How many examples do you want? You want one from Week 2 last year with a highly ranked team playing a very close game against a much worse team?

Cal beat CSU in Week 2 last year, 34-26. Cal went from 10th to 8th in the AP.

Nebraska beat Wake Forest 20-17. Nebraska went from 16th to 14th in the AP (Wake wasn't receiving any votes at the time the game was played, having lost to BC by 10 the week before).

Your bucks won't be able to score enough to keep up. They are going to lose and lose big.

Do they just hate BYU? Clearly BYU doesn't have the history to convince them that BYU had a bad game, rather than the teams were closely matched.

oh, give it a rest.

Everybody knows some teams get the benefit of the doubt and others don't. Depends on the logo on the jersey. That's all Cali's trying to say.

Listen to the batgirl SU. You might learn something.

Why do some teams get the benefit of the doubt?

Honestly, I think BYU is overrated because they have had a relatively easy schedule the past three years. Their coach admitted he's softening up the schedule to make it easier to get into the BCS.

And Washington is your example? Bronco has had almost no impact on the schedule for this year. He wouldn't have had any impact, except Nevada cancelled, and BYU got Northern Iowa instead (who is probably better than Nevada).

Do you really think some teams don't get the benefit of the doubt more than others? Do you honestly think this is just a matter of the voters not knowing how good BYU is because it is just week 2 and they don't have a lot of info on which to base their opinion yet? Then how do you respond to Nebraska moving up (how did that season end, by the way) or Cal from last year in week 2? The voters didn't have any more information on those two teams than they have on BYU.

There is a BCS bias, and it is strong. Voters tend to punish non-BCS schools more than their BCS counterparts. The UW game is a good example (as is UW v USC last year where USC moved up after a narrow win against UW, who was worse last year than they will be this year).

I think the BCS bias is not irrational, it's based on common sense. You won't see me whining because the polls don't treat Utah with the same deference as USC or Florida or Ohio State. If Florida narrowly escapes upset by a crappy team it's not the same as if Utah or BYU does. Your argument that BYU deserves the same deference as USC is funny as a crutch. You're just defeating your own argument by using USC-Washington as your example. You're parochial, narrow minded, and biased, like most BYU fans.

I'll agree with you that USC deserves more of a "benefit of the doubt" than BYU, but I won't agree that BYU fans are any more "parochial, narrow-minded, and biased" than Utah (or any other non-BCS team) fans. In fact, I would probably use those terms to describe that statement.

You may be right. Utah fans also tend to be that way. I'm less parochial, biased and narrow minded than most BYU or Utah fans. I can't believe anyone would complain an MWC team gets less benefit of the doubt than USC. Cali's posts here are classics, though.