Royster had like 40 yards against a 1-AA team. If they can't run the ball, it's going to be ugly with Bolden.
i would find this more credible if it was about Tom Crean
Royster had like 40 yards against a 1-AA team. If they can't run the ball, it's going to be ugly with Bolden.
Wait until after this weekend to see if Michigan belongs there or not. Texas could probably drop another two places comfortably. Penn State might have jumped a bit too much as well. They were up by 6 at the half to YSU and didn't really look all that impressive.
there is the whole Coulter-Krugman thing, but also the feeling we've been down this road before. Sure, it's different now with more experienced QB's, OL, etc, but it's also just the first week. Is UConn who we thought they were? Is Michigan, for that matter? I co-sign the wait-and-see approach, at least until after ND. U-M wins that one and we have a few very winnable games (although Tandon Doss still scares the daylights out of me) before they're tested again (MSU in AA).
Is anybody who we thought they were? All we have is one week of evidence, for Michigan or anyone else.
I really doubt Coulter is in play at 25, since that is only worth one point and I'm pretty sure the winners were always more than one point above the poll average. And that's only if Michigan gets no other votes. I'm guessing Michigan will be top ten or close on the ballots of all the resume rankers since a win over a probably-bowl-bound BCS team is one of the more impressive wins of the first weekend.
I don't even want Michigan to be on CK's radar! ;)
Tempting CK is always a bit dicey and there is the 'we have been down this road before'. That being said, I think placing us at 25 though is fair from a resume perspective. After all, one might argue that it's too low given that you ranked ND above us when they 'only' beat Purdue, who I think would have been predicted to lose to U Conn before this weekend. I wouldn't advocate moving us just because of the ND comparison though.
Poll looks pretty complete to me, I give Boise St a definite #1 nod. They continue to prve again and again why they are one of the nations top teams year in year out. I wouldve moved UofM up higher (at least ahead of the Irish), they beat the shit out've a decent if not good team. Also God knows I'm buyest...Go Blue
Perhaps you are biased?
Obviously he meant he is the most buy. He has all the merchandise guys!
This was not a strong first post.
It could have been "bi-assed".
I disagree with Boise at #1. Both VaTech and Boise were sloppy, both teams also went to sleep for periods of time. Boise walked out of there with the win because it goofed up slightly less than VaTech. VaTech's WRs were getting behind the Boise DBs and getting open, the only thing that saved Boise was that VaTech's WRs kept dropping passes or having them bounce off their fingertips.
It's hard to argue who should be #1 given that a lot of teams played cupcakes this weekend, but I'm not to sure about jumping Boise 4 places from that game alone.
True. I saw Boise St. beat an ACC team that wasn't all that good and definitely waaaay overrated. Boise St. certainly didn't look like even a top ten team to me let alone #1. To my mind the number one team should have dominated a team that played as badly as VTech.
Has anybody other than BSU beaten a top ten team? Both teams were pretty sloppy, but when the pressure was on, Moore made things look almost too easy. BSU is legit, and nobody else has really shown anything against anybody decent. Ironically, the people who complain about BSU's schedule overlook the fact that so far BSU has the most meaningful victory so far.
Let's be honest. Even if BSU was to go undefeated in a Big Ten schedule, there are still those who would just assume that the Big Ten must be overrated that year. At some point BSU is going to have to get credit for continuing to win, including games against top teams.
But PSU needs to hold steady or even take a hit. Yes, they ended up with a huge win, but it took them WAY too long to get going against YSU. They should've been up 14 inside of the first quarter.
Also, I don't know that I would move Boise above OSU just yet. OSU resoundingly won a game they should have won resoundingly. Boise won a game that was probably a toss-up statistically, and they barely won. At times they were dominant, and at times dominated. I would keep OSU at #1. We'll find out if they REALLY deserve it this weekend against Jacory Harris. Why shuffle them more than you have to?
Why shuffle them more than you have to?
...because now there's actual evidence on the field of how good the teams are?
...then Va. Tech can't be all the way down at #13. Those were two evenly matched teams. And had the Hokies not imploded in the 1st quarter they likely win the game.
This is an excellent point. Boise barely squeaked past VT on the strength of VT having a terrible first quarter and then a few friendly calls at the end of the game. The teams are evenly matched and should be closer together; if Boise moves up that much, it's hardly fair to move VT down. That being said, VT did not look like a top ten team.
At some point, after BSU has that sort of first quarter against every heavy hitter that they play, does it not become a credit to BSU instead of a demerit to the heavy hitter? We have seen this play out not a few times now.
What other games are you referencing? I can't think of any, but my knowledge of BSU's games is far from encyclopedic. I'm more irritated with the officiating in that game. BSU was gifted a first down on a blown roughing the kicker call (on the same play that there was a blatant holder by the personal protector), and then gifted several more calls that allowed them to make a go-ahead score. The fact that these things were necessary to beat a VT team that is clearly not an elite team seems like a pretty damning statement.
These are the end-1st (or end-2nd, *) scores for all BSU games vs major (as I handwave-ly determine major) going back to 2005-2006 season.
Oregon..................2009-2010.....13-0...BSU.....W TCU.....................2009-2010.....10-0...BSU.....W Oregon..................2008-2009.....24-6*..BSU....W TCU.....................2008-2009.....10-0...BSU.....L Washington..............2007-2008.....14-0...UW......L Oregon State............2007-2008.....28-14*.BSU...W Oklahoma................2006-2007.....14-7...BSU.....W (also 21-10 *) Georgia.................2005-2006.....24-0...UGA.....L Oregon State............2005-2006.....14-0...BSU.....W Boston College..........2005-2006.....24-0...BC......L (after furious BSU comeback)
There's a pretty solid pattern there.
As for complaining about the officiating in that game, you can shove that one. Both teams got jobbed on a regular basis.
If a team takes the potential #1 team in the nation down to the wire, you could even argue that they are the near equal of that team. Granted, the "neutral field" in MD was close to a home game for VT, so you have to give BSU a couple of points there, but if BSU is #1, I don't think VT moves.
Evenly matched or not, one team won, and the other lost. There are plenty of teams that haven't suffered the indignity of losing yet. This is a resume poll, not a power ranking, and the Hokies are still the top team in the poll with a loss.
Why not put Fresno State in after dominating a (supposedly) decent BCS team in Cincy.
If this is a true resume poll, Michigan should be higher than half those teams. Not that I think they have any business being that high, but as it stands now their resume is stronger than essentially everyone who played the usual opening mid-major and FCS tomato cans.
This sure doesn't look like a resume poll... Florida and LSU certainly didn't have more impressive wins than we did.
I think you're being a little too friendly to TCU - I'd give them a +3 or 4 rather than 7. I like the fact that you'll actually ding Florida for playing like ass. I also think you're being too kind to LSU. They almost choked away a game to a squad that was missing half it's defensive starters. At the most I'd put them at 17. Also, Oregon State is borderline. I'd say move them a little lower until we know for sure exactly how their QB is going pan out - we'll know much more in a couple weeks when they play Boise.
And Northwestern, yeah, they beat Vandy but I don't think that's enough to get them into the top 25. Major props for dropping Florida though, I watched that game and was very, very unimpressed with them.
I'm okay with Boise State being number one for now because they beat the best team of anyone in the top 25, but I hope you will drop them as they get into their WAC schedule and start beating piss poor teams. Will you put Miami or Florida State above Boise State next week if they beat either Ohio State or Oklahoma, respectively? Because that is essentially what you are doing here by moving Boise State up 4 spots for beating your ninth ranked team.
I too think it's fine to put Boise #1 for two weeks (they don't play this week). After that, you'll have some basis for evaluation. Their next game is @Wyoming, who will have played @Texas the week before. So if one watches both games (Wyoming-Texas; BSU-Wyoming), one might have an idea of where to put them. Then Oregon State goes into Boise, so that will help as well.
I predict they get through their early schedule, but lose one of their last three games, against Fresno State, @Nevada, and Utah State.
Depending on how they perform against the rest of their schedule (i.e. if they beat every WAC team by 50 points, they'll stay up there), I'd say it's likely they'll eventually move down.
Sounds fair enough to me. As long as you are willing to move them down if they don't perform as they should, then I'm fine with you ranking them number one this week. Good work.
Much respect for this Tim. Putting Boise State at the top is the right thing to do because no one higher than them played anyone decent.
If an undefeated BSU team scrapes by Fresno State the same week say an undefeated Alabama team has a convincing win against a strong SEC team I bet Alabama will pass them. It's got to work both ways.
What gets me is that the coaches won't move give BSU much credit now but they will penalize them later when lowere ranked teams have good wins.
Yes Florida was slow out of the gate, but they got it together and should probably be more like 11 or 12. LSU is not that good. They barely squeaked by a decimated (and perhaps over-rated to begin with) UNC team at home. I wouldn't have moved them down but I certainly would not have moved them up that much.
And get Notre Lame the hell out of there. They didn't show much against a weak Purdue team with an over-rated QB (purely based on his 5-star recruiting rank). They are not that good and will struggle a whole bunch this year. This coming weekend might get ugly for them.
I think having Michigan at 25 is reasonable for the reasons you stated. And, the homerism is somewhat tempered by the fact that the next team in the "Others receiving votes" section of the poll is the Dixie State Rebels, who, by the way, lost to Central Washington. So, clearly homerism is alive and well in the poll and far more blatant elsewhere.
UConn and Notre Dame were seen as about equal by both the coaches and AP in the week 1 polls, and said curbstomping certainly was more impressive than Northwestern's win over Vanderbilt. You could argue UM up to around 21 at this point.
Oregon should be over TCU and Northwestern shouldn't even sniff the top 25. I think someone like S. Carolina should be in over them. The rest I can live with.
...that #1 remains #1 until beaten. I am perfectly willing to downgrade a #1 if they win unimpressively. However, I think Ohio State did everything you could have expected of them, in beating Marshall 45–7. Therefore, if they were your #1 last week, they should still be your #1.
Beyond that, I am fairly confident that the Buckeyes would be favored over Boise State on a neutral field.
Beating VT on the road > Beating Marshall at home, even given the difference in scores.
Don't you feel Boise was spotted 17 points and still had to hang on for the W, though? I thought the game was sloppy on both sides, FWIW. Just curious...
Don't you find it a tad bit curious that somehow Boise State is spotted a pile of 1st quarter points against literally every tough opponent? Might this be a function of BSU as much as any given opponent?
God help them when Petersen goes to the Pac 12.
Virginia Tech is not a great team. Tyrod Taylor is not a great QB but hung 30 on them.
If you look to those who know (Vegas), Boise would be a dog against half of your top 20 which means they are not a #1 team. Top 10 is fine.
VT will end the season with 4 losses.
They would be dog and probably cover if not win outright. Ask Jamie Mac about betting on Boise State as an underdog.
Virginia Tech is a perennial Top-25 team, and Tyrod Taylor is a better QB than most of those Michigan will face this year.
You can knock Boise State's schedule all you want, but when they have faced opponents from BCS leagues, they have generally won, and they have always been at least competitive. I wouldn't put them at #1 either, but they are a very good team.
Boise St. is a god team, but very large number of teams that will end up unranked at the end of the year "generally" beat opponents from BCS leagues.
They haven't yet though. Boise's resume is better than those guys for now. I'm not projecting the final poll, I'm going on what we've seen so far.
You can knock Boise State's schedule all you want, but when they have faced opponents from BCS leagues, they have generally won
False. BSU is 7-11 in the past 10 years against BCS conference teams. They've only got a winning record against the Big XII (2 wins - Iowa State and Oklahoma). BSU is a good team, but they're not an elite team. They're Oregon or Wisconsin or Georgia: good, but not great.
They are 50-4 in four years under Chris Petersen, which is all that matters in ranking this team. The four losses are:
That's one loss to a "BCS conference" team. Petersen is 5-1 against them (wins over Oregon State, Oklahoma, @Oregon, Oregon, and now Virginia Tech).
God only knows what relevance that ten-year statistic has for a team that has been D1A for fifteen!