Wait. Northwesten plays 3 of the worst teams in college football, beats all three (although they snuck by DUKE) and they are a top 25 team? I get the whole Big Ten love thing, but MSU or Iowa would have been better choices. My two cents, unsolicited.
Blogpoll Ballot Week 2 (Draft)
Carnage in the Pac ten rips three schools from well up the poll to out of it, but ASU’s got a couple wins over meh teams and a loss to UNLV, Cal got housed by a team that lost to MTSU, and UCLA lost 59-0.
Major jumps for:
- USF, for beating a legit opponent
- Wisconsin, for doing so on the road whilst getting hosed by the refs
- Florida for no apparent reason
- BYU for hosing UCLA
- Utah and Wake Forest for no apparent reason.
Descents were mostly for obvious reasons: playing bad against bad teams like South Carolina or Mississippi State. I think I should have dinged ECU, maybe, and will do so in a revised ballot.
MSU lost to Cal. There's no way they belong anywhere near this poll. Iowa didn't exactly look good in a home game against a bad Iowa State team either. They were outgained, the game was tied going to the 4th, and one of those TDs was a punt return. Not terribly impressive. Their other two games were a 1-AA team that went 4-7 last year and FIU, who is perenially the worst team in 1-A and was a bad 1-AA team before they moved up (and they haven't improved much if at all).
That said, Northwestern nearly lost to Duke again this year (outgained, and a winning TD wiped out by a holding penalty late in the game), so I'm not sure they belong either. I should note that Southern Illinois was at least a 1-AA playoff team last year and lost in the semis to Delaware, though the coach, QB and running back from that team are all gone. Still, they're probably better than FIU and Maine. And are we really convinced that Duke isn't better than Iowa State? Duke's QB is pretty good. And Northwestern won @Duke. Iowa played ISU in Iowa City.
Still, I'd probably put Vandy, Nebraska, or TCU into the poll ahead of Northwestern and Iowa at the moment based on what we've seen so far.
Agreed--Northwestern has not earned its way into the ballot. East Carolina should be penalized for their close win--if any other top 10 team bearly snuck by Tulane, they would surely be lowered. I know the loss was ugly, but Ohio State at 19? Really? Would they really lose to BYU, Wake Forest, Utah, or Oregon on a neutral field? Is this assuming that Beanie will struggle with injuries all year? I'd still have them hovering around the top 10. USC would destroy a lot of teams.
Ok, I'm biased, being a Tulane grad and all. Yes, we currently sit
0-2, but I'd like to point out that we really outplayed Alabama on the
road with special teams costing us the game and played ECU fairly
evenly at home, we're not necessarily as bad a team as has been implied
in this thread.
I don't think you'll find any Tulane fans that think Alabama is better
than ECU. Is #6 a bit high? Possibly, but I can't say positively that
any team Brian's ranked 7 and lower is any better, and certainly nobody
has a better resume than ECU outside of USC.
FWIW, I don't think ECU will make it through the season unscathed.
They just lost their all americnan line backer for the season.
If idea is that each team would beat the team ranked directly below it and lose to the team ranked directly above in a game played on a neutral field, then I see some problems here. For example, I'm reasonably certain that OSU is still the best team in the Big Ten. USC is just that good. There are about 9 future first day draft picks on that roster, including a linebacker who could go first overall. The Pac 10 may be top heavy, but that USC team beats anyone by three scores at home.
I am also confident that teams like ECU, BYU, etc would probably lose to legitimate powers like LSU and Auburn, maybe even Illinois-level teams. Probably ahead of the curve with bring Clemson/WVU back into play, as both are likely to put forth respectable years.
That being said, the top five looks perfect, and kudos for noticing Northwestern. After sweeping their non-cons, the Wildcats could easily come away with 7 or 8 wins.
I said it before the season -- if Northwestern doesn't start at least 7-2 they should be disappointed. They miss Penn State and Wisconsin, their road games in their first 9 were Duke, Iowa, Indiana and Minnesota and they have Purdue and MSU in Evanston. Their key players (Bacher and Sutton, Gill on the d-line) are all seniors. They really ought to be able to go 7-2 against that schedule, and it won't be all that surprising if they go to Iowa City, win, and end up in the AP poll at 5-0.
I'm still not sure I'd put them in the Top 25 yet - they really did just barely beat Duke. They're still a better candidate to me than any of the other Big Ten unbeatens that aren't in the poll already though.
Why did Penn State drop, Funky? They beat Syracuse 55-13, and they drop a spot? I know they haven't played anyone good, but they're beating bad teams by 30+ points, which seems more impressive than what Wisconsin's done.
Wisconsin went on the road and beat a team that was supposed to be a "BCS buster", and did it despite some atrocious officiating. PSU stayed at home and beat up on cupcakes. If going purely by resume, Wisconsin is clearly in front.
Penn St. beat Syracuse in the Carrier dome. And "clearly" is a wild overstatement; Wisconsin won by 3 and was outgained by Fresno St. Fresno St. is okay, but their "resume padding" win over Rutgers looks less impressive after Rutgers got absolutely destroyed by UNC.
I am sure that Brian does not honestly believe that these teams are currently ordered correctly based on the team's quality. He is trying to be logically consistent, so that certain teams are not overranked based on future expectations/ how good they are thought to actually be.
If Ohio State finishes out the season and wins the Big Ten as most or atleast some expect, they will EVENTUALLY be ranked accordingly. After all, the rankings at the end of the season are what really matter, and they will reflect what each team actually accomplished.
This is a method of removing inefficiences in ranking teams. I don't get overly mad when ECU is ranked this high. They are not likely to finsh this high. They do not have a marquee game the rest of the year so they are unlikely to rise, but if they struggle with a few mediocre teams and are still undefeated, I am sure by the resume ranknig logic, they will finsh somewhere in the 6-15 or so range and maybe grab an at-large bid, which they will deserve if they dont lose, beating VT and WVU.
I'll buy that it is logically consistent, but it seems silly to me to ride the fence between resume ranking logic and the traditional poll logic (which I suppose is just guessing).
Really, I see three forms:
1) Resume Ranking: self-explanitory
2) Informed guessing: making a list such that Team 1 will beat Teams 2-25 head-to-head.
3) Extrapolation guessing: Trying to figure out which teams will have the most favorable record at the end of the season considering their future opponents (i.e. BYU's got a shot to lose zero)
As far as ECU, even if they have a few squeakers, I think it will be hard to move them down if BCS confrence teams above them continue to lose. Granted the odds that ECU, BYU, et al finish undefeated is pretty slim, but I wouldn't be surprised to see an at large big against Wake Forrest or Clemson or somebody swooped up. If you'll pardon the cliche reference: Boise State.
week 3? no?
I probably wouldn't have dinged osu quite so much, and west virginia is too high.
You could have left 25 blank and say that Mangino is so huge, Kansas takes up both #24 and 25.
I agree there really isn't a great candidate for 25 -- the undefeated teams not already in the poll have played no one and/or didn't really look that good, and the other 1-loss teams have mostly lost to teams that aren't in the poll either.