Michigan 7th in AP poll all-time programs
Someone's really drinking that Scarlet and Grey kool-aid (Ohio State is #1). Might as well call it the top 100 programs since 1936 instead. MSU as high as 19th as well
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/17201971/ohio-state-buck…
You have to respect FSU because they are the anti-SEC by traveling to tough away games. They got a lot of respect and a lot of high rankings in a short amount of time compared to a more 'traditional' program with taking on all comers in building their program up.
The Harbaugh years will bost that number over time!
Preposterous.
Huge recency bias layered on top of sheer ignorance.
But they are getting the clicks, and that is what it is all about.
I don't if since 1936 counts as a recency bias.
is mostly recencly bias. If they do this same poll 5 years from now, Michigan will be much higher and MSU won't be in the top 20.
No recency bias is overrating what has happened recently. This ranking is weighted for every year equally. A ranking in the AP poll in 1936 is worth exactly the same as on in 2015. MSU has had a good last decade, that decade isn't worth any more or any less than a good decade from Michigan in the 40's. Recency bias would be putting msu above michigan becaues winning now is harder than winning in 1940. That didn't happen so no there is zero recency bias, msu has just had more success over the last 70 years than people give them credit for, especially since shockingly the last 70 years also includes the last 10. I also wouldn't expect Michigan to jump anyone other than maybe Nebraska since all the teams above us are likely to be ranked pretty much every week for the next 5 years.
Problem is that they only use AP polls rankings which only go down to 20, or more recently 25.. That is not accurate. It distorts and overranks a team (like MSU) that has has some very high poll finishes (MSU recently and a few times in the 1960s), coupled with a ton of years where they were nowhere near the top 20, or even the top 60.
MSU's recent top 20 rankings are over rewarded. Meanwhile being a terrible team from 1970 until Dantonio (with only a few good years form Perles and a couple from Saban) is not accuratelycounted.
If there had been something like an S&P+ ranking (ranks all teams) from 1936 forward, schools would be more accurately ranked.
This AP thing treats, for example, a 3-8 MSU team from 1980 the same as the team that finished just outside the the top 20 (21st) in 1980. IOW, the no. 91 team is treated the same as the no. 21 team in a given year.
People are being obtuse. People don't care about football championships in 1905 because so few schools had teams and nobody traveled across the country to play so any ranking was a joke based off nothing. There are different eras of football and since about the 1940's is the era 95% of people would care about.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
When babe ruth played baseball there was a professional league in which teams played each other and then in a world series to determine a champion. In 1902 when Michigan won a national champioship they played Albion, Case scientific, Michigan gricultural (won that game 119-0) Indiana, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Chicago, Oberlin, and Minnesota. 8 of those games were at home. Princeton also went undefeated that year playing literally zero of the same teams. The national championship was split. Nobody has any idea how good any of those teams were relative to each other. It was completely different from the modern structure. You can both admit Michigan was great during that era but comparing it to modern football makes literally zero sense. Whereas in the 1950's there were bowl games and teams didn't only play teams in their region, so even though the game was different comparing relative success in that era to this era actually works.
See how logic can do wonderful things for you? In an all time ranking Michigan is easily a top 5 program and maybe the best, in a modern era ranking Michgan is easily top 10 and arguably top 5. 95% of people only care about the modern era and if you remove Michigan, Army, and Navy football fans its probably more like 99%. This isn't that difficult to understand.
August 3rd, 2016 at 12:19 AM ^
Yeah, but Tom Osborne's record is inflated with clubbing baby seals before it was fashionable to club baby seals.
I don't have a prob with Michigan at 7 until I see Nebraska above them.
Hard to argue with 1 - 5 though.
Dare I say this actually a decent poll?
and this is how it came out. Find it hard Nebraska had more points then us, but it is what it is. Let's have a big year this year and climb that poll.
Looks like the opener for UofM is against the 93rd all time ranked team in the country. What a humbling stat if you're Hawaii.
August 2nd, 2016 at 10:56 PM ^
August 2nd, 2016 at 11:23 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 2nd, 2016 at 11:46 PM ^
Iowa Pre-Flight at 98 is straight bullshit. No way they should be that low.
August 3rd, 2016 at 12:01 AM ^
So 5 weeks as the #1 team is the same as winning a title? Nice. The point basis for these "rankings" is pretty much shit and seriously undervalues winning a title.
Some details I found in another forum:
vs Top 25's
- ND 295-168-16 0.616 (479 games)
- Alabama 294-184-20 0.590 (498 games)
- OSU 253-165-19 0.579 (437 games)
- USC 211-148-20 0.557 (379 games)
- OU 163-146-12 0.508 (321 games)
vs Top 15's
- Alabama 207-133-19 0.577 (359 games)
- ND 134-110-9 0.530 (253 games)
- USC 84-75-9 0.500 (168 games)
- OU 113-124-10 0.457 (247 games)
- OSU 86-103-8 0.437 (197 games)
vs Top 10's
- ND 98-84-7 0.519 (189 games)
- Alabama 43-37-3 0.518 (83 games)
- USC 70-70-9 0.470 (149 games)
- OU 104-118-10 0.448 (232 games)
- OSU 66-85-7 0.418 (158 games)
So OSU rolls up wins against 16-25 and is sub .500 against 1-15. Start the season as #1 and roll through your non-conference games to 5 wins and that's as good as winning a title? C'mon...
August 3rd, 2016 at 12:25 AM ^
August 3rd, 2016 at 12:34 AM ^
Not trying to put UM above OSU, more that OSU isn't #1. And that winning a title is undervalued.
August 3rd, 2016 at 12:51 AM ^
Again... We cannot really argue the AP poll and down them. Say that this poll doesnt matter when Nebraska can only use that against us. They will say 97 then is all theirs. Its this simple... Michigan football is on the rise and will be a powerhouse. As much as we include all our wins and championships from the Harvard/Yale days, thats been over 100 years ago. We haven't been dominate over the course of the last 100 years. Our last times of being remotely dominate was the Bo days. We need to take this for what its worth and wake up. We are not just the University of Michigan and deserve respect. We must start earning respect once again. Its been way TOO LONG!