BCS Standings Released (Michigan 22)

Submitted by Fhshockey112002 on

Title says about it all.  1st BCS Standings released Michigan comes in at #22.  Some other information.

1. Alabama

2. Florida St.

3. Oregon

4. Ohio

5. Missouri (very surprising)

22. Michigan

24. Nebraska 

Conference Breakdown

SEC - 6

ACC - 4

PAC12- 4

Big 12- 4

B1G- 3 

MGoBoard
Football
BCS
rankings
MNC
fhshockey112002

Robocrofts

October 20th, 2013 at 8:57 PM ^

I think much of where we end up hinges on this next game.  The coaching staff and team #134 needs to prove they can win a tough game against a quality opponent on the road.  Beating MSU will be huge.  

Here's to a November climb.

GO BLUE!

Joined: 09/16/2013

MGoPoints: 23

gwkrlghl

October 20th, 2013 at 8:59 PM ^

Missouri is highly overrated. Tell me about their wins over UGA and Florida but I don't care, we've played this game and Mizzou is a pretender. They'll lose 2 or 3 by the time the season ends

Joined: 04/13/2012

MGoPoints: 72

MI Expat NY

October 21st, 2013 at 10:08 AM ^

Not a chance.  Clemson doesn't get a rematch when they got crushed at home.  Alabama only got a shot because they lost a tight game where they missed some FGs, and there really was nobody elses.  Next three in the rankings were Oklahoma St. who dropped  a late game vs. Iowa St., Stanford who got drubbed by Oregon, and Oregon who had two losses including a bigger loss to LSU than Alabama's.  

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8636

Perkis-Size Me

October 20th, 2013 at 9:00 PM ^

I think an argument could be made for FSU to be ranked #1 right now, but at the same time, its hard to not give the benefit of the doubt to the team that's won 3 of the last 4 national titles.

Bama will be #1 until they lose.

Joined: 11/30/2011

MGoPoints: 105246

funkywolve

October 21st, 2013 at 12:41 AM ^

Bama's offense did look like poop against VaTech but they've improved quite a bit since then.  They had either 3 or 4 new starters on their oline (fwiw, they oline has improved a heck of a lot more than UM's has so far this year)  Bama was way more convincing than any other team against Ol' Miss.  They shut out Ol' Miss and beat'em by 25.  Ol' Miss other losses are by 8 and 3.  Ol' Miss has scored at least 22 points in every other game.

Joined: 10/08/2008

MGoPoints: 20177

denardogasm

October 20th, 2013 at 9:12 PM ^

Why are we always "learning about the team?"  It's too late in the season to be learning about the team.  They are what they are and they either perform or they don't.  Expectations are out the window.  Now they either win or they lose.  The BCS rankings mean nothing to us.  Find a way to win and we go to the Rose Bowl.  That's it.

Joined: 09/11/2011

MGoPoints: 10688

MichiganTeacher

October 20th, 2013 at 9:34 PM ^

+1

The constant "we'll find out about this team in November" idea irritates me, too. Every year. The WWL guys are the worst at it. Constantly "we'll know more about this team next week" or the week after or the month after. They say it all year.

We know who this Michigan team is. They're a good team, not an elite team, who plays to the level of competition and suffers from youth in key spots.They're turnover prone, they have big play potential from their QB both positive and negative, they lack any stars on defense even of the Kovacs-I-Can't-Believe-It's-Not-a-Law-Firm kind, and they have no pass rush but decent team defending vs the run and pass both. That's who they are.

Knowing who will win a specific game != finding out about the team.

I vote that in all future seasons, past the first Saturday in October, anyone who says "We'll find out about this team when X happens" must read the sonnet thread and post in it no less than three times as punishment.

Joined: 10/06/2011

MGoPoints: 9263

MichiganTeacher

October 20th, 2013 at 9:50 PM ^

Maybe I wasn't clear. Of course there are things to learn. We don't know the future. Well, THE_KNOWLEDGE does. Except for him it's actually the past. Whatever.

My point is that it's silly to imply that we don't know a lot about a team by now, and it's equally silly to imply that we won't learn significant information about a team until the last few games of the year.

As for watching things without learning, I refer you to my students. They assure me that they repeatedly enjoy things that have no relation to learning whatsoever.

Joined: 10/06/2011

MGoPoints: 9263

turd ferguson

October 20th, 2013 at 10:07 PM ^

I agree if you're talking about a baseball team 80-100 games into its schedule, but we've only seen this Michigan team seven times and while there are some patterns in their performance, I still feel like we're figuring out what we have. I'm sure the team's youth has something to do with that, but it's not like I feel like I understand OSU, Northwestern, PSU, etc. like I usually understand the Tigers, White Sox, etc. through this % of their games. Edit: This would probably be better placed as a response to denard, above.

Joined: 12/09/2009

MGoPoints: 26493

Robocrofts

October 20th, 2013 at 10:06 PM ^

I recently watched a special about the 1997 championship team.  I was surprised by how much I did not know about that "team".  It's liking reading a book twice.  Often the second time reveals the nuance of greatest importance.  I'm different than I was yesterday.  So is every person on team # 134.  With that in mind, the opportunity to learn something more becomes exponential.  

As far as your students go, well, maybe I would ask them to define learning.  

Joined: 09/16/2013

MGoPoints: 23

MGlobules

October 20th, 2013 at 11:01 PM ^

learn from what they do in November? That would be freaky. And isn't saying "either we win or we lose" the same damned thing?

What we know--if they show up and play error-free ball we are in every game.

What we "have to learn"--if they do that; if the o-line continues to cohere; how yesterday's d woes translate against November's teams. 

Etcetera.

Joined: 11/17/2008

MGoPoints: 47402

snarling wolverine

October 20th, 2013 at 10:27 PM ^

What you say would probably be true most seasons, but our incredibly back-loaded schedule makes it difficult to determine how good we actually are.  We could be a 10-win or a 6-win team.  I honestly have no idea right now.

 

Joined: 12/14/2011

MGoPoints: 97906

Wolverine In Iowa

October 21st, 2013 at 9:31 AM ^

+10  Old Wolverine in Iowa would be so shitfaced/hungover after the FYS game, win or lose, that it would take me until the Nebraska game to fully understand the result of the State game.  New Wolverine in Iowa will meditate before and after the game to be in full conscious acceptance of the result.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 10767

Bodogblog

October 20th, 2013 at 10:31 PM ^

We just went from zero offense to literally the best performance in the history of 134 years of football, and you think it's figured out? Indiana being terrible doesn't explain it all. How good can this team be if they cut loose the drama/disasters? I think very good, especially if we stay in a sensible offense.

Joined: 06/08/2010

MGoPoints: 26674

goblue81

October 20th, 2013 at 9:05 PM ^

One of the computer polls has Missouri #1 ??!?!   Now that UGA & FLA have fallen out of the  Top 25, they have not beaten anyone in the Top 25 and lost their starting quarterback....  Playoffs cannot get here soon enough.

I'm a little surprised Oregon is on the outside looking in.  They have been extremely impressive imo, but I do think Bama and FSU look legit too.  So, I guess it all will figure itself out in November.  I just hope we don't have 3-4 undefeated teams come bowl selection time.

Joined: 10/02/2010

MGoPoints: 1654

nMkaczor

October 20th, 2013 at 9:06 PM ^

It's surprising to see Nebraska in and Wisconsin out... It would be hard to argue that Nebraska is a better team than Wisconsin. But since when is the BCS about ranking teams based on how good they actually are?

Joined: 08/23/2013

MGoPoints: 706