The first BCS rankings are out:
The first BCS rankings are out:
My thoughts are that we would line up and beat each team ranked 16-25 by 2 scores
The way we are playing right now, I like my chances against most teams. Especially since we practically gave away the game in South Bend.
We're ranked 35th by the computers? Polls don't usually fire me up but that's ridiculous.
We got demolished by the #1 team, had 6 turnovers against the #5 team, barely beat #94, and demolished #66, #84, and #120. What type of evidence is there to place us higher than #35? If we win the next two weeks against #34 and #36 (according to the computers) - especially if they are by decent margins - we will move up significantly. Don't worry about it.
do the BCS computers now incorporate margin of victory? Shouldn't matter if Michigan beats msu by 1 or 100, according to the BCS computer ratings (although we'd all prefer the latter). It would, of course, matter somewhat to the voters, so MOV is still important in that respect.
"It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning"
You're right, I was talking about the ranking in general. Nothing changes, though. We lost to #1 and #5 and beat #66, #84, #94, #120. When we beat #34 and #36, then we'll move up.
I believe one or two of them do. Excluding garbage time and various factors...
I like it when you use numbers to talk dirty to me
I hate the whole moral victory thing, but that's sort of what that Notre Dame game was. Take out those critical turnovers and our offense was almost unstoppable. Our defense was also lights out against them. They needed the ball in our redzone and a freshman penalty to actually score a touchdown.
Uhh don't mean to be that guy, but those turnovers happened. I'd contest that our offense was very stoppable in that game.
We had a few very solid drives. One turnover was a pass from a 5'6 RB to an equally tiny WR. Another turnover was a fumble on an otherwise good play. I'm not discounting the turnovers — obviously they happened — however I do believe that they were not necessarily indicative of the ND defense containing our offense. I felt they were mostly our own fault. Partly game planning, partly execution. However, despite these turnovers, the game was very winnable down to that final Notre Dame drive. Sure, this was mostly a result of our defense shutting down their offense, but it was also party a result of us having the ball for so damn long and moving down the field with convincing consistency.
And to add insult to injury, our turnovers came in the red zone after long drives that ate a lot of clock up. Again, a loss is a loss and we deserved that L. But that one definitely had a "we beat ourselves" feel to it.
But I never seriously thought we were in the NC hunt anyway, but that winning the BIG was the PERFECT goal at this stage: realistic, but challenging, and an appropriate step of season to season improvement for Hoke & company.
I feel your pain, bro. But, like the B.S. @ the Small House (ND), let's just let the BCS rankings go...
... And enjoy the B1G championship ride!
Agreed. A loss is a loss, but some hurt more.
I guess the point is, did Notre Dame appear to be a vastly superior team? To that I'd say no. If we played that game ten times, M probably wins 5 or 6. As opposed to Alabama, where we'd almost certainly lose all 10. A win is a win and a loss is a loss, but they do come in different flavors. Bama was a beat down. ND was us shooting ourselves in the foot.
So you are counting on the same things to happen in each of those 10 games? NDs offense to be sluggish, defense is stout... Or Denard doesn't turn into a turnover machine and ND stays the same. Can't have it both ways.
The thing is, I'm not convinced that we have serious problems. We're by no means elite and passing is an issue, but our offense moved the ball consistantly at times against Notre Dame. I understand your quote but I don't think its applicable. There was no guarantee we'd keep turning the ball over and they by no means had a comfortable enough lead to see if we would. Do you really think Notre Dame would take that chance against us after the past few years?
If you considered Bama holding your offense, ND held you for just 20 more yards. You don't consider Denards bad throws the result of the DL being in his face?
Texas Tech by 2 scores.
Any reason that you're leaving #15 Rutgers out of this? Maybe because we'd beat them by five scores? Their most impressive win is... nine points over Arkansas? eight points over Syracuse?
35) Michigan State
No other Big Ten team registers with a BCS average. Alabama is one, we are ND is four.
Win next week and we're in. Win the week after that and we're probably in the top-20. Ain't no thang.
Of the 44 teams whose BCS average is a non-zero number, nine of them are Big XII teams. Only Kansas was left out (which, at 1-5...well...anyway...). The Pac-12 and SEC have seven teams each. The Big Ten rings in with five teams and the ACC with four. The remaining 13 teams are spread between independents (ND, who else?), the Big East, MWC, MAC, Sun Belt, WAC and C-USA.
Ohio is #999. I don't care if that's a null placeholder for a team on sanctions, it still makes my day
Why we aren't in their but who cares
over Air Force, UMASS, Purdue and Illiniois.
Who just got their asses kicked should be above us when we lost on the road twice to two top 5 teams
Iowa State lost by 6 to Kansas State
on the cbssports site - right above the 4 schools in the Penalty box is the worst team in FBS, UMass. We've lost to #1 and #5, but our wins are over #66, #84, #94, and #120.
not that it matters but I see one BIG thing missing
THIS MAKES ME SO MAD THAT I WANT TO THROW MY COUCH OFF OF MY ROOF AND BURN IT WHILE PLAYING A UKULELE, SITTING NAKED IN VANILLA PUDDING THAT"S TOPPED WITH CINNAMON AND NUTMEG.
By their own standards Michigan has a better resume than Texas or Iowa State. Lost on the road to better opponents than either of them. This is just dumb.
And they beat better opponents than us.
A big problem for Michigan in the computer polls is that UMass is dead last, and dragging down their strength of schedule. the Colley Rankings have a tool to add/remove games. Replace UMass with Bowling Green (still a blowout, but ranked #72 there instead of Umass' #138) and Michigan moves up to #27 from #38. This is the same exact problem that the basketball team had last year.
If we win the B1G, we go to the Rose Bowl, no matter what the BCS poll says.
EDIT: PSA -- Yes, I know the title should be "Who SHIVES a git", but in your head, you'd have pronounced "shives" like "hives" not "gives", which would be totally wrong. So I saved a step for you. Now I feel better.
You truly are a master of the spoonerism.
I don't see how we aren't ranked in the top 25 when both our losses were to top 5 teams
So you're saying our biggest victories were losses? That's so Notre Dame.
They are 4-2 just like us. They beat Wyoming (107), New Mexico (67), Ole Miss (55), and Okie State (34). They lost a close one to the #8 team and got curb stomped by an untested #13 Oklahoma (yes, I said it, wins over UTEP and Florida A&M while losing to K State means nothing). Yet Texas is #25 in the BCS with almost half as many coaches votes.
I'd call it Notre Dame with a point.
They just got beat by 40+ this list is a joke
Air Force 3-3, other two losses UNLV, NAVY
UMASS 0-6 losses to UCONN, Indiana, and 3 MAC schools
Purdue 3-3 3 wins were E. Kentucky, E. Michigan and Marshall
Illinois 2-5 2 wins over W. Michigan and Charleston Southern, blown out in all 5 losses to ASU, PSU, Wisky, UM and La Tech.
Purdue is the only one of those teams ranked in the top 100 in passing at #70.
We have not beaten anyone who finish in the top half of college football
Didn't we settle this issue when everyone was arguing over how good Mississippi State actually was back in the day? That you're judged on the quality of opponents you beat, and not by the quality of opponents who beat you?
My problem with this is last year's selection of Alabama over OSU (ntOSU) for the championship game. OSU had the better victories but the worse loss and that made the game an SEC lovefest.
Basically choose if the deciding factor is wins or worse loss.
Not criticism of you just criticizing the current system.
/ thank goodness for playoffs.
Actually, now that you say that, I should have put some restrictions on the "not judged by the quality of opponents who beat you" comment. Becuase if UMass whomped you obviously you'd be viewed as a worse team than you were before the whomping.
More like "Losing to good teams doesn't entail that you are good."
That should cover the bases. But yeah, there has to be better systems than what we've got now. Might as well abandon the whole trying to find a "national champion" goal and just install a system with a "playoff champion." Not to start that debate again.
the 3rd best team in college football. This is pure SEC homerism.
They are supposedly the 2nd best according to this list
We could beat #4,5,8 and then 15-25 these list just upset me
Uh, we already lost to #5.
Very true. For argument's sake, though, I bet we beat them 3 times out of 5 on a neutral field. It took the perfect storm of a bad game from Denard to beat us in South Bend. But you are still right, we lost the game and can't change that now.
Everybody knows that if we played Notre Dame 9 times out of 10 we'd win.
/Terrelle Pryor logic
Quite a shot in the balls when your only losses are to the #1 and #5 teams in the rankings and you are not ranked. Whatever. Win the Big Ten and I'll be happy for the seniors.
We need to have a standard response to polls in 2012 along the lines of... "There's no sense in getting worked up about polls, because they just don't matter for Michigan". Unfortunately, Michigan is not going to win the national title, and with how weak the Big 10 is, even going undefeated the rest of the regular season would not land an at-large BCS bid. It's either "Win the Big 10 and go to Pasadena, or... go to some bowl named after a restaurant." Brady's goal is winning the Big 10, and that's still very much in play, and that's all that matters. The rankings are essentially irrelevant.
Or a credit card. Either way.
BCS rankings are going to be irrelevant for us. Which I am somewhat happy about. Our destiny is in our hands - win the conference and make a BCS bowl. If we lose a game, we probably won't be eligible for one. Just gotta maintain focus and beat the teams in our division and probalby Wisconsin.
Michigan has beaten no one good to date. B1G is a terrible conference. The only good team that would really move the needle in the poll for Michigan is OSU. Until then, they just need to take care of business and win B1G. They won't go to BCS bowl unless they win it
Since OSU isn't included in the BCS poll, will it count when we beat them?
/s <--- (just in case)
Anderson-Hester you have Alabama 5 your computer is broken you might want to reboot or something bro.
They are accounting for number of recruits over the last 5 recruiting classes.
I'm glad as heck we're almost done with this thing.
You, me and the sad clown on the corner could arrange the teams better 9 times out of 10.
Only one man has beaten the computer.. That man, Dwight K. Schrute.
Ryan was super embarrassed.
Just win out and win the B1G championship and beat the shit out of a PAC-12 team and the season is a success. Next up State.
Computers are regressing in their "fight" to become more powerful and "knowledgable" than humans: There are actually computers that have Alabama ranked lower than No. 1. We're safe for at least another decade.
"There are actually computers that have Alabama ranked lower than No. 1. We're safe for at least another decade."
Or is that just what the computers want us to think...
I appreciate that the gurus of ESPN stated that even if ND runs the table it does not jump an undefeated Alabama or Oregon due to the conference championships. So Dame not being in a conference could really hurt them if they win out.
Since when have the WWL gurus been credible? They all picked Florida State,Oklahoma, or USC to win the NC. If the Irish are undefeated, there is no way in hell that they are not playing in the BCS championship game. Facts of life.
I didn't see who said the Irish wouldn't pass an undefeated Bama or Oregon, but I would bet my bottom dollar that it was different from those who made those NC predictions.
And those two are completely different kinds of analyses. Not comparable in any way.
It's all the same network right? My point was that people take ESPN analysis as gospel, but what have they done to achieve credibility?
Same network doesn't mean everyone has the same opinion
And again, and much more importantly, these are completely unrelated. Guesswork for "fun" before a game is even played is different than understanding how the polls work in the majority of circumstances and then explaining that.
you are very wise
The BCS just proves that it doesnt matter who you play...its all about your record. The only way strength of schedual matters is if 2 teams have the same record for the #2 spot in the BCS.
Thats why I do not understand scheduling Marque Match ups...The Bama game was worthless.
You are going to need it come playoff system.
While watching I kept waiting for Ohio to be unveiled. After not seeing them 11-15, and the not 6-10 I screamed out holy fuck Ohio is in the top 5!!!! Then did not see them......then it dawned on me, then I giggled.
After last year's Alabama / LSU championship game -- and all the attendant issues with that matchup (wipe-out game, lower ratings, etc.) -- did they include a mechanism this year to prevent that?
Let's assume Florida and Alabama win out the rest of the regular season. That would mean they meet in the SEC championship. Someone has to lose. Assuming either Oregon or ND are also undefeated (not a given) ... is there a chance we'd see another all-SEC NC with a rematch of Florida and Alabama?
As for Michigan and its BCS ranking ... meh. Just play solid football and win out the rest the games. The rest will take care of itself.
is also to avoid an SEC vs. SEC championship game. I'd hate to see the SEC get beaten in the MNC game two years in a row.
No, that probably wouldn't happen. That's a similar scenario to UM and tOSU 2006, with a loss coming in the teams final game of the season. What made Bama and LSU work was that they were both in the west, and Bama didn't play in the title game.
I think there's too much of a gap between the elite teams and the good teams this year. Am I the only one with that sense? I see a lot of overrated teams so far.
Other than Bama and Oregon, I have used the word " terrible" to describe every team in the top 25. I'm sure that none of these team are terrible but Bama set the bar really high on Septmber 1st.
But if you wanted to really waste everyone's time, you should have directed them to the BCS selection pre-show, and told them it would be something worth watching.... like a seal bouncing a ball on its nose
Are we looking at a rematch in the Rose if we win the big ten?
Assuming Bama stays at #1, I'd say close to 50-50, but I'll lean no. Sugar will get to pick an at-large team before the Rose will, so they'll take either ND or the top SEC team left.
It bothers me that UM isn't ranked becasue those 16-25 teams don't sport great resumes either in most cases, but that's what happens with 2 losses. At the end of the year, I think this team finishes as a top-10 outfit, which is great.
I will say, Florida as #2 is a recipe for disaster. That is not the #2 team in the country, just one that got to beat a mediocre LSU team.
When your conference has dominated, the way the SEC has, you get a few perks.
HAY GAIZ WHY AREN'T WE RANKED JUST CUZ WE LOST TO ALAB$MA AND NOTRE SHAME ON THE ROAD???
these are the rankings you should pay attention to... these are obviously slightly more predictive than descriptive as bookmakers/bettors use them to set lines / find value.
I look forward to a day when these rankings don't appear fixed.
The real question is not how we aren't ranked (face it, we are 4-2 without a good win), but how do 2 computers actually have ND as the top team in the country? I hate using common opponents, but Alabama made us look like a high school team. Notre Dame needed every one of our turnovers (not all caused by their defense) to beat us. How can this even be possible? I know the BCS is a joke, but that's awful.
They can't take margin of victory into account. Both beat Michigan by a point in their eyes. ND has beaten 4 other BCS teams and Navy including 3 Big Ten teams all of whom at some point have been declared the expected winner of the Big Ten. Bama has played two cupcakes and three teams from the bottom half of the SEC. In a few weeks, Bama will have played an undefeated Miss St, LSU, and a Kevin-Sumlin-led TAMU team. They will jump to #1 if they win all of those games.
SkyNet is as intimidating as a Speak N' Spell.
If we play OSU's schedule...we are undefeated and in the top 5 of the BCS. Shows you just about how useful these rankings are.
What a load of shit. I'm glad this garbage is almost done.
Geez, SEC #1 and #2, imagine that.
Some computers have Alabama ranked below #1. What after all these years computers still can't complete an eyeball test???
Hows cum Michigan aint ranked?
I bet if we win the remaining games on our schedule, we'll be ranked.
Just a hunch.
Florida doesn't deserve #2. Luckily for the rest of college football, the Gators still have to play South Carolina, UGA, and FSU.
For most of the last five years or so, I have thought that the SEC deserved their lofty rankings and reputation. This year, though, everyone except Bama seems extremely vulnerable. They're pretty much exactly like the Big Ten: good teams, but everyone has a flaw that precludes them from serious top ten consideration.
Bama appears to be far above everyone else; they deserve to be #1 until someone beats them. As far as the rest of the SEC goes, I think they are a bit overrated this year.
Big 10 is going to be a non-factor this season. Let's win our conference championship, hang a banner and head out to the Big 10's only BCS bowl game this year and see if we can pull off an upset.
Worrying about our position in the BCS poll this season is pointless.
There is no reason Stanford should be ahead of us. Their two losses come against Washington and Notre Dame. Ours come against Notre Dame and Alabama. This is another case of a team getting punished for playing a more difficult schedule.