Why does this guy rank the UK below LSU? Did not UK beat LSU. Yes, now that I think of it, they did. Help me out. UK had on blue clothing, LSU had on yellow pants and white shirts. There were many people. The field was green with white stripes. Yes! I am sure of it. UK did beat LSU. I demand UK be given higher ranking. [http://www.collegefootballadvisor.com]

I'll probably put LSU ahead of UK, for what it's worth.

Well, it is not worth much. All you are saying is that LSU has been better than KY in the past, which may have been true. Suppose we are in a footrace and I lead you the entire time except the last 100 feet of the race. Then, you pass me and cross the finsih line first. Who wins? Using your criteria, me, because I was ahead most of the time. give it a rest.

This isn't a footrace though, those are winner take all's.

Kentucky has to play a full season just like LSU. Teams are to be ranked on what they are, what they've accomplished, etc.

Under your model we should put Stanford ahead of USC. But what if USC beats Arizona State in a few weeks? Arizona State beat Stanford 41-3.

Stanford > USC

+

ASU > Stanford

+

USC > ASU

=

USC > ASU > Stanford > USC (???)

So what you propose collapses under its own weight, its a bogus and impossible way of ranking teams. Sorry.

It's all rigged to get the most popular two teams in the BCS games