Week 6 Polls & Ratings (AP #4, Coaches #4) Open Thread
Your Week 6 Thread for all polls, rankings, and computer ratings discussion. I will try to update with AP and Coaches Poll when they are released later this afternoon
Most of the preseason projections are phased out now so the advanced stats are a little more meaningful now. FEI with F/+ will be out tomorrow.
AP Poll #4: http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
Coaches Poll #4: http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/football/polls/coaches-poll/
F/+ #4: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fplus
S&P+ #3: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaa
FEI #5: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fei
Massey Ratings #4: http://www.masseyratings.com/cf/fbs/ratings
Sagarin Ratings #3 (#3 in Predictor): http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/
ESPN FPI #4: http://espn.go.com/college-football/statistics/teamratings
SRS #1: http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/years/2016-ratings.html
Michigan's team statistical profile:
Football Study Hall: http://www.footballstudyhall.com/pages/2016-michigan-advanced-statistical-profile
ESPN FPI: http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/fpi?id=130&year=2016
Massey Ratings: http://www.masseyratings.com/team.php?t=4741&s=286577
October 2nd, 2016 at 2:49 PM ^
Three 2-loss teams in the Top 25 seems like a travesty. One in the Top 15 is a bad look. I know Ole Miss has lost to good teams, but it's kind of an insult to those below them with better quality wins, and fewer losses.
October 2nd, 2016 at 3:01 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 2nd, 2016 at 3:05 PM ^
Bama hasn't played a team with a winning record
October 2nd, 2016 at 4:48 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 2nd, 2016 at 6:07 PM ^
October 2nd, 2016 at 2:49 PM ^
Only AP pollster that votes with an EUTM! Michigan No. 1.
October 2nd, 2016 at 3:08 PM ^
That SRS link (the one with us at #1) has state at #85 and EMU at #86!!! I like this one
October 2nd, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^
...And ND at 89...lol
October 3rd, 2016 at 1:15 AM ^
October 2nd, 2016 at 3:25 PM ^
Herbstreit was saying on air that if Clemson wins ACC, Louisville would still have a shot at a playoff birth. If Washington slips up a bit, would the playoff committee pass up Big 12 and Pac 10 to chose a team that didn't win its conference?
October 2nd, 2016 at 4:02 PM ^
October 2nd, 2016 at 4:20 PM ^
Answer: Never
Unless the fix is in to increase the playoff to 6 or 8 teams, and generate more revenue with more playoff-game ticket sales, advertising, and lucrative playoff-football television and sponsorship deals.
So, upon reflection...
Answer: Definitely
October 2nd, 2016 at 5:09 PM ^
Yes, they looked good against Stanford, but Stanford absolutely did not deserve a top 10 ranking based on what they'd done on the field to that point. They had three meh wins against nobody special, and they will be gone for good from the top 25 in a few weeks. And Washington has nothing else impressive on their resume. They are a very beatable team, even in a weak Pac-12.
October 2nd, 2016 at 5:20 PM ^
When Louisville beat FSU it was the statement win to end all statement wins. When Texas beat ND Charlie Strong has finally turned things around. When OSU beat Oklahoma they had their signature win. When Wisconsin beat LSU and MSU they earned their place in the playoff conversation.
But when Michigan starts out 5-0 and shows America that they may have the best defense in the entire nation while beating two top 25 teams, they need to show more. They still have to prove themselves so we're not going to let them advance any further in the polls and we'll have other trendy teams leapfrog them each week.
I keep thinking about that scene from Major League when the Indians kept looking at opposition from their owner no matter how well they were playing and Tom Berringer finally addressed the team and said "There's only one thing left to do then.....win the whole fucking thing".
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 2nd, 2016 at 7:59 PM ^
October 2nd, 2016 at 7:32 PM ^
Too bad MSU is a tire fire and won't be ranked when we play them.