Blogpoll Draft Ballot: Week 9

Submitted by Tim on November 2nd, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Rank Team Delta
1 Alabama
2 Texas 2
3 Florida
4 Iowa 2
5 Cincinnati
6 Oregon 4
7 Boise State 2
8 TCU 1
9 LSU 1
10 Georgia Tech 2
11 Houston
12 Penn State 1
13 Southern Cal 7
14 Pittsburgh 2
15 Notre Dame 3
16 Ohio State 1
17 Oklahoma State 2
18 Virginia Tech 4
19 Arizona
20 Miami (Florida)
21 Wisconsin 1
22 California 1
23 Utah 2
24 Auburn
25 Texas Tech
Last week's ballot

Dropped Out: South Carolina (#21), West Virginia (#24).

I'm pretty comfortable with the moves during the top. Texas got a new marquee win, and Iowa was far less impressive against Indiana than the final score indicated. It also seems pretty likely that Iowa is going to grab Stanziball from the jaws of victory at some point this year.

I think Oregon ahead of Boise State is justifiable, despite the head-to-head result. The Ducks have beaten USC, Utah, Cal, and a couple other teams that are looking pretty strong. The only good win for Boise is Oregon, and if you're looking to be highly-ranked coming from a weak conference, it's probably a better idea to not schedule awful 1-AA teams.

TCU and LSU drop primarily because of the Oregon victory, and the boost it gave both the Ducks and Broncos. Everything else is pretty self-explanatory, but the end of the poll, as usual is a mess.

Resumes after the jump

Rank Team 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th        
1 Alabama 34-24 VT 20-6 So Carolina 22-3 Ole Miss 35-7 Arkansas 38-20 Kentucky 12-10 Tennessee 40-14 Florida Int 53-7 N Texas  
2 Texas 41-14 Oklahoma St 41-7 Missouri 34-24 Texas Tech 16-13 Oklahoma 38-14 Colorado 59-20 Monroe 41-10 Wyoming 64-7 UTEP  
3 Florida 13-3 LSU 41-17 Georgia 41-7 Kentucky 23-13 Tennessee 23-20 Arkansas 29-19 Miss St. 56-6 Troy 62-3 Charleston  
4 Iowa 21-10 PSU 20-10 Wisconsin 27-17 Arizona 30-28 Michigan 15-13 Michigan St 35-3 Iowa State 42-24 Indiana 24-21 Arkansas St 17-16 N Iowa
5 Cincinnati 34-17 South Florida 47-15 Rutgers 28-18 Oregon State 41-10 Louisville 28-7 Syracuse 28-20 Fresno State 37-13 Miami OH 70-3 SEMO  
6 Oregon 47-20 USC 43-19 Washington 31-24 Utah 42-3 Cal 24-10 UCLA 52-6 Wash St 38-36 Purdue 8-19 Boise  
7 Boise State 19-8 Oregon 28-21 Tulsa 51-34 Fresno 45-7 San Jose St 54-9 Hawaii 49-14 BGSU 48-0 Miami OH 34-16 UC Davis  
8 TCU 38-7 BYU 14-10 Clemson 30-14 UVA 44-6 Colo St 41-0 UNLV 20-17 Airforce 39-14 SMU 56-21 Texas State  
9 LSU 31-10 Auburn 20-13 Georgia 31-23 Washington 30-26 Miss State 23-9 Vandy 42-0 Tulane 31-3 UL Lafayette 3-13 Florida  
10 Georgia Tech 28-23 Va Tech 24-7 No Carolina 42-31 Miss St 30-27 Clemson 34-9 UVa 56-31 Vandy 49-44 Florida St 37-17 Jax State 17-33 Miami FL
11 Houston 45-35 Oklahoma St 29-28 Texas Tech 31-24 Miss St 44-16 Tulane 50-43 USM 38-15 SMU 55-7 NW St 41-58 UTEP  
12 Penn State 35-10 Michigan 20-0 Minnesota 35-17 Illinois 34-13 Northwestern 28-7 Syracuse 31-6 Temple 31-7 Akron 52-3 Eastern Ill 10-21 Iowa
13 USC 30-3 California 18-15 Ohio State 34-27 Notre Dame 42-36 Oregon St 56-3 SJSU 27-6 Wazzou 13-16 Washington 20-47 Oregon  
14 Pittsburgh 41-14 South Fla 24-17 Rutgers 24-21 UConn 35-10 Louisville 54-27 Buffalo 24-17 Navy 38-3 Youngstown 31-38 NC State  
15 Notre Dame 35-0 Nevada 37-30 Washington 33-30 Michigan St 20-16 BC 40-14 Wash St 24-21 Purdue 27-34 USC 34-38 Michigan  
16 Ohio State 31-13 Wisconsin 38-7 Minnesota 30-0 Illinois 33-14 Indiana 38-0 Toledo 45-0 N Mexico St 31-27 Navy 15-18 USC 18-26 Purdue
17 Oklahoma State 33-17 Missouri 24-10 Georgia 36-31 Texas A&M 34-7 Baylor 41-24 Rice 56-6 Grambling 35-45 Houston 14-41 Texas  
18 Virginia Tech 31-7 Miami 48-14 BC 16-15 Nebraska 34-26 Duke 52-10 Marshall 24-34 Alabama 23-28 Ga Tech 17-20 UNC  
19 Arizona 43-38 Stanford 37-32 Oregon St 27-13 UCLA 19-6 Central Mich 34-17 Northern Ariz 17-27 Iowa 33-36 Washington    
20 Miami (FL) 34-17 Ga Tech 21-20 Oklahoma 38-34 Florida State 28-27 Wake Forest 27-7 UCF 48-16 FAMU 7-31 Virginia Tech 37-40 Clemson  
21 Wisconsin 38-30 Mich State 37-0 Purdue 31-28 Minnesota 34-31 OT Fresno 28-20 NIU 44-14 Wofford 10-20 Iowa 13-31 Ohio State  
22 Cal 45-26 UCLA 35-21 Minnesota 23-21 Arizona St 52-13 Maryland 49-17 Wash St 59-7 E Washington 3-42 Oregon 3-30 USC  
23 Utah 23-16 Air Force 24-17 Colorado St 30-14 Louisville 24-14 SJSU 22-10 Wyoming 35-15 UNLV 35-17 Utah St 24-31 Oregon  
24 Auburn 41-30 West Virginia 33-20 Ole MIss 26-22 Tennessee 49-24 Miss State 37-13 La Tech 54-30 Ball State 10-31 LSU 23-44 Arkansas 14-21 Kentucky
25 Texas Tech 31-10 Nebraska 66-14 Kansas St 42-21 Kansas 48-28 New Mexico 55-10 Rice 38-13 No Dakota 24-34 Texas 28-29 Houston 30-52 Texas A&M

Comments

S.G. Rice

November 2nd, 2009 at 10:22 AM ^

It's not so much that the end of the poll is a mess, it's more that ALL of the teams toward the bottom have one or more WTF losses that make you want to say "wow team X SUCKS".

DoubleMs

November 2nd, 2009 at 10:24 AM ^

Could it be that Boise State schedules creampuff I-AAs not because they want to pad stats, but because I-A teams don't want to risk the loss damaging their conference so deny their attempts to schedule?

jlvanals

November 2nd, 2009 at 10:51 AM ^

I know that Boise tried to schedule M next year on their open date, but M wouldn't give Boise a home at home so they refused (and we got UCONN, etc, etc.) or at least that's the grist from the rumor mill (I'm not an insider, I obviously don't know more than anyone else). Also, this is not really that big of a deal, but UC Davis is actually a pretty good I-AA team, just for the record. They should have won @Wisconsin last regular season game of 2008 except for a missed extra point.

Also, it seems like no one wants to consider the distinct possibility that instead of Boise getting "lucky" or "catching Oregon on a bad day" that Boise was simply the best team the Ducks have played all year. Personnel-wise, the ducks actually have fewer weapons today than they did against BSU and BSU still held them to fewer yards than USC gave up in 1/2 of the first quarter. IMO, this is indicative of a superior team. All that being said, I understand Tim's rationale, but I just can't get over how thoroughly Boise dominated Oregon to open the season. I know, I know "one win does not a season make," but I guess my opinion is that one win does a season make against that particular opponent when you haven't lost since.

The good news is that the only way this discussion matters is if Oregon is the one loss team that gets to play for the national championship and I don't think that is very likely.

B

November 2nd, 2009 at 11:03 AM ^

TCU not only has a better body of work to date, but they also still play Utah. If they win that game, against a team that has only lost to Oregon in Eugene so far, then their body of work looks significantly better. I don't buy Boise St.'s excuse that they can't schedule better teams. BYU managed to get Oklahoma and Florida St. to play them. TCU played Oklahoma last year. This year they played at Virginia and at Clemson. I respect Boise St., but there is a point where schools need to realize that a cupcake schedule is not acceptable if you want to be a BCS contender, especially when it comes at the expense of a team that did everything right by playing a difficult schedule.

jlvanals

November 2nd, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^

I'm not arguing that TCU shouldn't go over Boise, just that Boise should be over Oregon. Your points on TCU are well taken and I think there is a strong argument for ranking TCU over Boise, especially since TCU beasted all over what basically amounts to this exact same team last year in the Poinsettia Bowl.

Tim

November 3rd, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^

That Michigan/Boise thing is not accurate. They offered a roadtrip-only to teams, and ended up getting Virginia Tech (in Virginia) with no promise of a return game.

If you're actually trying to claim that NO 1-A team would play Boise... I just don't know what to tell you. There are options better than UC Davis out there.

Seth9

November 2nd, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^

While I agree that Oregon certainly has more big wins then Boise State. You should remember just how dominant Boise State was in that game. Boise State held Oregon to 152 yards total offense. In the weeks since, Oregon's next lowest total is 303 yards of offense against UCLA, the only game that they did not double their total yardage against Boise State (falling short by one). Furthermore, Boise State gained 361 yards of offense (only Washington has done better in that regard, gaining 395 while being blown out 43-19, which allowed Oregon to play their subs in the fourth quarter).

The final score of the Boise State game is misleading. Boise's final score of 19 was held back by two unusual missed field goals (including one botched snap), a missed two point conversion, and several turnovers deep in Oregon territory. Even so, Boise still managed to notch a two score win.

Boise State completely and absolutely dominated Oregon. As such, I think it is unfair to move Oregon above Boise State unless Boise State actually loses a game.

formerlyanonymous

November 2nd, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^

One game does not a season make. I can hardly even say the Ducks of week 1 are the same team of the Ducks in week 9. Oregon has defeated two teams that were in the top 10 when they played in Cal and USC. They absolutely tore them to pieces. They also beat the #18 team in the nation. (Those teams are now #12, #14, and #20 in the BCS)

Boise State struggled to beat Tulsa, and the Broncos weren't dominate over Fresno State.

As such, I think it is unfair to keep Oregon behind Boise State when they have dominated two top teams and another top 25 team while Boise State has one game in the first week of the season as it's sole quality victory.

jlvanals

November 2nd, 2009 at 12:25 PM ^

is so weak. They're the same team, ironically minus a few key pieces (most notably a pre-season heisman contender), that Boise State shut down. Losing starters is never a good thing (maybe you haven't been watching Michigan this year?) and, I know this is difficult to believe, it is actually MORE difficult to win games when entrenched starters are kicked off the team or go down due to injury.

For the record, I have no problem with the argument that Oregon has a better resume than Boise (although I disagree with that line of thinking because of the hellacious ass whipping Boise put on them), but the idea that teams somehow morph over the season into another, better team is just crap (excepting, of course, instances where injuries change the actual makeup of the team for the worse).

This exact same team, ironically plus a few starters, was steamrolled by Boise. Equivocating about "development" does not change that.

Seth9

November 2nd, 2009 at 2:20 PM ^

Boise State might not have dominated every weak opponent on their schedule, but pretty much every team does this at some point. A number of BCS teams (*cough* Florida *cough*) have recognized that an off game will often happen against a weak FBS team, and decided to schedule a number of FCS games so that they don't have letdowns.

Bottom line: Boise State beat Oregon in dominating fashion, outgaining them 361-152. This was an Oregon team playing with their first string running back. Not one Oregon offensive player was able to have any kind of success against the Boise State defense. This isn't the '06 Boise State team that went undefeated by winning a wild shootout against Oklahoma. This is a rock solid team that absolutely eviscerated what is arguably the best offense in the country. Unless Boise State actually loses a game, there is no way one can justify ranking Oregon* above them.

*And looking at the other one loss teams, none of them have a resume worthy of putting them above Boise State either. Same goes for a one-loss Texas, Iowa, Cincinnati, or TCU. I'd also have problems ranking the SEC runner-up above them if by some miracle, there is only one undefeated team in addition to Boise at the end of the year. I would be amenable to a one-loss LSU over Boise if they beat Alabama though.

SpartanDan

November 2nd, 2009 at 7:49 PM ^

Sorry, you don't get a "do-over". Every game matters. Oregon had their chance to prove they belong ahead of Boise State. They failed. Until the Broncos give us a reason to re-evaluate that (i.e. they lose), to put Oregon ahead is to completely ignore what actually happened in favor of "what we all know would happen".

If Oregon is voted ahead of Boise State, BSU fans may as well ask "Why the @#$% did we even bother playing the game if you're going to put them ahead of us anyway?" And they'd be 100% right. Until BSU loses, they stay in front of Oregon.

Engin77

November 2nd, 2009 at 11:44 AM ^

they were mediocre in their first 3 games; losing at BSU, beating Purdue and Utah at home by two and seven points, respectively. Then the offensive line jelled, they beat Cal 42-3 and now the Ducks are playing the best football of any team on the west coast.

I agree Oregon can't be ranked above Boise St. today, but if both teams win out, I'd place more weight on the later part of the season and give serious consideration to putting Oregon over BSU.

a2tarheel

November 2nd, 2009 at 11:06 AM ^

In terms of the rest of their schedules, Boise pretty much dominated everyone excpet Tulsa but that isn't any worse than beating Utah "only" by 7. I think Boise should definitely be over Oregon and Iowa (what has Iowa done that Boise hasn't, overcome "adversity" they created themselves?) and maybe Cinci too. Iowa got completely bailed out by two horrible video replay calls and likely would have lost if they were called correctly.

dakotapalm

November 2nd, 2009 at 1:34 PM ^

Unbelievable. I thought the who reason we were for a playoff was to avoid the subjective "well, I think this team A is better than that team B."

This season, we don't have to do that. Boise State and Oregon, two top ten teams, played each other. Both team knew what was at stake. As a matter of fact, there was some rumor that a Oregon RB said something about an "ass-kicking," IIRC.
And Boise State beat them.

Yet, journalists and bloggers are saying, "well, I don't think that's what matters."
The point of playing the games is to reveal who is better. Will it be okay in two weeks to vote USC over Oregon?
Let's just nullify all our playoff arguments ourselves, why don't we.

joeyb

November 3rd, 2009 at 12:18 AM ^

Who is the better team: Washington(3-5) or USC (6-2)?
If you go by head-to-head, then a 3-5 team is better than a 6-2 team.

Michigan or Michigan State?
Michigan State or Notre Dame?
Notre Dame or Michigan?
If you pick Michigan State over Michigan and Notre Dame over Michigan State, then Notre Dame has to be the better team using head-to-head logic, but that conflicts with the same head-to-head logic that says that Michigan is better than Notre Dame. That means that one of the head to head match-ups has to be a fluke.

New England or New York Giants?
You can't pick either one because they both beat each other once and even if they played another 100 times and one team won all 100 times, the head-to-head logic is still flawed because there is still evidence that the team that won once is better than the other.

You have to take head-to-head matchups with a grain of salt. They can help indicate who is the better team, but they can also lead you astray in trying to accomplish the same goal.

SpartanDan

November 3rd, 2009 at 1:22 AM ^

In those cases, you have other data points that contradict the head-to-head result, such as win chains going in the other direction. When that happens, head-to-head alone is no longer a coherent ranking system. But that hasn't happened here because there *is* no chain back in the other direction. You can build a win chain from USC to Washington (it doesn't even take many steps - just through Notre Dame). You can build one from any of the UM-MSU-ND triumvirate to any of the others (again, not difficult). You can build one from GT to Miami, or Virginia to William & Mary (although that one's surprisingly convoluted), or Maryland to MTSU, or Houston to UTEP. But you can't build one from Oregon to BSU. And that's why BSU has to stay ahead.

Where no chain exists in either direction (Oregon-PSU is a good example here, as is any pair of unbeatens), or one exists both ways, other factors come into play. But when a win chain exists in one direction and not the other, particularly when that win chain is as short as head-to-head, that has to take precedence.

joeyb

November 3rd, 2009 at 10:36 AM ^

While you are correct with your point, I think you are also making mine.

"In those cases, you have other data points..."

Small sample size can lead to misrepresented data. The two teams against each other, we have 1 sample point. Individually, though, we have several sample points for both. Those sample points are saying that Oregon is playing better against much better competition and Boise State is playing worse against much worse competition.

The other part of that is that, because it is unreliable, we can't use head-to-head to determine who is the better team. That's why we are using the resumes.