Coach Hoke's Final Top 25 Ballot
1.LSU
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma State
4. Oregon
5. Stanford
6. Boise State
7. Arkansas
8. Wisconsin
9. South Carolina
10. Kansas State
11. Michigan
12. Virginia Tech
13. Michigan State
14. TCU
15. Baylor
16. Georgia
17. Clemson
18. Nebraska
19. Oklahoma
20. Penn State
21. Southern Mississippi
22. Houston
23. West Virginia
24. Florida State
25. Cincinnati
For those curious, Mark Dantonio has Michigan State No. 12 and Michigan No. 13. And Virginia Tech coach Frank Beamer had the Wolverines at No. 14.
Also interesting, LSU coach Les Miles was one of three coaches to have Michigan at No. 8 in his final poll -- joining Air Force's Troy Calhoun and Fresno State's Pat Hill. Wake Forest's Jim Grobe and San Diego State's Rocky Long had Michigan at its lowest position, No. 18.
Very weird/bitter Long would put Hoke at 18 after losing to the Wolverines and working for/with Coach Hoke and Borges.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:32 AM ^
Now my neck and eyes hurt.
December 5th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^
beyond miles having us at 8, saban, spurrier, and zook had us at 9 surprised
December 5th, 2011 at 12:17 PM ^
December 5th, 2011 at 12:29 PM ^
I would bet they assign the ballots at the beginning of the year for the entire season. Keeping up with head coach firings and hirings, especially in these final few weeks of the year, could be a nightmare for the polls. For example, Illinois hasn't hired anyone yet - who would you give the ballot to?
December 5th, 2011 at 9:24 AM ^
That Flash file of all the coaches votes is really fascinating. It's interesting to see the wide deviations on some schools -- M included -- vis-a-vis others.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:24 AM ^
He had OK ST at #4 with Stanford at #3
Troy calhoun (air force) had OK ST all the way down at 5!
December 5th, 2011 at 9:26 AM ^
That is really a classless move by him. There is no excuse for voting OSU 4th if you're in that position.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:33 AM ^
He made up for it by putting us nine and Sparty 17 haha.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:44 AM ^
Interesting note on Saban re: UM -- Saban voted UM #9 and MSU, his former employer, #17.
(EDIT: Oops, I did not refresh the page before making my post. Redundant!)
December 5th, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^
Saban once referred to MSU as his dream job. He left because of constant meddling and micromanagement by the MSU administration. There is definitely not a warm, fuzzy feeling between Saban and Sparty.
December 5th, 2011 at 12:12 PM ^
From my brother who went to MSU, what essentially happened is Saban wanted a raise (he wasn't making bank at MSU, probably around league average but was on the cusp of making MSU a consistent top 25 team and competing for Big 10 titles) for him and his assistants and the president or administration said "no football coach will ever make more money than the school president."
What happened is what unfortunetly would probably happen at most universities with the way things seem to work: Saban left for LSU and a raise, the administration probably gave the president a nice raise and then raised tuition while cutting faculty and then hired a new coach for less money. Now, after a decade of crapping the bed, they have Dantonio, who has gained some respect for MSU on the football field and probably still isn't making more money than the president because they probably gave the president another raise while raising tuition for students and cutting faculty and other things to help pay for it. the president and stand by the claim that "no football coach will ever make more money than the school president."
December 5th, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^
...is a repeat of Tom Osborne's doing the same to Michigan in '97, right?
December 5th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^
I am not sure about Osborne, but I always thought Phil ranked us 4th as retaliation for Woodson beating Manning for the Heisman.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:27 AM ^
I think Hoke had the fairest rankings of anyone.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:28 AM ^
I knew I liked Pat Hill for something other than his glorious mustache. Too bad he got fired.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:38 AM ^
It is too bad that he got fired. I always appreciated his "anyone, anytime, anyplace" motto. He really seemed to have nice momentum built up there for a while, but then it seemed like he lost it. I'm not sure if it was a result of BSU's progress, or what. I'm curious to see where he winds up.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:36 AM ^
Anybody have an over/under on number of coaches who actually filled out their ballet instead of handing it to an assistant?
December 5th, 2011 at 9:49 AM ^
I'm not the expert at betting lines that jamiemac is but I believe the over/under would be set at 0.5
December 5th, 2011 at 10:55 AM ^
because of one man who I feel must have time to vote for himself - Zooker!
December 5th, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^
To get his ballot would require Zook to have correctly filled out his forwarding address during the exit interview.
Quite a risky gamble...
December 5th, 2011 at 10:11 AM ^
the assistants of every program are in charge of ballet, leaving time for the head coaches to fill out the ballots.
December 5th, 2011 at 12:37 PM ^
Agreed. How can a coach properly rank teams if he's worried about which player (Gholston, Worthy or Cousins) will get the lead in Swan Lake?!
December 5th, 2011 at 9:37 AM ^
Bielema seems to have Michigan at 9, MSU at 15. Maybe he's not as dumb as he looks.
December 5th, 2011 at 1:09 PM ^
a slap in the face
December 5th, 2011 at 9:39 AM ^
December 5th, 2011 at 12:27 PM ^
December 5th, 2011 at 9:46 AM ^
I can't believe 5 coaches has Oklahoma State 4th (including (former) Big 12 coach Gary Pinkel) and one had them 5th!! Also funny that MSU was ranked 21st by 3 coaches!
December 5th, 2011 at 9:49 AM ^
U MAD BIG 12?
December 5th, 2011 at 10:02 AM ^
Rocky Long is an idiot though. Boise at four? TCU at eleven? MSU at twelve? Georgia at fifteen? Southern Miss and Houston both ahead of us?
Maybe if we had beat his ass by four touchdowns instead of three he'd be convinced we're better.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:52 AM ^
Larry Fedora('s SID) ranked VT 9th and Clemson 22nd.
Tom O'Brien('s SID) ranked Georgia 7th. Had to go somewhere midway through the second quarter of the SECCG?
December 5th, 2011 at 9:54 AM ^
Art Briles may have the wackiest thing on his ballot and is definitely the biggest homer. Michigan at 11 and Wisconsin at 16! MSU is at 21 on his ballot. His Big 12 rankings Oklahoma St 2, Kansas State 6, Baylor 12, and Oklahoma 14! Guess he had to justify his losses
December 5th, 2011 at 10:03 AM ^
Seeing Kansas St. rated so highly (by many media members/coaches) is absolutley mind boggling. KSU has 10 wins this season and 8 (!) of them are by a TD or less. KSU actually has a negative yardage margin this season (345 ypg offense vs. 400 ypg defense) and is only +5 in point margin (33 ppg offense vs. 28 ppg defense). KSU isn't good, they are just incredibly lucky.
December 5th, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^
Tebow just wins games.
.
.
What were we talking about?
December 5th, 2011 at 1:18 PM ^
My favorite post of the day
December 5th, 2011 at 11:52 AM ^
I was a bit surprised. I mean, I really don't like MSU and their douche of a coach, but ....21? I think they are pretty good team. They barely lost to Wisconsin (by a field goal), a team they beat earlier in the season. My guess is that it has something to do with the second half of their schedule. They lost against Nebraska in a bad way (they scored only 3 points against the huskers) and had, sort of, some uninspiring wins against Minnesota (by a td), by two tds against Northwestern, and closed out with a loss in the conference championship.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:55 AM ^
I think the people that are upset about Michigan making a BCS Bowl need to look at some of the different polls and actually study them. I can't tell you how many people I know that are bitching about how so and so go screwed this, and unfair that. I think the nation got used to Michigan not being very good for three years and now they are just upset that Michigan is back to itself. It's funny watching people when they are in a state of denial.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:56 AM ^
I just thought of something. Why is the Coach's poll used over the Media poll for the BCS? What are the coaches even basing their votes on? Hoke has given me the impression that he doesn't have time to watch any games besides the teams he's playing and I'd assume it's the same for everyone else. Seems like the AP would be more informed.
December 5th, 2011 at 9:59 AM ^
Not to mention the ridiculous conflct-of-interest that the coaches poll presents.
December 5th, 2011 at 10:00 AM ^
I believe the AP Poll backed out or got kicked out because they crown their "own" national champion.
They don't have to vote the national champion #1. I may be completely off, but I think USC won the AP National Championship the year they beat us in the Rose Bowl ('06) and Florida won the BCS National Championship for beating Ohio.
December 5th, 2011 at 10:14 AM ^
USC won the AP title after beating us in the '04 Rose Bowl when LSU beat Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl for the BCS title.
December 5th, 2011 at 10:46 AM ^
The AP withdrew itself in 2004/05 after Mack Brown lobbyied like no other for voters to put Texas in the Rose Bowl over Cal. And after it happened, the AP was disgusted by the system and pulled itself
December 5th, 2011 at 9:57 AM ^
be allowed to vote in any polls.
December 5th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^
I disagree. I don't mind coaches voting but the system needs to be changed. I believe in the coaches ranking teams that they have played only. I can't remember who, but some columnist made a formula out of this idea and it made a lot of sense and took the guesswork out of it for busy coaches who don't have time to watch games. I'm not sure how to quantify it with every ranking together, but would look something like this for us:
1. MSU
2. Iowa
3. Ohio
4. ND
5. Nebraska
6. Northwestern
7. Illinois
8. Purdue
9. SDSU
10. WMU
11. Minn
12. EMU
Sure, teams could still be screwed over, but if it's all public knowledge anyway, what's the difference?
December 5th, 2011 at 10:47 AM ^
How is a 6-6 OSU team and a 7-5 Iowa team ahead of Nebraska here?
December 5th, 2011 at 11:03 AM ^
because we lost to Iowa, and came a whole lot closer to loosing to OSU than Nebraska.
December 5th, 2011 at 10:50 AM ^
It gives a major advantage to schools in weak conferences and discourages non-conference games with AQ conference opponents. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it would have Houston ranked either #1 or #2 now.
December 5th, 2011 at 10:51 AM ^
while this idea makes no sense to me, whats up with your ranking, it seems to be purely a recap of how our games actually went....Iowa over Nebraska or ND?
December 5th, 2011 at 11:00 AM ^
I think that's the point. Each coach would rank their opponents based on what they saw when they played them. That's the best data point a coach can use. The ranking above is based on how teams played against Michigan, so to me, it would make sense.
One the other hand, Iowa and OSU would get ranked lower by coaches that beat them. In theory, it would balance out.
December 5th, 2011 at 11:20 AM ^
Isn't that what computers are for?