Michigan #17 In First Coaches' Poll
![18AB8E19B2483668D36A39_Large[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/UV_B562/18AB8E19B2483668D36A39_Large1.jpg "18AB8E19B2483668D36A39_Large[1]")
THIS GUY SAYS MICHIGAN IS #17
And will remain there all year because coaches don't pay attention to football games other than their own. The whole thing, with opponents bolded:
- Alabama
- Ohio State
- Oregon
- Stanford
- Georgia
- Texas A&M
- South Carolina
- Clemson
- Louisville
- Florida
- Notre Dame
- Florida State
- LSU
- Oklahoma State
- Texas
- Oklahoma
-
Michigan
- Nebraska
- Boise State
- TCU
- UCLA
- Northwestern
- Wisconsin
- USC
- Oregon State
Michigan State is in also receiving votes at #27, and that's it for teams Michigan will face.
And as much as I think luck played a big role in them going undefeated last year, but is it just me or are they getting a bit unfairly punished for getting stomped by a 'Bama last year in a game where 'Bama had over a month to prepare for. I think any team gets destroyed in that game under those conditions.
This is probably the first and only time I'll ever say this, but with the way coaches tend to make these ranking (slight alterations from the end of the previous year), it actually seems like ND may be underrated...
That hurt to say.
If Golson was on the team they would have been higher.
But my personal opinion, while I don't think Reese is great by any means, he's about as good of a backup as there is to be thrown back in as a starter. I really don't think there was as big of a drop off from Golson to Reese as many made it seem, I think Golson just provided a little scrambling ability at the sacrifice of some decision making (not that Reese was perfect in that regard either), but the drop off isn't huge IMO.
the Irish. Can't trust 'em.
---Gordon Gee
Rees is capable of facilitating a game if their defense is playing well and *creating* turnovers. Golson would have been a good candidate to take a decent leap in production this season and doesn't seem as likely to shit the bed against us like he did early last season. With Rees, we pretty much know what we're gonna get.
I thought they were slightly over-rated last year and I think they are still slightly over-rated. I'm fine with where they are at right now, though, because I don't see them being much higher or lower at the end of the season. I think Michigan will be rated higher at the end of the season, but I'm fine with where they are at, as well, for the same reasons.
First let me say kudos to any team that goes undefeated - it takes a lot of skill, a high level of concentration, and a few breaks. Even mighty Alabama slipped last year and they were clearly the best team in the nation. I still shudder to think the championship game would have been two frauds in ND and OSU last year if not for tattoos. With that said I think ND is a bit fraudulent - great defense but they were not very different than an average Michigan team. If Denard had literally kneeled on every play in the 2nd quarter that game would have been decided in the closing moments. I dont think Michigan was better than ND, I just think they were close and both were exposed equally against a truly elite team - us early, ND late. Further, a very average USC team lost its QB the week before ND showed up and I wont even talk about Stanford. Again I say that with respect because it is rare that any team goes undefeated, but ND is to me MSU (top end defense) with a better playmaker at QB... or had a better one.
in my opinion are worthless. I don't think they should have polls until about week 4 or 5.
Polls are just a rank of teams based on opinion. Should opinions be banned until week 4 or 5 also? Get HTTV and read the section on predicting preformance.
The issue is that people do not easily change opinions even in the face of contrary data, but thats humans for you...
after 4 or 5 weeks, even with wrong opinions there's data points to use as argument ammo.
The thing about ranking teams week to week, the way we do, is that we rely on a set of believed probabilities that we've built from prior evidence. This is a Bayesian approach to statistics, in which evidential probabilities are continuously updated with new data. It's very good for lots of applications, but the one thing that really impacts the long-term functioning of such a process is the initial set of probabilities we feed into the system. Therefore, it's important that these initial probabilities - built from evidence - come close to capturing the true probabilities of reality.
I think a fair few people would argue that, in college football, the evidence we have in the preseason with wich to form a quality set of expectations is too scarce and too poor to accomplish such a feat. It's fine to form opinions, but remember that these opinions become reality, statistically, when our Bayesian machine is set in motion and grabs onto them.
An alternative to the current system would be to suspend the generation of expected probabilities for use in meaningful rankings until more data has been collected. Perhaps you postpone the release of rankings until three games have been played - then you have a greater volume of more applicable evidence with which to rank teams. If Notre Dame shits the bed in two of their first three because they actually suck, the teams that beat them early on don't get rocketed to the top of the BCS undeservedly. Similarly, if lower-tier SEC teams don't fare so well in their non-conference games, LSU and Georgia won't be given platinum medals for curb stomping them just because they're SEC teams.
As you pointed out, it would be impossible to prohibit conjecturing in the early weeks. But it would be nice if there was a designated point in the season when we take a retrospective look at some real data, get some context, and smooth out the noise to form a more perfect basis for mid and late-season rankings. Otherwise, it is as they say: "garbage in, garbage out."
Ditto.
They're not "just" an opinion. They're an opinion that heavily influences the season's final result.
It's been shown that a team's preseason ranking affects how it is ranked later in the season. For instance, think of all the voters who don't want to "jump" one team over another if they both won. Therefore, this preseason poll, which is really a barely educated guess, will have an impact on which teams go to which bowls.
I don't have any problem with people expressing their opinion, but I do think that if a poll wants to be included in the BCS rankings, they should be prohibited from official polling or publishing until, say, halfway through the season.
Agreed, and I think 3-4 weeks in is way too early because many of these teams nowadays (incl us) often play 2-3 "patsies" so you would have really often 1 "real" game to go on by week 4. Let it get 2-3 games into conference play before official polls are released, so about week 6. Because yes where you start does influence things unfortunately especially when there is one team that came from 17-25 at the start and another who started in the top 5. I am not sure if the influence of the polls wane a bit in the new playoff system - hope so.
The phrase "How much for a Lap Dance?" crosses my mind....
Because you're attracted to smarmy middle-aged men?
NTTAWWT
Alabama has to be number 1.
Who else was undefeated? OSU. Ok, put them 2.
Oregon is always top 4, who cares about coaching change, let's throw them at 3.
Stanford is a good story and has been consistent up there as well: 4.
Damn, we've gone three spots without an SEC team: former champ game loser, team that beat Bama, team that won bowl game in some kind of order.
Who has an offense that's electric and can put up a lot of points? Clemson, alright.
Louiville won a BCS bowl game last year over Florida, and we need another SEC school in the top 10, so lets put them in that order.
Oh yeah, ND, how could we forget (because we were thinking about the SEC)
FSU is required to be highly ranked too, and I think it's only fair to put another SEC team.
Big 12 has been underrated but no one really watches, so lets throw three teams in here, what the hell.
Oh crap, we forgot about the popular B1G teams, better start tossing them in here around now.
Boise St is top 25 despite always losing to a crappy team or two, so let's act like they're still better than a lot of the other teams.
And whatever, here are some teams I've heard of.
Well then. Let's just cancel the season.
2 seems like a stretch to me. Given their cream puff schedule once again, they have a decent chance to be undefeated headed in the big house. And actually, I hope they are - and then we shatter their title game dreams right in front of their dirty faces.
like picturing Ohio with dirty faces. Makes me think of:
Although this GIF is funnier:
So you're predicting they will go 11-1 in the regular season? Sounds like a top 5 team to me, since most voters don't adequately consider strength of schedule (except to put SEC teams at the top whenever possible).
You looked at their schedule?
Not many challenges there.
Only Wisconsin has an easier SOS than OSU in the BIG.
and I hope they stay there... Until November 30th.
Few things in this world would make me happier than to see them finish 11-1, with their lone loss coming in Ann Arbor and just missing out on the title game.
You are bringing back memories of #Cooperville
"I make plays, baby. Hey I make plays. That's all there is to it. They do the talking. I do the walking."
Ah yes, the preseason poll. The one where, "hey, didn't A&M have some really good player last year? He's definitely going to be better this year, so by default that team should also be good despite losses to the NFL" is the guiding principle.
OSU will not go undefeated, and definitely is not the #2 team in the country. Notre Dame played a tougher schedule and was undefeated last year, but they are clearly being hurt a bit by losing to Alabama the same way OSU would have. I thought they were overrated last year, but OSU is definitely getting the benefit of being "undefeated" without, you know, playing in a bowl game.
Coaches apparently ignore the fact that coaching changes as places like Wiscy and especially Oregon are just presumed to be seamless, despite ample evidence to the contrary. Would be surprised to see the Ducks take a dip, unless Kelly really is a fraud and anyone can run that offense.
Clemson, a team that created the team "Clemsoning" because of how they screw up a couple of games a year, is ahead of a couple of teams that should, in theory, be more conistent in Louisville and LSU.
I'm okay where UM is. Probably could be top-15, but minor quibble. Wiscy at 23 seems right, but it's a mediocre outfit that will live and die on James White becoming the feature back. Their WRs are solid, but whoever they have at QB probably isn't going to be above average, and that defense seems rather meh.
Will be interesting to see if Ohio, Oregon and Stanford are all undefeated heading into November if the voters would jump the winner of Oregon and Stanford over Ohio.
Getting through the MAC unscathed is nearly impossible and even if my Bobcats do it, they will still get snubbed out of the MNC game if two other teams go undefeated. It is a harsh reality for me..
True but Ohio could still make a BCS bowl game and thats plenty of prestige - #NorthernIllinois
Bert looks like he borrowed his shirt from Cosmo Kramer.
Nebraska's the only other Big Ten team that plays a top 25 team in the non-conference schedule (they play UCLA). Exciting stuff.
Breakdown by Conference:
| Conference | # |
|---|---|
| SEC | 6 |
| B1G | 5 |
| Pac12 | 5 |
| Big 12 | 4 |
| ACC | 2 |
| Ind | 1 |
| MWC | 1 |
| BE | 1 |
Prediction: When Michigan defeats Notre Dame this season, those teams will switch positions in the coaches poll. Michigan moves to #11, ND drops to #17.
Michigan was ranked 14th in the Preseason poll for 1997. I think we did alright that year.
think positive, bold Wisconsin.
As meaningless as preseason polls are I love them because, football. As far as personal opinions on the matter, I agree with many posters
- Ohio State is probably overrated at #2, despite their weak schedule. They will almost 100% guaranteed not go undefeated again (considering it's only happened 6 times in their history, or something similar)
- I will be surprised if Michigan ends the season lower than 17th, seems to me we should be in the mix for top 12.
- Louisville may go undefeated this year, their schedule is insanely easy.
- Coaching change at Oregon and they're still 3rd? They'll probably fall
- Texas isn't very good right now, not sure why they're 15th. Would've eased them in at a lower ranking (~19)
- Oklahoma State and TCU are questionable to me
- Northwestern may be underranked a tad
football is finally here! ohio will lose more than 1 game this year.
I will agree to your terms, preseason coaches' poll. However I reserve the right to snicker at that school on Olentangy River Road and their shiny top-5 ranking.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
This was the second game I ever attended at Michigan Stadium (only behind the 1991 Northwestern game). Good times, although I remember being frustrated that we weren't winning by more (as the video shows, there were several near-misses on Michigan touchdowns). Glad to see it on the interwebs.
Comments