Oregon fans have been advised to stay away from sharp objects following their beloved Ducks' disturbing No. 3 debut in the first Bowl Championships Series standings.
Third in the BCS is like fourth in the Olympics, but the good news is that this is the second-to-last-ever first release of the BCS standings.
The system is being junked in 2014 for a four-team playoff that would currently put this year's Oregon squad in the national semifinals.
How does that help Oregon now?
It doesn't, but it's also early.
The whiz-kid pundits were wrong in predicting Alabama and Oregon would debut at No. 1 and No. 2 in the first standings.
Alabama is No. 1, of course, with its glossy .9761 average, followed by Florida. Oregon is third by an eyelash, trailing by the margin of .9092 to .8993.
The BCS is weighted two-thirds to the Harris Interactive and USA Today coaches' polls, where Oregon sits at No. 2 in both, but it is being pulled down by a No. 6 computer rating.
It's a flashback to 2001, when Oregon finished second in the coaches' and Associated Press polls but No. 4 in the BCS standings because of ... the computers!
It prompted then-coach Mike Bellotti to say the BCS was a cancer.
Florida passed Oregon on Sunday because it was No. 1 in the six computers that consistently mess up what common sense dictates.
Oregon can get to work on its computer numbers as early as Thursday when it travels to 5-1 Arizona State.
Don't sweat this, Ducks; it will all work out as long as you keep quacking out victories.
When has the BCS ever failed?
Oklahoma is also not news, as the Sooners are the all-time leaders with 20 weeks spent at No. 1.
Conspicuously missing from the conversation, however, is the Big Ten Conference and USC.
The Big Ten added Nebraska last year thinking it would be an improvement, but the conference of "Leaders and Legends" has no teams ranked in the BCS top 25.
USC, considerably off the pace at No. 10, was this year's preseason No. 1 in the Associated Press poll.