thoughts on who should be starting than the popular opinion....kicking a-- and taking names so far...

So, who finishes last in the Big 12 South?....A&M or Baylor?

Nit Picker,

Do you really look through all of the picker articles to try and come up with quasi-double talk? Honestly, unless you have something besides just world picker bashing, why are you talking at all?

I disagree with the picker on a couple of things. I don't think Georgia's play against ASU really warranted pushing them ahead of a team that we didn't get to see play that week. I don't think it's a good policy to punish teams just because their bye week is that week. Georgia did what a number three team should do. They didn't completely dismantle ASU like USC did to Ohio State, but they had a solid victory.

I am in agreement though that it is questionable that the best conference may not have a team in the national title spot. If 'Bama, Florida, Georgia, or LSU aren't in the title game, that raises some questions about the BCS system. Unless OU wins very convincingly against Texas and Mizzou and both of those teams are still ranked in the top-10(I don't think either will be top-5) at the end of the season, then they should be left out. USC hosted what looked to be a top-5 team and at least a top-10 team to most voters. They destroyed that team. They took what was a great defense and still worked their offense very well. OU has yet to and may not do something similar to that this season.

Any of the aforementioned SEC teams are going to play at least two top-10 teams and for a couple of them, 3. I just don't think Texas Tech, Mizzou, or Texas are top-10 teams this year and I think that will be apparent as the year progresses.

Maybe I'm wrong, but if I'm not I definitely won't post insult laced rhetoric on the picker's blog if he does disagree with me. There are more important things in life.

LSU is the only top 5 team that has played legitimate competition. (And don't tell me that USC faced serious competition with Ohio State. That would be a joke.)

I think they have proven themselves and if the polls are truly a snapshot of football today, they should be higher.

OSU afraid to play TU in football. If they played, probably about the same score as Lobo game. OSU duckers just cheating the fans while padding schedule.

Gus, OSU and TU do have future games scheduled. Those that were afraid to play TU are no longer there. But, schedules are made years in advance so it takes a while to get someone back on your schedule once the decision is made to do it.

World Picker, a team cannot and should not lose their ranking in a bye week. With that being said, shouldn't that also mean they can't be rewarded for not playing either by moving up in the rankings? That's quite a paradox.

NIT Picker, I miss your musk.

PW, a fight between A&M and Iowa State for the cellar.

Gus, it's pathetic how hard you try.

Arthur, I think you are right about Mizzou BUT that still doesn't mean they'll be left out of the top 5-10. Even if they go to Texas and lose, they still play in the questionable North. All they need to do is keep winning against the likes of ISU and KSU and they'll move up as the SEC beats up on the themselves and inevitably, move down. Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with how good your team actually is; it merely depends on how weak your schedule is/opponents are. Actual talent will be trumped by perceived talent via the BCS poll everytime. Go ask last year's Hawaii team.

Arthur, good point about Missouri. There is an odd Missouri vibe going on among Tiger fans themselves, it's as though they're waiting for the past to catch up with them soon, probably at Texas.

Why people go so crazy about the home field is hard to figure. It comes into play the most if you're not elite; maybe doubting Missouri fans know their team best. If Missouri has to lose a game, there's no doubt losing to Texas is better than losing to Nebraska.

Those who think early polls aren't important are wrong.

What if all three major teams go through undefeated? What if USC is undefeated, and the Big 12 and SEC winners have one loss?

The poll voters are extensions of the fans. The voters are the only protection against rotten scheduling. Their actions should be thoughtful. Most times, though, they vote a particular way so nobody will yell at them.

I would vote them: Georgia, OU, USC, in that order, and would have Wake in the top ten.

I usually agree with the Picker and his nature of being unbiased. I don't agree that OU or Georgia should be rated over USC...hate to say it but USC is easily the best team this year if healthy and motivated. Great D, great O...best coach in the country. I am also not a huge fan of Sam Bradford, but he is a better QB than Matthew Stafford simply in terms of consistency. One week Stafford looks great, the next you wonder if he has ever played the position before. Bradford always gives a consistent effort and allows his team to win. Stafford may have better Pro potential...but that's not what we're grading are we. The fact that TU is not ranked in the top 25 is shameful...they do everything every other team does and beats the crud out of low teams and better than some and yet they have a soft schedule...OK well so does OSU...WASU is simply awful, Missou St (sorry, Springfield HS), and Houston (not the same Houston as the past 3 years)...TU's schedule to this point probably has been a little stronger if you want to know the truth. Yes, C-USA does not stack up against the Big XII in conference season, but at the end of the day, neither will OSU. Everyone raves about BYU's schedule...hmmm...Washington pretty bad with 1 good athlete and they needed to sneak out a win there. UCLA...awful....simply awful...Wyoming bad as well. The rankings are a sham and to the comment on that they don't make sense until later...in theory they don't, but for a team like TU to not be in the polls or on the radar at the beginning prevents them from moving in a poll to a place they need to be to vie for a BCS berth in the event more than 1 non-BCS team goes undefeated. If they held out on any poll until week 5, things will shake out and pollsters can look at a body of work, like a midterm ranking, and then move from there. There is a reason that the BCS rankings and the Harris polls don't release anything until after Oct. 1...fairness for all. The coaches should be taken completely out of the mix altogether..too many biases and reasons to vote for teams in your conference and too much influence simply because of the amount of money involved. Real fans want to see an exciting poll and have games mean something late and more than just certain games.

My Picker how you forget. The week of the OSU / Georgia game you argued that Bobby Reid was better than Stafford. You called Stafford a pick machine. That is a quote. Stafford is gifted but he is not nearly as consistent as Bradford. There is no edge I would say they are equal, with Stafford having more upside he isnt delivering.

JJ, one way to guess who is the best team is by asking Vegas to put up a number. And one way to guess at the best quarterbacks is to ask the pros. My guess is at this point, the Georgia quarterback is a little higher rated than Bradford.

Bystander: It's like a reporter being on the mayor's staff.....certain things would seem to trump free enterprise. In the very least, you should come on and say I work for OU, or I work for OSU, and now the sports. It's normal, even required, for people to be loyal to their bosses. The questions is, how can you be on one payroll and be objective over there? It's probably possible. Not ideal from a viewer's perspective. Disclosure would be one answer. Hi, Boomer Sooner, go Cowboys, poor TU, now the sports.

World Picker and other Know It Alls:

This stupid debate about being "objective" is pathetic.
World Picker is not objective and he is not on any team's payroll. He is simply not objective. Anyone with an IQ comprised of three digits knows it.
So what.
It is his right to be biased, as well as ignorant.
The same goes for commercial radio sports talk shows. (At least these guys aren't hiding behind anonymity like World Picker is.)
It is a total non issue.
Get over it, chumps.