Football Display Case
rundown of Michigan's riser
needs moar usage
so much for that
This list is completely arbitrary and not a genuine analysis of the relative merits of state fossils.
will be michigan's highest pick in a while
money has to go somewhere
I am only motivated by people who have no opinion about me.
the just released schedules were a flat-out statement that the B10 doesn't believe SOS will matter in playoff selection
but I thought that draft was supposed to be incredibly loaded?
If you're gonna go please be in the first round.
another delightful side effect of a 14 team conference
thoughtful piece from Jacobi on middle finger lady
SB Nation BlogPoll College Football Top 25 Rankings »
I may have gotten a little too excited about Johnny Football.
Aside from Texas and UCLA being super ovverranked, and TAMU being a little too highly ranked, this is probably the most accurate blog poll you have posted ever. Congratulations.
"The Blogpoll" BCS forecast:
BCS: 1 Oregon vs. 2 ND
Fiesta: 3 K-State vs. 4 Texas A&M
Sugar: 5 'Bama vs. 10 Clemson
Orange: 7 FSU vs. 23 Louisville
Rose: 11 Oklahoma vs. 15 Nebraska
Capital One: 6 Florida vs. 20 Wisconsin
Cotton: 8 LSU vs. 14 Texas
Outback: 13 UGA vs. 22 Michigan
Gator: 24 N'Western vs. SEC (Miss. State)
Class of '97: 4 Years -- 4 Four-loss seasons
Arizona State gets thrashed by usc and they move IN?
The swag is back.
Is part of Brian's irrational RR love. Now he can rank UA when they beat ASU.
BOOM - Tin foil hat-ed
But Brian has a very rational hatred of Todd Graham. The irrational RR love is so strong it has forced him to rank a .500 Arizona State team that has beaten absolutely no one? Wow, it's a worse diagnosis than I had presumed.
This stuck out to me the most too. USC, who hasn't beaten anyone of note, beats up on ASU at home, and that's enough to put ASU on the ballot. That's fucking weird.
...Arizona Wildcats, and got the two mixed. There's no other explanation.
Yeah, he has to be confusing the two. ASU is 5-5 and on a 4 game losing streak. They have no quality wins. But either way, how does 6-4 Arizona jump Michigan after beating Colorado when Michigan is 7-3 and just beat a ranked opponent?
I'd like to see Florida lower, after their punt block Hail Mary win over Louisiana-Lafayette, but the damn head to heads with A&M and LSU weigh against that, though not sure why A&M gets to jump Florida. (Additionally, how weird is it that Florida's conference schedule was done by the first weekend in November. Their last 3 games: LA-La, Jax St., FSU. Is there any further proof required that the SEC needs to go to a 9 game conference schedule?)
The head-to-head issue seems to indicate Georgia might deserve a bit of a bump given the win over Florida but the rest of their resume is so bad. Crossover wins against tire fires from Ole Miss and Auburn, an absolute woodshedding by South Carolina when they still had Lattimore, uncomfortably close wins against Tennessee and Kentucky. Their next best non-Florida win is ... Missouri? At least with Florida, you can point to a series of really good wins, even if they play every game close. Georgia's played literally two tough games and they got blown out in one of them.
Georgia is another team whose conference season is now done, playing Georgia Southern and Georgia Tech before the SEC Championship game. For those who complain about the lack of compelling Big 10 games in late September, conference seasons that end early and games against tomato cans in November are the counterarguments.
EDIT: After looking at the schedule, I can understand the case for downplaying the A&M-Florida head to head. I forgot that game was A&M's first of the season, after having their first postponed because of a hurricane.
Besides not making the Rose Bowl, I would not mind Michigan playing Georgia one bit in the Outback Bowl.
Ha! You have more Big Ten teams in there than B12 teams. I was trying to figure out how you had ND above KSU and that seems to explain it. There isn't really a case for KSU being behind Notre Dame except they aren't sexy. That's if we call the common opponent (OU) a wash. KSU was really only in danger once against ISU and even then, they were in control of the game. I would assume, though, a win over Texas would make them jump ND correct?
1. so, i can see lots of ways to make the argument that ND should be #2 (even #1 for that matter...all depends on what your criteria are), but i'm hard pressed to see how ND should be aheads of KSU this week, but behind them last week. hard to imagine that we got meaningful new data from ND beating (more soundly than the score suggests) a very bad team while KSU beat a pretty decent one. does this mean that you changed your mind or is there some hidden data that persuaded you?
2. is KSU (theoretically) beating Texas more impressive than ND (theoretically) beating USC? it seems to me that if you have ND ahead of KSU now and they both win out that its pretty hard to make the case that KSU should jump ND. I think that'd be true more or less regardless of margins of victory (see: Oklahoma woodsheding of Texas and both ND and KSU beating Oklahoma)
There is no argument for ND at #1 IMO. They have struggled to beat some mediocre to bad teams while Oregon has played in one game that was competitive much past halftime. If Oregon ran out their starters and actually tried for full games like ND has had to, they probably would have put up a 100 twice and like would be winning by 40 per.
I feel that the perception of Notre Dame and KSU are flip flopped. I think people think KSU just gets by on grit and defense when that is most certainly not the case. Switch KSU with Oklahoma and Oklahoma is likely #1 and is certainly #2 because of name. Let's just say BYU, Pitt and Purdue are the equivilent of Iowa State (which they aren't). ND has had all three of those games come down to the wire. KSU vs. ISU was a one possession game but outside of that single game, KSU has won games comfortably.
KSU has simply played better teams than ND has throughout the year and beaten them more decisively. Bill Snyder is a wizard. If a Big 12 team goes undefeated this year, they need to be in the National Championship over an undefeated ND. That should not be a question but it will be because, well, they're ND. If that's BYU with the same schedule, they're third. Of course, I'm strictly talking about this particular poll. The BCS has it right.
nd, has played by most measures, the toughest schedule of any of the unbeatens. ksu and oregon have beaten teams by bigger margins. that's what i meant by "depending on your criteria" nd could be ranked #1. if you prioritize who you beat over how much you beat them by, then nd would be #1. oregon's schedule has been very weak thus far, although that's going to change a bit the next couple weeks.
perhaps the reason that nd has struggled to beat some mediocre teams is because the floor of nd's schedule is much higher than the floor of the other unbeatens. if your defense takes two quarters off against pitt, you'll end up in a close game...if your defense takes two quarters off against arkansas st, you'll win by 4 tds instead of 6.
i honestly don't have a clue which of the three teams is best. and i hate hate hate these arguments because there is very little useful evidence to inform them.
here's one good measure of schedule strength: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei
KSU wins 23-10 on the road against a decent 6-4 TCU team, and ND wins on the road 21-6 against an awful 2-8 BC team....and that was any incentive at all for ND to jump KSU??
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
totally agree...ksu has to be ranked ahead of nd to this point. oregon is probably a fair #1 to this point, but even they have some serious warts on d. k-state is the most complete team so far, but yeah, they are not a sexy pick. i'd rank them #1 on my ballot, but can't quibble with oregon being #1 either.
The Catamounts are really bad too, but Bama is going to be in rage annihilation mode all game.
Is it time to re-think Alabama's vaulted rankings?
Texas at #14? Seriously? I'm guessing this was a tribute vote to the late Darrell Royal.
You have hereby lost your right to be critical of any sportswriter who voted Nebraska #1 back in 1997.
The only beef I have is with Florida, who is ranked way too high....and probably setting the passing game in football back 100 years. Knocking Georgia for having a bad schedule and getting waxed by South Carolina is ok, but you need to knock Florida's turnover luck this year. There's way too much "turnovers are random, don't buy into it" on this blog to have Florida ranked #6. I'm not even sure Florida is a top 10 team, let alone #6