When the BCS rankings were announced, there weren't a ton of surprises. Some may say that this team or that could have or should have been a few places higher or lower, but for the most part, each team that was expected to be in the top ten was, and the teams that we all expected to be 11 through 25 were about where they should have been.
But almost predictably, the conversation turned to the computers and the consideration of non-conference schedules.
Even in the announcement, ESPN analysts pointed to Wisconsin's utter lack of non-conference difficulty, which inevitably hurt the Badgers in the computer rankings.
But let's take a closer look.
Both Wisconsin and, for example Alabama, are undefeated. Both have played non-conference games against opponents that are not ranked in the human polls (for Alabama, three, and for Wisconsin, four). Both have played against one conference opponent currently ranked in the human polls.
So why is Wisconsin deserving the ire of the computers?
The fact is, no one really knows for sure. But for some reason, ESPN talked about Wisconsin's strength-of-schedule as if they are privy to the inner workings of the computer formulas that are notoriously kept a closely guarded secret.
And even if strength-of-schedule were to explain some separation between the two, it doesn't explain the difference between Alabama's .951 and Wisconsin's .771.
Why can't we just all admit that no one has any fricking idea what the computers will do?