the voters into voting for USC??? This, in the guise of "objective" sports journalism. None of them want to discuss who "deserves" to go based upon who each team has beaten AND LOSS TO. Since this was the first Saturday that I have been at home in quite some time (always at the games EARLY and late), I really hadn't gotten to see Herbstriet and the boys in a few weeks. But, after watching my fill this weekend, I came to the conclusion that they KNOW that any objective viewing of the two teams would lead to the INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION that LSU CLEARLY deserves to be #2 (as USC hasn't defeated ONE team that shows their worth). Therefore, while ostensibly doing what is supposed to be an objective sports journalism bit, are actively lobbying the voters to vote for USC. Could this be because ABC (ESPN's parent and broadcaster of the Sugar Bowl) thinks that a USC/OU would bring in more ratngs? Maybe we should all e-mail Kirk letting him know that his "job description" involves "SPORTS JOURNALISM" and not LOBBYING on behalf of his employer.
Of course that is exactly what is going on right now. Why on earth is SC ranked ahead of a team in the SEC with the same amount of losses and who happened to play more top 25 teams this season . . . b/c of the ratings an SC Sugar Bowl would bring in from the 2nd largest TV market in the country. LSU has been making it's case for weeks. For some reason, whenever the debate turns to LSU and SC, the "experts" feel SC is the more deserving team. It doesn't matter who we have played or how well we have looked this season, SC did what it had to in the media's eyes, and we are screwing it all up. I think beating #5 will be hard to ignore in the polls, or to justify on TV by having SC go to the Sugar.
I will tell you what their agenda is - plain and simple. Rome is a SoCal native and wants his boys in the dance. Period. Herbstreit, May and Alberts are all employees of ESPN, owned by disney, who owns ABC. All BCS bowls are played on ABC. USC vs. Oklahoma is more sexy than OK. vs. LSU - for the obvious reasons. USC is located in the #2 media market in the USA, LSU is in like the 43rd (or lower!) More sexy = more money for parent Disney. There IS NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT THEY ARE BEING TOLD WHAT TO SAY!! Their comments are meant to sway voters and national opinion to think that USC is the only worthy opponent of Ok. There is no way someone who just finished seeing LSU destroy Ark could possibly think that (as May said) "LSU would lose by 3 tds to USC!!!" Garbage!! These honks are gonna win, too - and no one will call them on it!!
I honestly think that in the end, if LSU had been ranked in the preseason ahead of USC, we'd be #2 right now and USC #3. there just hasn't been any compelling reason (in the voters' eyes) to jump LSU over USC in the polls. But I bet that if the situation was reversed, the voters would see no reason to jump USC over LSU. Reason enough why preseason polls should be abolished and the first poll taken after week 5 minimum.
