Michigan remains #17 in AP and coaches poll
AP: http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll/2013/2
| 1 |
 |
Alabama (58)
Record: 1-0
|
PV Rank
1
Points
1,497 |
| 2 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
3
1,355
|
| 3 |
 |
Ohio State (1)
Record: 1-0
|
2
1,330
|
| 4 |
 |
Clemson (1)
Record: 1-0
|
8
1,304
|
| 5 |
 |
Record: 0-0
|
4
1,277
|
| 6 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
6
1,181
|
| 7 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
7
1,085
|
| 8 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
9
1,073
|
| 9 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
12
971
|
| 10 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
11
953
|
| 11 |
 |
Record: 0-1
|
5
894
|
| 12 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
10
875
|
| 13 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
13
780
|
| 14 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
14
707
|
| 15 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
15
674
|
| 16 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
16
612
|
| 17 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
17
583
|
| 18 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
21
387
|
| 19 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
22
320
|
| 20 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
34
315
|
| 21 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
23
287
|
| 22 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
18
219
|
| 23 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
27
150
|
| 24 |
 |
Record: 0-1
|
20
148
|
| 25 |
 |
Record: 1-0
|
24
135
|
Coaches: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/polls/
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:46 AM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:52 AM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^
What is funny is that he has an 0-1 Virginia Tech at 25, but a 1-0 Michigan that won by 50 not in it. I absolutely don't care about rankings at this point in the season, especially the AP and in particular, Drew Sharp, but that part is pretty funny.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:34 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:54 AM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:00 PM ^
I haven't a clue how he is able to stick around. I don't expect local media to be blantant homers but when you fail to put a clear top 25 team in the top 25, you either are blinded by hatred or know nothing about the sport.
In the case of Michigan, I wonder what the school did to make him hate them so much?
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:23 PM ^
They keep him around because his articles are so asinine and inflammatory that they get plenty of clicks and comments. He really is an asshat, but unfortunately that's what gets you views.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:25 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:11 PM ^
I have been wondering this for years. What did Michigan do to him to make him develop such an unending hate toward and bias against his alma mater?
September 3rd, 2013 at 4:04 PM ^
Well played!
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:08 PM ^
More ridiculously, he has Boise in. If you lose by 30+ in week one, you are not ranked week two.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 2:53 PM ^
I, for one, appreciate the effort. Now do a limerick involving Drew Dileo plz
September 4th, 2013 at 8:37 AM ^
Notre Dame just won't cover the slot.
Devin Gardner might take his best shot.
They're ignoring Drew Dileo?
That's gonna be silly-o.
The Irish don't know what Drew's got.
September 4th, 2013 at 8:41 AM ^
There once was a guy named Drew Dileo
Whose hands were so good they were sticky yo!
He said Go Blue! as he tied up his shoe
I'm a throwback to the era of Bo!
September 4th, 2013 at 3:40 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^
Well, considering how hard it is to see the screen with his head up his own ass, I'm amazed he even knew which teams he was putting on the ballot.
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:47 AM ^
With an impressive showing and a victory on Saturday night in prime time we could see a huge jump in the rankings, seeing how the media (looking at you Lou) constantly slobbers over ND.
Beat ND!
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:03 PM ^
wouldn't you? Unfortunately what will happen is if UM wins they might move up to 14-10 area and ND falls to 20-17 area; if ND wins they'd move up to 7-4 area and UM drops to unranked.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:27 PM ^
I don't know if Michigan has a whole lot of room to talk about getting the benefit of the doubt from voters.
September 3rd, 2013 at 3:27 PM ^
Yep...
Over the last 24 seasons, we're the 6th most overrated program in preseason polls (relative to end of season rankings):
Overrated -
1) Oklahoma
2) USC
3) Texas
4) Florida State
5) Nebraska
6) Michigan
7) Notre Dame
8) Miami (YTM)
9) Florida
10) Clemson
September 3rd, 2013 at 7:36 PM ^
I've seen that list before (and others like it) and you can almost replace "most overrated" with "best" as well. Because in order to be highly ranked, you need to be perceived to be good, which almost always means "was good last year or has been good for the last few years."
Look at that list. Every team save Clemson has won a national title during the period covered there, and those 10 schools comprise the top-15 or so best programs over that period as well.
The one school I would have expected to see on there is Georgia. It seems they are expected to be contenders every year, and although they're usually a very good team, it seems they don't typicaly live up to their billing.
September 3rd, 2013 at 8:42 PM ^
I did a double take when I saw that list. That is actually some really good company.
And well said
September 4th, 2013 at 1:06 PM ^
The top 10 underrated list has some reasonable credentials also.
Top 10 underrated:
1) Oregon
2) Boise State
3) Kansas State
4) TCU
5) Boston College
6) BYU
7) Alabama
8) Michigan State
9) Georgia Tech
10) Iowa
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:57 AM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:58 AM ^
Awesome embed orobs.
Almost all the teams above won with the exception of Georgia. I didn't expect them to drop below Michigan. The team will rise next week if it beats Notre Dame.
September 3rd, 2013 at 11:59 AM ^
I'm sorry, but how can anyone in the AP have Ohio above teams like Clemson and LSU? I can understand Michigan still at 17, but Ohio at 3? Come on, man.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:02 PM ^
Some voters may think that Buffalo was legitimate competition for Ohio. Time has a way of working these problems out. Ohio still won by a decent margin although they didn't look impressive.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:19 PM ^
Hard to find a loss on Ohio's schedule. In early season voting it makes more sense to vote based on expected finish then performance.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:37 PM ^
osu is closer to 4th than to 3rd (their AP ballots ranged from Asmussen to 10). For that matter, Michigan is closer to 16th (and there is a big dropoff in points in both polls going from Michigan to UCLA) - Michigan ranged from 11 to Drew Sharp on the AP. Asmussen from Chambana, IL, was the high voter for 3 different schools.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^
Early on, pollsters seem to think "Hey, Buffalo hung around with the #2 team in the country!", while at the end I figure most will say "Wow, OSU had trouble pulling away from a crappy MAC team."
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:00 PM ^
Suprised Wisconsin moved up two spots. I know they won 45-0 nothing, but they looked pretty blah against a very bad UMass team.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:00 PM ^
Another unsurprising fact, the SEC seems overrated. I was not really impressed with TAMU, SC, or LSU. Georgia lost. Alabama is really the only elite team in that conference. With all this talk about Division 4 football, it seems like parity is way up. None of the big teams looked all that great against their snacky cakes, aside from us, Oregon, Wisconsin, and a few other teams.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:45 PM ^
The score is prettied up greatly by the fact that Alabama had
- A punt return TD
- A kickoff return TD
- A pick-6 TD
Not that those are not worthwhile, but Alabama only gained 206 yards on offensive against a declining Virginia Tech team. Virginia Tech actually outgained them 212-206!
Maybe it's early season whatever, but Alabama looked very beatable
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:09 PM ^
...was very stout against Bama. Its offense could never get moving as Logan Thomas had a horrid day made worse by at least 7 drops by his receivers. The game was closer than it appeared even though Bama was always going to win.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:05 PM ^
If Georgia loses a close game to South Carolina (say 28-27) this weekend they will be 0-2 but they will have only lost to the #4 and #6 team in the country by a total of (in my example) 4 points.
Will they still be in the Top 25?
SHOULD they still be in the Top 25?
Right now, I think 11th is a good spot for Georgia. Will the voters be able to have an 0-2 team in the Top 25 though? Questionable.
In week 3, they'll crush North Texas. In week 4 they could lose to LSU the #9 team. Can a 1-3 team be in the Top 25?
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^
No, I don't think they should. We have no basis to know how good Clemson and SC are. SC won in a similar fashion to OSU, where the scoreboard didn't indicate the level of play. UNC blew coverage a few times to lead to quick strikes. Tajh Boyd looks the part, but there is such a small sample size that you can't claim that Georgia were to lose to two top 5 schools. I'll bet a nickle that SC and Clemson won't both be in the final top 5.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:29 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:09 PM ^
I agree with your prediction that with a loss next week they will be ranked in the 20s. I don't think the voters will put a 1-3 team in the polls. They'll be near the bottom of receiving votes.
I also don't really think they should be ranked a 1-3. Good teams need to win some of those games. Losing all 3 might be a sign they aren't Top 25 material.
Now, after beating Vandy, Tenn and Mizzou with a 4-3 record and those specific losses, they'll definitely be ranked again.
I'm on the Georgia side with you this week, so hopefully this is all just a thought exercise.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:34 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:55 PM ^
This is why early polls are fun. There's a lot of potential movement and more things to discuss. The last few weeks, the positions are somewhat locked in place and can't change very far. Boring!
If the voters could be trusted to ignore their previous ballots then the early season polls have no downside. The problem is that too many voters take their previous poll and make minor adjustments. I would rather fix this problem than eliminate early polls (although it is the much harder solution).
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 3:14 PM ^
I don't give a shit who you lose to or how close it was. 0-2 teams (even 0-1 teams) should not even be in the "Others receiving votes" bucket. Thats why early season polls are bullshit and its unfathomable that they are used to determine post-season bowl matchups.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^
Here is the distribution of the individual AP votes:
| RANK | NO. OF VOTES |
| 11 | 1 |
| 12 | 4 |
| 13 | 2 |
| 14 | 7 |
| 15 | 8 |
| 16 | 14 |
| 17 | 9 |
| 18 | 5 |
| 19 | 4 |
| 20 | 2 |
| 21 | 2 |
| 23 | 1 |
| N/R | Drew Sharp |
| AVG. RANK | 16.12 |
| MEDIAN RANK | 16 |
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:28 PM ^
These polls should really include a clause that states that if a voter has too many votes that deviate greatly from the standard, that they will be disallowed from voting. Either vote with knowledge and sportsmanship, or GTFO (eg. Sharp and Fulmer).
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:42 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 2:06 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:21 PM ^
Sounds about right. At the end of the day, we simply just beat up on a MAC team who's starting QB had zero prior experience. Next week is our real gut-check game. I like our odds going into Saturday night, as I'm still not convinced that Rees is anything special. But the interior of the O-Line, as well as Fitz/Green are really going to have to earn their keep that night.
If we can knock off ND, we should be ranked somewhere right outside the top 10 next week. Probably 11-13.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:06 PM ^