oh well
Mason NEEDS this, Pistons, after all you've put him through
and... i like them? I think I like them.
I think you will get your wish.
they see me trollin' / they hatin'
well, yeah
in case you're interested in the details of a long long appeal process
Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ohio St. Buckeyes | -- |
| 2 | Alabama Crimson Tide | -- |
| 3 | Oregon Ducks | -- |
| 4 | Boise St. Broncos |  1 |
| 5 | Nebraska Cornhuskers | 3 |
| 6 | Oklahoma Sooners |  -2 |
| 7 | TCU Horned Frogs | -1 |
| 8 | Texas Longhorns | 1 |
| 9 | Arkansas Razorbacks | 8 |
| 10 | Florida Gators | 1 |
| 11 | Wisconsin Badgers | -1 |
| 12 | Arizona Wildcats | 7 |
| 13 | Auburn Tigers | -- |
| 14 | LSU Tigers | 4 |
| 15 | South Carolina Gamecocks | -1 |
| 16 | Stanford Cardinal | -1 |
| 17 | Utah Utes | -5 |
| 18 | Miami Hurricanes | 3 |
| 19 | Iowa Hawkeyes | -12 |
| 20 | Penn St. Nittany Lions | 2 |
| 21 | Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets | -- |
| 22 | Arizona St. Sun Devils | -- |
| 23 | West Virginia Mountaineers | -3 |
| 24 | Michigan Wolverines | -8 |
| 25 | Michigan St. Spartans | -- |
| Dropouts: Florida St. Seminoles, USC Trojans | ||
SB Nation BlogPoll College Football Top 25 Rankings »
A few notes: Ohio State and Alabama are still the top two, and without too much useful information to separate them, I left them in their previous order, although there's a legit argument for Alabama being #1 now. On that note, Oregon is far and away #3, and if they can continue their hot streak when they run into legit competition, they could make a run for the top of the table.
Nebraska is also rocketing toward the top behind Taylor Martinez. However, they don't play any truly legit competition (depending on how you classify Washington) for y a month, when they'll take on Texas.
Arkansas moves up for beating Georgia on the road. I may be a little irrationally exuberant on them, since their other two wins are bottom-feeders, and Georgia currently sits at 1-2. Please advice.
LSU moves up for no real reason, as the only legit team they've played all year (North Carolina) sits 0-2 on the year, and the Tigers should be expected to take care of Mississippi State on the road. They'll probably move down in the final ballot.
West Virginia moves down despite a convincing win because they Marshall team that took them to overtime just got pasted by... Bowling Green. Maybe the Maryland win should be considered impressive enough to keep them were they were.
Michigan moves down for Saturday's debacle, although I'm still holding out hope that the poor defensive play was something of an anomaly. Michigan State sticks where they were for an overtime win against a decent opponent.
No Nevada?
Also, re: OU dropping despite the close win. I watched the game. AF is going to be pretty good this year. I think we might see them upset TCU and/or Utah.
I also don't think Boise should have been jumping anyone. Style points be damned, Wyoming isn't as good as they've been the last few years, what little that means.
Is GT beating a maybe solid UNC team enough to make up for Kansas? I mean, Kansas was blown out again this week.
As someone who happened to be at the GT-UNC game, I would be moving GT down for their preformance. They almost lost to a team that has a defense that is a mere shell of what its supposed to be, and basically doesn't have a punt/kickoff coverage team. (That whole still missing 12 players thing...)
UNC played LSU really tough, and they also had the "two weeks to prepare" for GT"s offense. That being said, didn't Kansas lose again this weekend? GT's loss to Kansas should be the bigger question, than a win against UNC.
And is Florida really that much better than any other team below them. Florida lacks a win over a BCS team with a pulse (I'm VERY low on USF). While Wisconsin may have won ugly, ASU looks better than Tennessee. Arizona also could be bumped a few more for at least this week. Auburn as well.
Puts Michigan. I guarantee that most people won't throttle Michigan as badly as most of us on here
I'm not sure you can assume that ND is a legit team this year.
I agree, at least at this point, they still look like the players are trying to figure out how to play in the new offense. A general lack of awareness, esp. in terms of where to run routes. From what I saw, though, the defense looked tough.
Unfortunately, given other results, I think we can assume that UConn isn't legit this year, at least not yet. Legit teams don't lose to Temple.
is fair, but I don't know if this is:
Legit teams don't lose to Temple.
Temple went 7-1 in the MAC last year. Granted, it's the MAC but Temple has some players. They're not EMU.
I think everyone remembers how terrible they used to be and thinks they're still that way. They're not THAT bad anymore. This ain't your, uh, older brother's Temple?
That said, a truly legit BCS conference team probably shouldn't lose to any MAC team, even the better ones. UConn is probably mediocre at best.
That's basically what I meant. A decent BCS team doesn't lose to a MAC team, even one of the stronger teams in the MAC, therefore, some of the shine has come off our win vs. UConn.
Hope you're still saying the same thing after Temple beats Penn State this week.
Just curious. They beat a tomato can, but 56-14 right?
in that Nevada merits some consideration and that Florida is getting a lot of goodwill based on rep alone. They haven't been Top 10 good, certainly not on offense.
TCU blows out Baylor and gets dropped while Boise earns up vote? Stanford smokes Wake and they fall? What gives?
Air Force is leading the nation in rushing, went into Norman and ran all over OU. That looks like a pretty good team, and their 2-1 record is more impressive to me than say ASU's. Clemson looks like a very good 2-1 team too--to me they were the better team on the field versus Auburn. I like AFA and Clemson both over ASU, but that they aren't in your 25 is not a big deal though this early.
Arkansas winning at Georgia is a good win. I don't know if its an 8 spot jump win. We'll find out more this week when the Tide comes to town.
Cosign on TCU and Stanford, also like Nevada for a spot in the 20's.
Also agree with posters further down: Georgia Tech should not be ranked after losing to Kansas (0 for 2 against the power programs of North Dakota and Southern Mississippi) and beating South Carolina State and half of UNC.
Agree with the other commenters that AFA is top-25 worthy.
I think Stanford deserves a slightly higher ranking. I'm not buying into South Carolina yet, and for some reason I think they beat LSU with how well Luck is playing. Maybe the 14th spot then.
I agree - Stanford should be higher. They have played solid and have overmatched every opponent so far. I think they'll give ND a very difficult game and probably win.
Also, each conferece is starting to buld its 2010 totem pole. The Big 12 may very well have the strongest top 3 teams in Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas. SEC has Alabama clearly on top. Ohio State, right now, is the class of the B10 with #2 still up for grabs. Oregon looks very tough in the PAC 10, but Stanford culd make a big statement this coming Saturday. The Big East & the ACC looks like they will be non-factors this year.
We are still in the mix to challenge - just need a fast start in conference play. Go Blue !
For the sake of arguing this here, although it could probably be it's own thread, I'd venture to put the Pac 10 as the strongest 1-3. Texas and OU aren't playing that much better than Iowa or Wisconsin. I'm still not sure what to make of Nebraska though. Washington isn't anywhere near what I expected this season.
On the other hand, the Pac 10 has Oregon and Stanford at the top dominating, plus Arizona/Arizona State both looking pretty good at the second level. Like you said, I think we see a lot of pro-PAC10 fodder this week on ESPN. If only they could stop drinking the SEC kool-aid long enough to notice.
No doubt the hype will remain on the SEC. The conference has dominated the BCS championships in the recent past ... so it is the "king of the hill" conference right now.
This "dominance" affects the polls, which impacts the strength of schedule, etc. I think the SEC is down this year (at least the "power teams" of the past). When you have Arkansas and South Carolina making waves - it speaks to a watering down of the conference elites.
Michigan's fall from power has also hurt the B10's "power ranking", because Wisconsin and Iowa - while very good football teams, do not have the national exposure and following as Michigan.
How do they get moved down? I would have them in my top 10 right now they way they've played.
Should drop at least behind Stanford. Two unimpressive wins vs. tomato cans and a virtual tie with ASU, who most people picked at the bottom third of the Pac-10. Granted, they were playing without their top 2 WRs, but they haven't been impressive yet this year. I'd slot them around 15.
Okay so Bowling Green just pasted Marshall. That's okay, just take a deep breath and be assured this upcoming win will be yet another that looks better than originally anticipated. I think the defense will solve some of the problems we just witnessed and it will be a great weekend.
Prior to that they lost to Troy and Tulsa. They intercepted 4 passes against Marshall.
deserves to be 3, but they always strike me as a glass cannon team. Capable of annihilating anyone, but hit them at the right angle and they'll shatter into a million pieces. Maybe just a prejudice that they're all finesse and couldn't hold up against a real smash mouth team. I don't know.
Sounds like the old "spread can't work in the Big 10" meme.
I grant that Oregon isn't the Big 10, and our whatever you'd like to call it offense hasn't exactly lit up the last three seasons (save for the last 3 weeks), but my opinion is that this theory has been disproven enough that it is null and void.
Nebraska is poised to destroy a "smashmouth" conference with it's finesse and we look alright and win or lose will hang points on people.
edit: statement retracted. Didn't realize QB Martinez was as much a running QB as I originally thought
I still think Nebraska is more "smash-mouth" overall, they just have someone who can scramble, which has introduced some "finesse" to the equation. "Smash-mouth" and "finesse" are just bad adjectives to describe running games.
I wouldn't disagree with that.
My larger point was simply that Oregon being generally not beefy in the way they do things should not negatively impact their success, and running a spread doesn't condemn a team to failure any more than running pro-style ensures its success.
has been dominating their opponents, none of which have a victory over a FBS opponent after week three. The next two weeks, at ASU and home with Stanford, will tell us alot about these duckies.
I watched both games vs Georgia and I thought So. Carolina handled them better.
Arkansas and So. Carolina have similar resume's, with only a slight difference in competition. The 6 spot difference in the poll seems a bit much.
Stanford should get a look higher imo.
to have two mid-majors in the top ten and then none (I'm not counting Utah) in the rest of the poll. Either we take these teams seriously or we don't. I agree with most everyone else that Nevada is a good choice for inclusion from the WAC. That quarterback alone gives them a shot at Boise State -- might as well start giving them some respect now.
I agree with holding Michigan's spot in the top 25 for now -- however, anything but a much-improved defensive outing against Bowling Green and they drop out until they win a Big Ten game...
TCU and Utah deserve to have the same status; they've been even as of late, but I think your point is worthwhile except it's hard to take any teams seriously until just a couple more games have been played.
Uh, you can't say "you don't have enough mid-majors, outside of these ones that I don't think count as mid-majors." Either they are mid-majors or not.
As a follow-up, this is a resume ballot. If other mid-majors had (successfully) tested themselves in the first couple weeks of the season, they'd be ranked.
From the Daily Gopher on their Week 4 Ballot:
Michigan has shown enough to get a ranking.
I LOL'd real hard that they said that this week.
Not sure what UCLA/Wake Forest have going for them, but the Fighting Trees have curb stomped them.
I don't think Ark is too high. They won at Georgia and have had no bad games. I think Auburn is too high. They should have lost to Clemson, and had a narrow escape at Miss St (who LSU just blew the doors off of).
M should not be behind ASU or GT. GT lost to a bad Kansas team (whose only win is in the game) and ASU looks like they could be a decent team, but they still lost, and they haven't beaten anyone good. I have a hard time calling Saturday's M game a "debacle," good teams have close calls against teams they should beat all the time. We still came out with the win.
but I don't think that is what Tim is doing. I think that if you are ranking based on resume, there's no question that a one-point loss at a quality opponent is significantly better than a five-point win at home against a I-AA team, no matter who it is.
That being said, I think you could strengthen your argument against Arizona State significantly by being more specific: ASU hasn't beaten a I-A team yet. Their two wins are over Big Sky teams, and mediocre ones at that (Portland State will be awful again this season; NAU may be somewhat better, but they were a .500 team last season in conference play). In that context, their close loss to Wisconsin shouldn't add nearly as much as it would if we were discussing a team with two I-A wins.
Even for a resume ranking. There's something to be said for a win being a win, and a loss being a loss. We're a little early in the season to start splitting those hairs, I think.
He said Michigan should win 8 games this year (4 - 4 in conference ?). Also said Michigan will beat either Wisconsin, Iowa or Ohio State.
Stated that Michigan's offense is so unique since the B10 is a "power" conference - that they should outscore their opposition. He said nothing of the defense.
Never hurts to get positive press on the national stage. Go Blue !
Is he Colin's brother?
I personally wouldn't have bumped Florida over Wisconsin, but I could see the logic in it. There's no way I would rate LSU ahead of South Carolina right now. LSU may be the only team with 3 victories against BCS conference schools (to my knowledge), but none of their victories have been impressive. South Carolina physically manhandled Georgia and destroyed a better than you think Southern Miss team. Ga Tech shouldn't be ranked, they still lost on the road to an awful Kansas team, and Arizona State doesn't deserve credit for almost beating Wisconsin. I'd have Nevada and Air Force in the poll over those two schools.
If you lose to KU who have now lost to a 1-AA and a Conf USA team, you don't belong in any poll. Period.
I'm also really unsure about Miami. OSU is good, but they're showing was putrid.
Not sure ASU deserves to be in yet. I'd have Nevada in before them.
My take on the poll: http://www.productivesweatpants.com/2010/09/blog-poll-week-3.html
They've had one good game; however, that was against Youngstown State. They had one horrible game, albeit against Alabama. And, they struggled against Kent State. All that has them behind Michigan -- at least in my humble opinion.
