"The University of Illinois is also in turmoil. The university sports an Interim Chancellor, an Interim Athletic Director, and an Interim Football Coach; the game will be played at Soldier Field, making this an Illini Interim Home Game."
Baylor is not ranked.
My only surprise is TCU still being in the Top 25 since they lost to Baylor.
Pizza party at my apartment if we crack the top 25!! All are invited!!
I'm not sure about that. If ND were 1-0 right now, maybe. But with us needing to jump about 10 teams and ND already having a loss, a win may not be enough.
15 votes hell yea. ND dropped damn. Would have looked better if Michigan beats #5 ranked ND instead of NR ND. Im surprised ND isnt still ranked though, they have slappys that say they'll run the table and be BCS bowl bound.
YSU controlled the line of scrimmage against MSU and yet they moved up?
Who won that game again?
Well, Auburn won their game and dropped in the polls. So yeah, sometimes "scoreboard baby!" isn't the best response to an argument.
MSU is hopelessly overrated. I understand that they get a nod for their record last year, but they only had one quality win--Wisconsin. That's it. They should have been a five-loss team with losses to ND, Northwestern, and Purdue. This year, they look like a five-loss team that got worse. They remind me of those mid-2000s Minnesota teams with Maroney and Barber.
MSU always smells fishy to me. This year they stink of rotten codflesh. I'll say 7-5 for Msu.
Not anything against this particular poll, but why do we even have a coaches poll? Having a coach who can't watch the games give the ballot to a GA who can't watch the games, just doesn't seem very good.
Also, Auburn should not be ranked.
How the h%ll are TCU and Auburn still ranked?
Coaches and to a lesser extent journalists usually put very little thought into any rankings until the last set that comes out after the bowls. They just move up any team that wins and drop any team that loses. In Auburn's case it won't matter at all because they appear to have only 3 winnable games left on their schedule.
We're 34th in the AP and 37th in the Coaches'. Notre Dame is 36th in both.
Michigan would be #36 in the new coaches poll and notre dame would be at #42.
You're right about the AP, though (nd #36, Michigan #37). Interestingly, Northwestern has far more points than Michigan in both polls (#32 and #30, respectively).
The new AP poll is out too. LSU has moved up to #2.
As far as I'm concerned, they can keep everyone else in the Big10 ahead of us, particularly Sparty and Ohio. Hell, I hope they're ranked number 1 when the time comes to play them.
No idea why we're getting votes. We beat a MAC team. I hope we aren't ranked if we win the ND game. It creates unnecessary pressure for our guys who will have had 1.75 games to see how our team is. The past 2 years should be reason enough not to get excited about getting votes early on.
If TCU and Auburn are getting votes after having just lost, then it makes sense that Michigan would and should get some votes too.
I largely agree. Beating ND the past two years created some unrealistic expectations for this team, ranking them despite all signs that they were not a top-25 outfit. Beating Western is a nice start, but there were clear problems on defense, ones that are more talent-based (and thus unlikely to be remedied during practice) than techniue-based. I expect ND to move up and down the field, but hopefully the defense will continue to create turnovers and wreak havoc along some pretty average ND lines.
If this team beats someone decent outside of ND (like MSU), then by all means give them the votes. But "blowing out" a mediocre MAC team probably shouldn't lead to UM being ranked.
Coaches poll...what a joke. How many coaches have a chance to see anyone else play except, if they are lucky, their next opponent. In fact, any poll until a team is into their conference schedule is largely worthless, as we see every year.
No malice implied here, but shouldn't this be OT? Non-Michigan, non-Big Ten*, just colleged football generally? Plus, you know, don't you usually post more than just a bare link?**
*[Gray area acknowledged: non-OT is other Big Ten teams news, and some Big Ten teams are of course ranked on the overall list.]
**Or is this something more common on the Board that I just haven't noticed before? Link::coment below, etc. If you take a look at my points, you'll see it's entirely possible I've missed this portion--so plz realize I'm not being a jerk, I'm just askin.
Does it really matter?
Yes it matters. Throughout the MgoBoard, other members enforce the rules for subjects like OT with near univeral support, so I'm surprised to see this labeled as Offtopic, which it isn't.
MGoBoard FAQ's from Brian make clear that during the season, the OT standard is raised, and only upcoming opponents and other Big Ten teams are become the standard for NOT being OT.
Read the policy as Brian spelled it out yourself, ironically ignorant MGoMembers who labeled my enforcement-based but polite response OT: (emphasis added)
What's the offtopic policy?
In the offseason, offtopic posts are tolerated. During football season they are discouraged and may be subject to removal depending on how alert the moderators are. What counts as on- and off- topic?
- Anything Michigan sports related
- Anything related to other Big Ten teams or upcoming opponents
- Stuff about the blog itself
- University of Michigan topics that don't relate to sports
- College sports in general
- Ann Arbor
- Pro sports of any variety
- Everything else
We will let pro sports topics slide even during football season but "everything else" posts are likely to get the axe.
Since college football as a whole isn't listed in ONTOPIC, it's clear based on a plain lanugage reading of Brian's OT policy that "Everything else" would include it.
"Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules???"
You seemed to have skipped over College Sports in General, which is a grey area. Besides that, Michigan received votes and several B1G teams are ranked, making this on topic.
I also think you misunderstand the point of the OT tag. If something isn't marked as off topic, then people assume it has something to do with Michigan. So, if I post something titled "Leonardo Dicaprio" people will go into it thinking that it will somehow link him to Michigan. If it had nothing to do with Michigan, people would get pissed that they wasted 10 seconds opening the the thread so the OT tag was added to alert people not to read if they only want to read things related to Michigan.
In this case, I don't think that an OT tag is going to help people determine whether to read the topic beyond what the title already does.
I disagree, and included the grey area on purpose (unlike Offtopic: Politics, which isn't relevant to the discussion)--hardly what you could call skipping it over. However, specifically addressing it, my positive (above) is that during the regular season, the standard for what is and isn't OT is raised, making grey area topics fall wtihin the OT category. I'm not saying they're banned or don't belong on the MgoBoard, just that they should be labeled OT.
I certainly understand the point of the OT tag, and think it applies here as you describe it, and that you're simply chosing not to. The logical step you leave out, however, would then be that, because topics not labeled OT are therefore assumed to be Michigan-related, then we can expect a "Top 25 Coaches Poll," that's not labeled OT, to therefore include Michigan. (While your more devoted fans will of course not expect this, it is certainly foreseeable.)
Sure, you can argue about how much time is wasted or how many readers actually would make that assumption, but I'm just arguing to enforce the rules as I see them and as I've seen them enforced elsewhere on the board.
Anything related to college football is on topic enough to get posted. At least until about 7:30 on Saturday...
got some votes though
Looks more like a popularity contest then actual assessment of productive teams.
Water is still wet.