>> If the BCS polling had any consistencies then Texas should have remained #3 while TCU should have leapfrogged to #2.
Why, exactly?
Texas played one more game than TCU — and, however ugly it was, they won it.
Only in a logic-free alternative universe should the following happen:
a) Two undefeated teams are ranked #3 and #4, after playing the same number of games
b) #3 plays, and wins, an additional game; #4 does not play, and so has played fewer games than #3
c) #4 leapfrogs #3 because #3 played “ugly” while #4 sat on their butts in front of a teevee watching it.
That just makes no sense!
You could argue that BEFORE the game TCU should have been higher than Texas — I don’t agree but at least that’s a valid argument. Or, you might argue that Cincinnati, who also played and won a game, should should move up because Pitt was ranked higher than Nebraska and Cincinnati’s additional game was “prettier”. That argument is also supportable.
But moving TCU ahead of Texas after Saturday is baseless.