Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
Coach Hoke's Final Top 25 Ballot
Now my neck and eyes hurt.
beyond miles having us at 8, saban, spurrier, and zook had us at 9 surprised
Zook? I thought he got zooked, how can he still be on the ballot. Correct me if I'm wrong, cause I don't know that much rule.
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?
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.
He had OK ST at #4 with Stanford at #3
Troy calhoun (air force) had OK ST all the way down at 5!
That is really a classless move by him. There is no excuse for voting OSU 4th if you're in that position.
He made up for it by putting us nine and Sparty 17 haha.
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!)
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.
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."
...is a repeat of Tom Osborne's doing the same to Michigan in '97, right?
I am not sure about Osborne, but I always thought Phil ranked us 4th as retaliation for Woodson beating Manning for the Heisman.
I think Hoke had the fairest rankings of anyone.
I knew I liked Pat Hill for something other than his glorious mustache. Too bad he got fired.
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.
Anybody have an over/under on number of coaches who actually filled out their ballet instead of handing it to an assistant?
I'm not the expert at betting lines that jamiemac is but I believe the over/under would be set at 0.5
because of one man who I feel must have time to vote for himself - Zooker!
To get his ballot would require Zook to have correctly filled out his forwarding address during the exit interview.
Quite a risky gamble...
the assistants of every program are in charge of ballet, leaving time for the head coaches to fill out the ballots.
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?!
Bielema seems to have Michigan at 9, MSU at 15. Maybe he's not as dumb as he looks.
a slap in the face
Its funny to see some of these ballots given a coach's history (like Saban ranking MSU 17, or Rocky Long (SDSU) ranking Michigan 18)
I thought once Long said Hoke will win a national championship at Michigan, so I was expecting some support there.
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!
U MAD BIG 12?
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.
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?
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
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.
Tebow just wins games.
What were we talking about?
My favorite post of the day
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.
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.
Not to mention the ridiculous conflct-of-interest that the coaches poll presents.
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.
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.
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
be allowed to vote in any polls.
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:
Sure, teams could still be screwed over, but if it's all public knowledge anyway, what's the difference?
How is a 6-6 OSU team and a 7-5 Iowa team ahead of Nebraska here?
because we lost to Iowa, and came a whole lot closer to loosing to OSU than Nebraska.
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.
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?
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.
Isn't that what computers are for?
You wont get an argument from me. The OPs point was that you can only rank based on your observations. Extending the argument, computers are the only ones who can "observe" every game.
However, the sports media views computers as evil and stupid, whenever they don't match their own flawed rankings. Nevermind that most sports journalists could barely pass a college math class or do anything more that tweet/surf/write articles on their computers.
1. They're not allowed to take margin of victory into consideration (obviously, not the fault of their progammers, but still a huge flaw).
2. We only know the formula for one of the 6 ranking systems (Colley).
3. Then there's this...
Then there is Richard Billingsley. He is 59 years old and lives in Hugo, Okla. Unfailingly courteous, Billingsley speaks with a homespun voice that exudes calm. Though he’s a stress-management expert for a living, Billingsley follows his passion for college football in obsessive ways. Starting in 1970, he set out to name a national champion for every season dating back to 1869, when Princeton and Rutgers split the two games played. (Billingsley’s verdict: Princeton.) His institutional history of college football is unquestioned. There’s just one snag.
“I’m not a mathematician,” Billingsley said.
A nonmathematician who uses a numbers-based formula to rank teams. A nonmathematician who, accordingly, uses the previous year’s rankings as a starting point for the next year’s, even if a school graduates its quarterback, running back and middle linebacker, and loses its coach.
“I don’t know that the powers that be even know what he’s doing,” Stern said. “I’m not saying he’s bad. But … he’s bad. It’s clear it’s not what the BCS should be doing.”
Billingsley is unrepentant about using the previous season’s results. He believes the past portends the future, even if the past is now playing in the NFL. The other computer systems that use preseason rankings take into account graduations, recruiting classes, and coaching changes – everything that matters.
“I’m not even a highly educated man, to tell you the truth,” Billingsley said. “I don’t even have a degree. I have a high school education. I never had calculus. I don’t even remember much about algebra."
The disparagement of "the computers" by voters is silly, but the computer polls are unreliable in their own right.
what you saw has a lot to do with how your team played not just the other team. anybody could go through our schedule and rank it in terms of how we did against each team.
Perhaps it would be more scientific to look at margin of victory and home field advantage (at 3 points to home team):
1. MSU (11 points)
2. Iowa (5 points)
3. ND (-1 point)
4. Ohio (-3 points)
5. SDSU (-18 points)
6. Illinois (-20 points)
7. WMU (-21 points)
8. Purdue (-22 points)
9. Nebraska (-25 points)
9. EMU (-25 points)
11. Northwestern (-27 points)
12. Minnesota (-55 points)
Yea, but then you really can't vote until you've played all of them.
you know, the COACHES POLL.
they cannot watch all of the games either. We all form our opinions based on the 3 or 4 games we watch (throw in some channel surfing), plus highlights and box scores from the dozens of games we don't watch each week, plus our pre-existing biases (past performance, tradition, etc.). No one can watch 100's of hours of games in less than 24 hours.
Hell, give me some good food, a case of my favorite beverages and about 4-5 TVs and I bet I could give you a decent top 25.
THE KNOWLEDGE CAN
I have a feeling Long's ballot has more to do with getting one of his fellow MWC teams in the BCS than with spiting Michigan or Hoke.
I disagree...you can bump TCU up without pushing Michigan that far back.
WeIl, we'll just have to disagree then! Michigan had to be out of the top 14 to open up an extra spot in the BCS. A spot that's worth roughly $10 million to his conference. He put TCU 4 spots higher than avg and Michigan 6 spots lower.
He's the head coach because Hoke left. I doubt he's feeling spiteful about a promotion, or is motivated any way other than money.
No, it's pretty damn weird. I can't imagine it's a coincidence he (along with the Wake coach) ranked M lower than any other coach did. Especially given that M absolutely crushed SDSU this year. It's very weird and clearly spiteful re Hoke.
I wonder how many coaches actually do their own balloting. My guess is that most coaches are way too busy in-season to sit around watching their DVR's for teams other than their own or an upcoming opponent.
I would think they delegate the task to someone who actually knows WTF is going on.
I personally think, for these reasons, the coaches poll should be eliminated in addition to the fact that some coaches manipulate rankings for their own benefit.
I believe almost none of them do during the regular season, and probably very few do for the last one. Maybe a Coach is handed a copy before it's turned in, and they may be prepped a little bit for the last one since it's published and they can be questioned about it. But really, what coach has time to sit down and actually think about a ballot he's putting together? It's pretty much an SID, which in my mind makes the whole poll worse. SIDs don't have time to watch the games either, and in my opinion, are more succeptible to fan-type feelings influencing their ballots. For instance, I doubt Rockly Long was negative towards Michigan and Hoke, but I could see it out of a bitter SID that wanted Hoke to stick around.
Seriously San Diego State? Does 28-7 ring a bell? 320 rushing yards? 18th huh?
over the coaches ballots. While they go on and on about bias and lack of accountablity and politics, all flaws of the human polls -- placing them 13th in the aggregate -- one poster was thoughtful enough to point out that the computers have them 20th.
is ranking Va Tech ahead of Clemson. They played twice this year and the combined score was Clemson 61 Virginia Tech 13.
Also, annoying though it is I think I'd probably rank Sparty ahead of Michigan. If I were being honest and all that. Going 1-1 vs Wisconsin is not a disgrace.
Still, you know, am kind of super-gla it's the Wolverines in the BCS and not anyone else from the state.
These are all good points, and again, I can't remember where I saw this idea but it made sense in the way the author proposed it (as my analysis has a lot of holes). I guess my original argument should be that if coaches are going to have a say, let it be based only on their perception of teams they have played or maybe just in their conference only. I don't know...this is all such a mess.
Polls are terrible. Especially the coaches poll. This is like politicians voting in elections they are running in. Except this one vote has much more impact than any public election. .
you have downvoted a simple post that directly relates to Coach Hoke.
Be aware that you have now the "pointed finger curse". Nothing, absolutely nothing you point at in the future will acknowledge that you exist ... likely because you don't.
For what it is worth, Michigan finished No. 12 in the Harris poll and Michigan State finished No. 13.
Here's his full final ballot:
3. Oklahoma State
7. Boise State
10. Kansas State
11. Michigan State
12. South Carolina
14. Virginia Tech
18. Southern Mississippi
24. West Virginia
25. Northern Illinois
Former Cal quarterback -- and Flint, Mich. native -- Craig Morton had Michigan at No. 7. So did former Colorado State head coach Mike Lude, a Michigan native.
Lude had a major Michigan/Michigan State discrepancy, too, ranking the Spartans at No. 19.
Former Rutgers coach Terry Shea had Michigan State at No. 9 and Michigan at No. 17. And Lansing-based radio personality Jack Ebling had the Spartans at No. 7 and Michigan at No. 16. Those were three of the biggest Michigan/Michigan State differentials among the pollsters.
Give credit where it's due, you copied and pasted this straight from behind the paywall for wolverine nation, as much as I believe Rothstein is a useless reporter, he still wrote this up, do not take this as your own
It's not an article, lol...it's a poll/ballot.
If it was any article, I would've linked it. This is the same as me copying the ESPN Bowl Lineup. Should I have to give credit there?
There is no opinion stated, just a poll ballot of Coach Carr.
I could've gotten the same information elsewhere.
I'm surprised that Dantonio has us that high.