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 1:46 PM ^
Not saying Gardner is necessarily any better at this point. In fact, the argument could be made that Rees is better, due to his experience and with Gardner still looking somewhat inconsistent, but I'm interested to see how he plays against us without having Michael Floyd to bail him out.
This game is going to be much more heavily influenced on defense, anyway.
September 4th, 2013 at 8:47 AM ^
Rees is no Heisman contender, but he has the experience and ability to be very effective, especially if he has time to throw.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:23 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:32 PM ^
I agree, and add Nebraska, MSU, and OSU.
Another prediction
ESPN, STFU about Jameis Winston. He looked really good, but I'm sure there was an all-office meeting today in Bristol highlighting how they can work Winston into every piece they do, including Wimbledon and any NASCAR events.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:50 PM ^
In his first start, he was 25/27 356 yds 4 TDS 0 INTs & 1 rushing TD. Plus it was technically against BCS competition. No one else put up numbers like that against anyone this weekend
If he was at Michigan we'd be wondering if we'll win 4 national titles in a row or just 3. I think this is a worthy hype train
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:01 PM ^
Yep. It's not like ESPN spent the whole weekend talking about him; there's been some attention, but the hype he'll get now is deserved. If he continues to put up stats like that, he'll continue to get attention, and nobody could be blamed for that. If he doesn't, it will fade.
Remember how nuts the country was for Denard after that first Notre Dame game? He had started two games. He was amazing. There were gobs of hype (Mark May said, "Just give him the Heisman now").
He faded, the attention faded, though (rightfully) never fully left. It worked out.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:25 PM ^
Gino Smith last year is another.
September 3rd, 2013 at 2:19 PM ^
I'm not doubting the ridiculousness of his numbers, he did not put a single football in a spot that he didn't want it. It was amazing. My annoyance is at ESPN's modus operandi. Jump from one big story to another, kill it to death, then find the next big thing. You miss the subtletly of the sports world by driving that truck. Plus, any bright moments are mitigated by the fact that you know they will beat the story to death. There's no reason that Tebow should be maligned, but he is, and the reason is that ESPN is a sports parasite. Cling to host, get maximum value, kill the host.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:25 PM ^
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:59 PM ^
Northwestern beat Cal on the road, without Kain Colter and with a banged up Mark. While Cal is no power, it's still an impressive win considering the two guys that were the primary reason NW was getting hype didn't play or were extremely limited.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:04 PM ^
In the last two years Northwestern has been the standard-bearer for B1G non-conference results. They have played BCS teams and won. Not great teams, and not great-looking victories, but they are wins and they count. If you think winning your season-opener on the road against a BCS team should be a cakewalk, you haven't been paying attention.
And you probably didn't watch Michigan football during the Lloyd Carr era, when Michigan always struggled in non-conf road games and usually lost them.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^
I agree with everything you said, I was impressed by Northwestern - I'm guessing this was meant as a reply Lampuki?
September 3rd, 2013 at 2:11 PM ^
Yeah, I started out agreeing with you, but then I engaged in an ungraceful change of direction not dissimilar to a defender trying not to get killed by Jabrill Peppers.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:27 PM ^
Michigan holding at 17 isn't too surprising. I'm a little surprised that MSU fell completely out of the poll, but I guess that's the downside to playing a Friday night game that lets the whole nation see that your offense is terrible.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:28 PM ^
Not surprised but the coaches' poll is nuts ranking the Huskers ahead of the 'Cats. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have ranked the Huskers at all - certainly no way I'd put them #19.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:32 PM ^
Where does one find how various writers voted?
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:40 PM ^
Mouse over "BY VOTER" and then select the voter you wish to see.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:45 PM ^
Here's the complete breakdown of votes for Michigan.
Only one person left us of the ballot *glares at Drew Sharp*.
September 3rd, 2013 at 7:18 PM ^
He should not be allowed to vote. His ballot is a disgrace. Did you look at the rest of his votes?
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:46 PM ^
#17 ranking is okay. BTW, we were ranked #17 in 1997 as well, and we know how that turned out.
September 3rd, 2013 at 12:57 PM ^
Somewhere around 14-15 would seem to be more appropriate. There's no reason why Florida and Texas deserve to be higher than Michigan right now. They've been consistently unremarkable and are coasting on reputation.
Then again, one could say the same about B10 teams. But still.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:05 PM ^
I'm really scratching my head at Neb jumping NU in the coaches poll, or even being in the TOP 25 period.
Wyoming.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:08 PM ^
These early season polls are rediculous, but whats even worse is that your ranking before you ever play a game can effect your final ranking. Clemson should be number one. They played and beat the best competition so far.
September 3rd, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
Not that this matters that much because he is kind of a clown (although can be entertaining), but Ray Bentley, from the Doc and Bentley morning show here in West Michigan on 107.3 FM, has Michigan at #5. Kind of a surprise since he's always come off as kind of a UM hater in my view.
September 3rd, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^
Michigan hasn't proved much yet so no obvious reason for them to rise and no need to complain about the rankings. If we take care of business against ND then I think Michigan moves up considerably and the real wrangling about where we belong can commence.
September 3rd, 2013 at 3:00 PM ^
#17 is just fine for now. If we beat Notre Dame, will likely continue to win and watch other teams drop from now until Thanksgiving weekend. Anyone that's watched the rest of the Big 10 teams play probably thinks we're better than sparty, Nebraska, Penn State... even Northwestern. We ought to win those games. If we start 2-0, we'll probably be 11-0 going into the ohio game, and ranked in the top five (except by Sharp, who will have us at #24.)
September 3rd, 2013 at 9:38 PM ^
I have the sneaking suspicion that the one first place vote that ohio got was from Urbz.
September 3rd, 2013 at 10:53 PM ^
We just need to take care of our business on the field. Everything else will follow.
Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I believe that the team will have a convincing victory against ND.