offer coming in a month, most likely
Blogpoll Draft Ballot: Week 1
Filed under:
MGoBlog Ballot - Week 2
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Boise St. Broncos |
 4 |
| 2 | Ohio St. Buckeyes |
 -1 |
| 3 | Alabama Crimson Tide |
1 |
| 4 | TCU Horned Frogs |
7 |
| 5 | Oregon Ducks |
3 |
| 6 | Texas Longhorns | -- |
| 7 | Miami Hurricanes |
3 |
| 8 | Iowa Hawkeyes |
-1 |
| 9 | Wisconsin Badgers |
6 |
| 10 | Oklahoma Sooners |
-8 |
| 11 | Nebraska Cornhuskers |
1 |
| 12 | Florida St. Seminoles |
2 |
| 13 | Virginia Tech Hokies |
-4 |
| 14 | LSU Tigers | -- |
| 15 | Florida Gators |
-12 |
| 16 | Utah Utes | -- |
| 17 | Oregon St. Beavers |
3 |
| 18 | Penn St. Nittany Lions |
6 |
| 19 | Arizona Wildcats |
3 |
| 20 | North Carolina Tar Heels |
-3 |
| 21 | Notre Dame Fighting Irish | -- |
| 22 | Pittsburgh Panthers |
-4 |
| 23 | Northwestern Wildcats | -- |
| 24 | Clemson Tigers | -- |
| 25 | Michigan Wolverines | -- |
| Dropouts: Auburn Tigers, Georgia Bulldogs, Stanford Cardinal, Washington Huskies, Connecticut Huskies, West Virginia Mountaineers | ||
SB Nation BlogPoll College Football Top 25 Rankings »
Comments:
- Yes, Boise #1. They beat a good BCS-conference team in a virtual road game.
- I might be dinging Oklahoma a bit too much. Utah State could out together a Idaho-like run this year, and actually be a decent win by the end of the year. On the other hand, typically high-flying Oklahoma beat them by single digits at home.
- Should I move Texas down a little bit?
- I'm totally fine moving Florida down that much. They didn't crack triple digits in total yardage until well into the second half. And this came at home against a crap Miami (NTM) team.
- I considered leaving Michigan off my ballot so as to not tempt the CK award, but they were one of the few teams to curbstomp BCS-conference competition (and the Huskies were being talked about as a Big East Title contender before Saturday).
- Everything else looks OK to me. Let me know where I've gone horribly wrong.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:04 AM | 
Penn State
Penn State
September 7th, 2010 at 9:05 AM |
Don't tempt Coulter
Don't tempt Coulter
Wait until after this weekend to see if Michigan belongs there or not. Texas could probably drop another two places comfortably. Penn State might have jumped a bit too much as well. They were up by 6 at the half to YSU and didn't really look all that impressive.
"I figure if I can get two degrees from Ohio State, it might be close to Elliott’s undergraduate degree" -- Brock
September 7th, 2010 at 9:32 AM |
agree
agree
there is the whole Coulter-Krugman thing, but also the feeling we've been down this road before. Sure, it's different now with more experienced QB's, OL, etc, but it's also just the first week. Is UConn who we thought they were? Is Michigan, for that matter? I co-sign the wait-and-see approach, at least until after ND. U-M wins that one and we have a few very winnable games (although Tandon Doss still scares the daylights out of me) before they're tested again (MSU in AA).
For my privacy, my new username is "non-Oriental non-Andrew"
September 7th, 2010 at 10:51 AM |
Is anybody who we thought
Is anybody who we thought
Is anybody who we thought they were? All we have is one week of evidence, for Michigan or anyone else.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:37 AM |
I really doubt Coulter is in
I really doubt Coulter is in
I really doubt Coulter is in play at 25, since that is only worth one point and I'm pretty sure the winners were always more than one point above the poll average. And that's only if Michigan gets no other votes. I'm guessing Michigan will be top ten or close on the ballots of all the resume rankers since a win over a probably-bowl-bound BCS team is one of the more impressive wins of the first weekend.
September 7th, 2010 at 5:42 PM |
man
man
I don't even want Michigan to be on CK's radar! ;)
For my privacy, my new username is "non-Oriental non-Andrew"
September 7th, 2010 at 10:01 AM |
Tempting CK is always a bit
Tempting CK is always a bit
Tempting CK is always a bit dicey and there is the 'we have been down this road before'. That being said, I think placing us at 25 though is fair from a resume perspective. After all, one might argue that it's too low given that you ranked ND above us when they 'only' beat Purdue, who I think would have been predicted to lose to U Conn before this weekend. I wouldn't advocate moving us just because of the ND comparison though.
'M-Burns', I'll never have better facial hair than this...
September 7th, 2010 at 9:06 AM |
top 25
top 25
Poll looks pretty complete to me, I give Boise St a definite #1 nod. They continue to prve again and again why they are one of the nations top teams year in year out. I wouldve moved UofM up higher (at least ahead of the Irish), they beat the shit out've a decent if not good team. Also God knows I'm buyest...Go Blue
Those who stay will be Champions...Go Blue Forever
September 7th, 2010 at 9:13 AM |
Perhaps you are biased?
Perhaps you are biased?
Perhaps you are biased?
September 7th, 2010 at 10:01 AM |
Obviously he meant he is the
Obviously he meant he is the
Obviously he meant he is the most buy. He has all the merchandise guys!
September 7th, 2010 at 9:19 AM |
This was not a strong first
This was not a strong first
This was not a strong first post.
I'm a cucumber. | Twitter
September 7th, 2010 at 9:26 AM |
Coulda been worse!
Coulda been worse!
It could have been "bi-assed".
"This is the EMU game, not the emo game."
September 7th, 2010 at 9:06 AM |
I disagree with Boise at #1.
I disagree with Boise at #1.
I disagree with Boise at #1. Both VaTech and Boise were sloppy, both teams also went to sleep for periods of time. Boise walked out of there with the win because it goofed up slightly less than VaTech. VaTech's WRs were getting behind the Boise DBs and getting open, the only thing that saved Boise was that VaTech's WRs kept dropping passes or having them bounce off their fingertips.
It's hard to argue who should be #1 given that a lot of teams played cupcakes this weekend, but I'm not to sure about jumping Boise 4 places from that game alone.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:31 AM |
True. I saw Boise St. beat an
True. I saw Boise St. beat an
True. I saw Boise St. beat an ACC team that wasn't all that good and definitely waaaay overrated. Boise St. certainly didn't look like even a top ten team to me let alone #1. To my mind the number one team should have dominated a team that played as badly as VTech.
There are no corners in space.
September 8th, 2010 at 4:35 AM |
Has anybody other than BSU
Has anybody other than BSU
Has anybody other than BSU beaten a top ten team? Both teams were pretty sloppy, but when the pressure was on, Moore made things look almost too easy. BSU is legit, and nobody else has really shown anything against anybody decent. Ironically, the people who complain about BSU's schedule overlook the fact that so far BSU has the most meaningful victory so far.
Let's be honest. Even if BSU was to go undefeated in a Big Ten schedule, there are still those who would just assume that the Big Ten must be overrated that year. At some point BSU is going to have to get credit for continuing to win, including games against top teams.
"People who love sausage and respect the law should never watch either being made."
September 7th, 2010 at 9:11 AM |
Looks okay
Looks okay
But PSU needs to hold steady or even take a hit. Yes, they ended up with a huge win, but it took them WAY too long to get going against YSU. They should've been up 14 inside of the first quarter.
Also, I don't know that I would move Boise above OSU just yet. OSU resoundingly won a game they should have won resoundingly. Boise won a game that was probably a toss-up statistically, and they barely won. At times they were dominant, and at times dominated. I would keep OSU at #1. We'll find out if they REALLY deserve it this weekend against Jacory Harris. Why shuffle them more than you have to?
"This is the EMU game, not the emo game."
September 7th, 2010 at 10:55 AM |
Why shuffle them more
Why shuffle them more
Why shuffle them more than you have to?
...because now there's actual evidence on the field of how good the teams are?
September 7th, 2010 at 9:12 AM |
If Boise is #1...
If Boise is #1...
...then Va. Tech can't be all the way down at #13. Those were two evenly matched teams. And had the Hokies not imploded in the 1st quarter they likely win the game.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:26 AM |
This is an excellent point.
This is an excellent point.
This is an excellent point. Boise barely squeaked past VT on the strength of VT having a terrible first quarter and then a few friendly calls at the end of the game. The teams are evenly matched and should be closer together; if Boise moves up that much, it's hardly fair to move VT down. That being said, VT did not look like a top ten team.
September 7th, 2010 at 11:20 AM |
At some point, after BSU has
At some point, after BSU has
At some point, after BSU has that sort of first quarter against every heavy hitter that they play, does it not become a credit to BSU instead of a demerit to the heavy hitter? We have seen this play out not a few times now.
September 7th, 2010 at 12:54 PM |
What other games are you
What other games are you
What other games are you referencing? I can't think of any, but my knowledge of BSU's games is far from encyclopedic. I'm more irritated with the officiating in that game. BSU was gifted a first down on a blown roughing the kicker call (on the same play that there was a blatant holder by the personal protector), and then gifted several more calls that allowed them to make a go-ahead score. The fact that these things were necessary to beat a VT team that is clearly not an elite team seems like a pretty damning statement.
September 7th, 2010 at 1:32 PM |
These are the end-1st (or
These are the end-1st (or
These are the end-1st (or end-2nd, *) scores for all BSU games vs major (as I handwave-ly determine major) going back to 2005-2006 season.
Oregon..................2009-2010.....13-0...BSU.....W TCU.....................2009-2010.....10-0...BSU.....W Oregon..................2008-2009.....24-6*..BSU....W TCU.....................2008-2009.....10-0...BSU.....L Washington..............2007-2008.....14-0...UW......L Oregon State............2007-2008.....28-14*.BSU...W Oklahoma................2006-2007.....14-7...BSU.....W (also 21-10 *) Georgia.................2005-2006.....24-0...UGA.....L Oregon State............2005-2006.....14-0...BSU.....W Boston College..........2005-2006.....24-0...BC......L (after furious BSU comeback)
There's a pretty solid pattern there.
As for complaining about the officiating in that game, you can shove that one. Both teams got jobbed on a regular basis.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:27 AM |
agree with this line of thinking
agree with this line of thinking
If a team takes the potential #1 team in the nation down to the wire, you could even argue that they are the near equal of that team. Granted, the "neutral field" in MD was close to a home game for VT, so you have to give BSU a couple of points there, but if BSU is #1, I don't think VT moves.
For my privacy, my new username is "non-Oriental non-Andrew"
September 7th, 2010 at 10:57 AM |
Evenly matched or not, one
Evenly matched or not, one
Evenly matched or not, one team won, and the other lost. There are plenty of teams that haven't suffered the indignity of losing yet. This is a resume poll, not a power ranking, and the Hokies are still the top team in the poll with a loss.
September 7th, 2010 at 11:14 AM |
If this is resume-based
If this is resume-based
Why not put Fresno State in after dominating a (supposedly) decent BCS team in Cincy.
September 7th, 2010 at 11:51 AM |
If this is a true resume
If this is a true resume
If this is a true resume poll, Michigan should be higher than half those teams. Not that I think they have any business being that high, but as it stands now their resume is stronger than essentially everyone who played the usual opening mid-major and FCS tomato cans.
September 7th, 2010 at 12:41 PM |
This sure doesn't look like a
This sure doesn't look like a
This sure doesn't look like a resume poll... Florida and LSU certainly didn't have more impressive wins than we did.
Galileo was also chastised.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:16 AM |
A few thoughts
A few thoughts
I think you're being a little too friendly to TCU - I'd give them a +3 or 4 rather than 7. I like the fact that you'll actually ding Florida for playing like ass. I also think you're being too kind to LSU. They almost choked away a game to a squad that was missing half it's defensive starters. At the most I'd put them at 17. Also, Oregon State is borderline. I'd say move them a little lower until we know for sure exactly how their QB is going pan out - we'll know much more in a couple weeks when they play Boise.
And Northwestern, yeah, they beat Vandy but I don't think that's enough to get them into the top 25. Major props for dropping Florida though, I watched that game and was very, very unimpressed with them.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:25 AM |
I'm okay with Boise State
I'm okay with Boise State
I'm okay with Boise State being number one for now because they beat the best team of anyone in the top 25, but I hope you will drop them as they get into their WAC schedule and start beating piss poor teams. Will you put Miami or Florida State above Boise State next week if they beat either Ohio State or Oklahoma, respectively? Because that is essentially what you are doing here by moving Boise State up 4 spots for beating your ninth ranked team.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:10 AM |
Me too
Me too
I too think it's fine to put Boise #1 for two weeks (they don't play this week). After that, you'll have some basis for evaluation. Their next game is @Wyoming, who will have played @Texas the week before. So if one watches both games (Wyoming-Texas; BSU-Wyoming), one might have an idea of where to put them. Then Oregon State goes into Boise, so that will help as well.
I predict they get through their early schedule, but lose one of their last three games, against Fresno State, @Nevada, and Utah State.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:58 AM |
Depending on how they perform
Depending on how they perform
Depending on how they perform against the rest of their schedule (i.e. if they beat every WAC team by 50 points, they'll stay up there), I'd say it's likely they'll eventually move down.
September 7th, 2010 at 12:27 PM |
Sounds fair enough to me. As
Sounds fair enough to me. As
Sounds fair enough to me. As long as you are willing to move them down if they don't perform as they should, then I'm fine with you ranking them number one this week. Good work.
September 7th, 2010 at 2:16 PM |
Much respect for this Tim
Much respect for this Tim
Much respect for this Tim. Putting Boise State at the top is the right thing to do because no one higher than them played anyone decent.
If an undefeated BSU team scrapes by Fresno State the same week say an undefeated Alabama team has a convincing win against a strong SEC team I bet Alabama will pass them. It's got to work both ways.
What gets me is that the coaches won't move give BSU much credit now but they will penalize them later when lowere ranked teams have good wins.
T
September 7th, 2010 at 9:32 AM |
My beefs
My beefs
Yes Florida was slow out of the gate, but they got it together and should probably be more like 11 or 12. LSU is not that good. They barely squeaked by a decimated (and perhaps over-rated to begin with) UNC team at home. I wouldn't have moved them down but I certainly would not have moved them up that much.
And get Notre Lame the hell out of there. They didn't show much against a weak Purdue team with an over-rated QB (purely based on his 5-star recruiting rank). They are not that good and will struggle a whole bunch this year. This coming weekend might get ugly for them.
Journal Entry - Day 782 of living amongst inbreds - Actually heard this today, "I don't see what the big deal is. All he was doin' was protectin' the players. What's wrong with that?"
September 7th, 2010 at 9:41 AM |
I think having Michigan at 25
I think having Michigan at 25
I think having Michigan at 25 is reasonable for the reasons you stated. And, the homerism is somewhat tempered by the fact that the next team in the "Others receiving votes" section of the poll is the Dixie State Rebels, who, by the way, lost to Central Washington. So, clearly homerism is alive and well in the poll and far more blatant elsewhere.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:43 AM |
Michigan
Michigan
UConn and Notre Dame were seen as about equal by both the coaches and AP in the week 1 polls, and said curbstomping certainly was more impressive than Northwestern's win over Vanderbilt. You could argue UM up to around 21 at this point.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:47 AM |
Oregon
Oregon
Oregon should be over TCU and Northwestern shouldn't even sniff the top 25. I think someone like S. Carolina should be in over them. The rest I can live with.
Like a blind man at an orgy, I was going to have to feel my way through
September 7th, 2010 at 9:49 AM |
I don't believe in Beano Cook's old axiom...
I don't believe in Beano Cook's old axiom...
...that #1 remains #1 until beaten. I am perfectly willing to downgrade a #1 if they win unimpressively. However, I think Ohio State did everything you could have expected of them, in beating Marshall 45–7. Therefore, if they were your #1 last week, they should still be your #1.
Beyond that, I am fairly confident that the Buckeyes would be favored over Boise State on a neutral field.
Marc Shepherd
New York, NY
September 7th, 2010 at 11:14 AM |
Beating VT on the road >
Beating VT on the road >
Beating VT on the road > Beating Marshall at home, even given the difference in scores.
September 7th, 2010 at 12:00 PM |
Tim
Tim
Don't you feel Boise was spotted 17 points and still had to hang on for the W, though? I thought the game was sloppy on both sides, FWIW. Just curious...
"You are the Mike Tolbert of my life."
September 7th, 2010 at 12:18 PM |
Don't you find it a tad bit
Don't you find it a tad bit
Don't you find it a tad bit curious that somehow Boise State is spotted a pile of 1st quarter points against literally every tough opponent? Might this be a function of BSU as much as any given opponent?
September 7th, 2010 at 1:33 PM |
It's a function of their coach
It's a function of their coach
God help them when Petersen goes to the Pac 12.
September 7th, 2010 at 9:55 AM |
I am already tired of Boise State
I am already tired of Boise State
Virginia Tech is not a great team. Tyrod Taylor is not a great QB but hung 30 on them.
If you look to those who know (Vegas), Boise would be a dog against half of your top 20 which means they are not a #1 team. Top 10 is fine.
VT will end the season with 4 losses.
"Deserve to Win!"
September 7th, 2010 at 10:20 AM |
They would be dog and
They would be dog and
They would be dog and probably cover if not win outright. Ask Jamie Mac about betting on Boise State as an underdog.
September 7th, 2010 at 10:23 AM |
Give due credit to both
Give due credit to both
Virginia Tech is a perennial Top-25 team, and Tyrod Taylor is a better QB than most of those Michigan will face this year.
You can knock Boise State's schedule all you want, but when they have faced opponents from BCS leagues, they have generally won, and they have always been at least competitive. I wouldn't put them at #1 either, but they are a very good team.
Marc Shepherd
New York, NY
September 7th, 2010 at 10:36 AM |
Boise St. is a god team, but
Boise St. is a god team, but
Boise St. is a god team, but very large number of teams that will end up unranked at the end of the year "generally" beat opponents from BCS leagues.
There are no corners in space.
September 7th, 2010 at 11:16 AM |
They haven't yet though.
They haven't yet though.
They haven't yet though. Boise's resume is better than those guys for now. I'm not projecting the final poll, I'm going on what we've seen so far.
September 7th, 2010 at 12:51 PM |
You can knock Boise State's
You can knock Boise State's
You can knock Boise State's schedule all you want, but when they have faced opponents from BCS leagues, they have generally won
False. BSU is 7-11 in the past 10 years against BCS conference teams. They've only got a winning record against the Big XII (2 wins - Iowa State and Oklahoma). BSU is a good team, but they're not an elite team. They're Oregon or Wisconsin or Georgia: good, but not great.
September 7th, 2010 at 2:03 PM |
Oh, please
Oh, please
They are 50-4 in four years under Chris Petersen, which is all that matters in ranking this team. The four losses are:
- 2007 @Washington
- 2007 @Hawai'i (unbeaten until Sugar Bowl loss to Georgia)
- 2007 East Carolina (bowl)
- 2008 TCU (bowl)
That's one loss to a "BCS conference" team. Petersen is 5-1 against them (wins over Oregon State, Oklahoma, @Oregon, Oregon, and now Virginia Tech).
September 7th, 2010 at 2:14 PM |
God only knows what relevance
God only knows what relevance
God only knows what relevance that ten-year statistic has for a team that has been D1A for fifteen!
Royster had like 40 yards against a 1-AA team. If they can't run the ball, it's going to be ugly with Bolden.