Michigan Would Be Too High In The Coaches Poll But Apparently Isn't Comment Count

Brian

The meaningless expectations of SIDs picking team names at random as long as they're from the SEC has landed. The top ten:

  1. LSU
  2. Alabama
  3. USC
  4. Oklahoma
  5. Oregon
  6. Georgia
  7. Florida State
  8. Michigan
  9. South Carolina
  10. Arkansas

Wisconsin is 12, MSU 13, Nebraska 16. ND is 24. Ohio State is ineligible due to bowl ban. So is Penn State but… yeah, probably not relevant there.

I'd say Michigan is too high but Arkansas. Seriously: Arkansas. The team coached by a raving duck-man is tenth. So I guess we're good. It doesn't take long for expectations to rebound to the usual when you are a college football blue-blood.

BONUS DISPUTE: VT is heinously under-ranked at 20. Logan Thomas is going to blow up this year. They crushed #8 Michigan everywhere but the scoreboard in the Sugar Bowl, and IIRC their defense was flush with sophomores last year. They have to replace almost everyone other than Thomas on O, but it won't matter that much early.

Comments

M-Wolverine

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:47 PM ^

Look, it wasn't pretty, but that's what happens when two defensive teams play each other.  I think VT was underrated by a lot of people because of two bad match up games with Clemson.  They're well coached and talented. Elite last year? No. But a good football team, particularly defensively.  Especially with a month to prepare. 

It's not like that wasn't our M.O. all year.  Let people move the ball up and down on us, but keep them to FGs and out of the endzone.  We're not talented enough to be a shut down defense yet. It'll come. 

And the offense goes how Denard goes. When he's on, we're a machine. When he's not, it's ugly. I expect more of the former than the latter as a senior in his second year in the system. How we do this year is going to rest on his shoulders a whole lot.

WolverBean

August 2nd, 2012 at 12:54 PM ^

And the annual tradition of overrating FSU pre-season continues...

[Edit] Wow, 3 of the first 4 comments are about exactly this. Very impressive, MGoHiveMind.

GoWings2008

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:04 PM ^

I imagine the coaches poll came out before their three yr starter and special teams player, CB Greg Reid was dismissed from the team. 

"Last month, Reid told police he had no knowledge of the marijuana found in his car."

Uhhh huh.

turtleboy

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:32 PM ^

Plus we rushed 35-40 times that game and got nowhere, because half the runs were designed Drob runs which aren't nearly as effective as zone reads, and the other half of the carries were by Smith and Gardener. Fitz had maybe 2 touches all game.

turtleboy

August 2nd, 2012 at 3:41 PM ^

Their defense was good, but our passing numbers were better than theirs, and we had equal first downs, but +6 on MSU penalties, lol, and roughly equal rushing attempts, we just didn't rush effectively, and they didn't let Denard play to his strengths in that game. If Fitz had the bulk of the touches we would've managed more than 82 positive yards. The 2 qb's on (poorly) designed runs managed -64 yards to +91 for a net of +27 yards on 24 carries, where Smith managed +42 and only -5 on 8 carries. If they had Fitz running like he did against Illinois, Nebraskas, and Ohios great defenses and Denard running on read options instead we would've had a lot more positive yardage, more 3rd downs, more clock, and a win.

mackbru

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:01 PM ^

M is too high. Given their brutal road schedule, I'd put them in the 12-15 range. But I guess we're back to the point at which M perennially gets too much benefit of the doubt. So that's progress!

corundum

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:14 PM ^

I agree that 8 might be a tad high, but you can't rank based on strength of schedule. Even though we might lose 2 or 3 games to tough opponents, it doesn't mean we aren't one of the ten best teams in the country IMO. That ranking certainly seems justified for a team coming off an 11-2 season, a BCS bowl victory, and also returns most of the offense including heisman candidate Denard.

reshp1

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^

I think we're in the mid teens. We're a hard team to rank honestly, like you said 11-2 and BCS victory but a lot of little things could've gone differently and we could've been 9-4 or worse. Yeah, we get Denard back for a second year in the same system, but his security blanket, Hemingway, is gone and the no one in the reciever corp has really proven themselves. Same goes for D-line, there are a lot of question marks.

 

MaizedOUTinoh

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:58 PM ^

But as you stated things could've gone different. Touchdown overturned, dropped td pass by Vincent Smith, a clear pass interference. All inside the 10 against Iowa. Had a chance late against state but Borges got a little goofy with play calling. Easily could've been 13-0 as well as 9-4. I'll take 11-2.

BlueinOK

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:04 PM ^

Sometimes I wonder what the people think when they vote on this. Well I might as well put Florida St. in there, maybe they will finally stick. Bowden is still coaching, right?

msoccer10

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:29 PM ^

FSU has had some pretty good recruiting classes. I think most analysts keep thinking that talent has to show it self on the field sometime even if the coaching isn't great.

According to Rivals, FSU's recruiting class ranking

2012-6th

2011-2nd

2010-10th

2009-7th

2008-9th.

Just FYI,

Alabama 12'-1st, 11'-1st, 10'-5th, 09'-1st, 08'-1st. Holy hell they will have a serious talent advantage over anyone this year and for years to come.

OSU 12'-4th, 11'-11th, 10'-25th, 09'-3rd, 08'-4th

Michigan 12'-7th, 11'-21st, 10'-20th, 09'-8th, 08'-10th.  

msoccer10

August 2nd, 2012 at 3:07 PM ^

Their recruiting was better in the early 2000's I think, but they have done well. They actually had the #1 class(signed in February 2010) the same year they had sanctions levied (June 2010) and the #4 class the next year. High school kids apparently don't care too much about sanctions that only effect the team for a couple years. The NCAA should take notice and make sanctions last at least 4 years if they want to hurt major programs from a recruiting standpoint.

USC 2012-8th,

11'-4th

10'-1st

09'-4th

08'-8th

corundum

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:18 PM ^

I was just going to say, despite the board's negative consensus on FSU, who I think might actually be a pretty good team with a proven senior QB in E.J. Manuel, not many people are ragging on Georgia who might even be more overrated than FSU.

turtleboy

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:23 PM ^

Oklahoma definitely deserves to be up there, not because they're the best team, but because the big 12 is weaker than the Big East now, lol. They could accidentally go undefeated this year, foreal.

turtleboy

August 2nd, 2012 at 4:13 PM ^

I was being sarcastic, but I didn't think I'd have to spell it out... Oklahoma and Texas have virtually no competition in the Big12 now. They replaced Nebraska with TCU, Nebraska>>>TCU, they replaced A&M with West Virginia, A&M>>> WVU, and they replaced Mizzou and Colorado with nobody. 

Needs

August 2nd, 2012 at 4:27 PM ^

Over the past decade, the A&M - West Virginia comparison would have to go decidedly in West Virginia's direction. A&M hadn't won the Big 12 since 1998, which is also the last time they went to a BCS bowl. West Virginia, by comparison, has three BCS appearances since 2005 (all of which they've won). Now, of course, you're talking about significantly different competition over that time as well as WVU's best decade in its history, but A&M has failed to leverage the talent advantage it enjoys in Texas to its benefit for quite a while now, while WVU's figured out a particular niche of high octane offense and a strong home field advantage. They'll be competitive for the Big 12 title in their good years (or when OU or UT are down).

The other factor in the Big 12 is Boone Pickens' funding of an enormous facilities upgrade at OSU may turn them into a perpetual contendor. OU and UT will usually be favored, but "virtually no competition" is a vast exaggeration. 

turtleboy

August 2nd, 2012 at 4:57 PM ^

Honestly I think TCU will have more success in the Big12 than WVU. WVU has been running the table in the East for a while now, but that's not honestly saying much. TCU will likely get a healthy bump in recruiting in Texas by playing in an AQ conference, now. 

snarling wolverine

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^

If we think we're overrated, it's probably because we've scrutinized our roster like crazy and know about every potential weakness.  If we did the same for other teams we'd find their weaknesses, too.