Final AP Poll is Out

Submitted by TallyWolverine on January 7th, 2014 at 8:08 AM

One-loss Sparty gets stuck at #3, while two-loss Auburn remains #2. 

FSU obviously received all 60 first place votes.

That conference that I refuse to name still ends up with 4 out of the top 7.

Other notables:

#12 Ohio State

#20 Notre Dame

#22 Wisconsin

Link:

http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll

Comments

TallyWolverine

January 7th, 2014 at 8:23 AM ^

I think that's plenty to laugh at. They were the only one-loss team in the top 9 and got the shaft. I think it's funny. What's funnier is we are gonna beat them in East Lansing next year. I enjoy anything that will give them reason to complain, and I will always enjoy it. Get over it. Was I pulling for them to beat Stanford? Kind of. Am I happy they got the shaft? Damn right!

Ask yourself this: Would they laugh at us if the roles were reversed? Your damn right they would, just like they laughed in 97 when we had to split the championship.

TallyWolverine

January 7th, 2014 at 8:30 AM ^

You deal with your grief your way, I'll deal with my grief my way. If you don't like it, move on. I prefer to be happy, so I choose to laugh at them regardless of the fact that they are on another level at this moment. That, however, is subject to change this year. Ask Auburn.

BoWoody

January 7th, 2014 at 9:12 AM ^

Auburn fired their national championship winning coach after one bad year.  Michigan didn't even fire one assistant yet, and most likely they wont.  So I am not sure where you are getting this confidence from that we will rock up to east lansing and get a win.  At this point, I am just hoping for not getting a beating from them. 

GoWings2008

January 7th, 2014 at 9:43 AM ^

So much this.

I was at a store in Chicago this past weekend, wearing a Michigan ball cap...a lady walked by me and said "Hey, how about dem Wolverines" with a smirk on her face.  I was in the middle of saying, "Yeah, it was a disappointing season..."  and before I could get the sentence out of my mouth, she says "Not like my Spartans..." 

Ahhh, I see.  Your question was all about you.  All I said back was, "Yeah, you guys had a great year.  Congrats." and I walked away. 

I'll let her live in her world without any validation from me.  Good on them for their year, but I'm concerned about Michigan and their future, nothing more.

maizenbluenc

January 7th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^

It makes me sick to my stomach to see Sparty where Michigan should be and Michigan where Sparty has historically been. Hats off to their players, and more sickeningly, their coaches. This year when Dantonio interrupts Funk at a coaching seminar, the coaches in the room will probably prefer to listen to Dantonio. That is how far we have fallen.

In 2014 the last few of Rodriguez's players are finishing out (and I thank them - they are warriors who have been through a lot). Auburn played for and almost won the national championship last night with two sophomore tackles, a redshirt freshman and a junior guard, and a junior center. Youth is not an excuse anymore. If the players don't execute after three fall practices in the system it is on the team and the coaching staff.

No more excuses. No more next years. This staff and this team of their players badly need to prove themselves.

MI Expat NY

January 7th, 2014 at 10:19 AM ^

Speaking of Auburn (posting here because I really don't want to start a thread for this), anyone notice Auburn's O-line depth chart?  Starters have three 3rd year players and two 2nd year players.  Backups are four 2nd year players and one 3rd year player.  I'm really going to be sick of the youth excuse if Auburn can do what they did with a near identical 2-deep as to what we'll have next year.  

WolverBean

January 7th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^

Ask yourself this: Would they laugh at us if the roles were reversed? Your damn right they would, just like they laughed in 97 when we had to split the championship.

You know how childish this sounds, right? "They'd make fun of us; therefore, we should make fun of them." Congrats on ceding the high ground as the "big brother" in that relationship.

chewieblue

January 7th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^

But I have a hard time believing we will go into EL next year and win.  I think we win at Cbus before we win in EL.  

And thanks to the B1G offices for screwing us YET AGAIN with the schedule flip.  Honestly, how do we get boned every time there is a schedule change?  At least we get Minny and Indiana at home again!  Poop.

TexasMaizeNBlue

January 7th, 2014 at 8:15 AM ^

how Sparty gets the shaft and finishes third behind a team that lost two games, and needed two miracles (Georgia and Bama) to win two others. I honestly think they would have a chance of beating either of those teams we saw play last night.

bluebyyou

January 7th, 2014 at 9:21 AM ^

Maybe Sparty would have had a shot, but we never really saw them play against a team with anything that approximated the passing attack that FSU possesses. Both Ohio and Stanford were primarly run first teams.

Jameis and friends are a whole different level.  Sparty also never played anyone with defeneses and team speed as good as both teams showed last night.

HarBooYa

January 7th, 2014 at 9:55 AM ^

I actually think MSU deserves the no 2 spot.  They looked impressive against both Stanford and OSU when it matter most.  While the Buckeyes d did indeed suck at the end of the year, I would argue the team speed on OSU rivals an SEC school.  Would have liked to see Auburn's run game vs. Sparty.  Next year, (and I truly, truly hate to say this), we might see MSU in the final four.  Its likely them, OSU or Wisco at this point right?

Friggin, ugh.

This too shall pass.

StateSmells

January 7th, 2014 at 8:24 AM ^

You are probably right.  But remember, even if this was a playoff year, Sparty probably would have been on the outside looking in.  I think Stanford would have gotten that 4th spot over them. 

Of course the bowls this year showed that to be a flawed idea, but if the 4 team playoff was this year, I see it going like the pre-bowl BCS rankings:  FSU, Aub., Bama and Stanford.

Just another argument to prove that we still don't have the right system.

M-Dog

January 7th, 2014 at 8:53 AM ^

This is why being concerned with the perception of the strength of the Big Ten is still valid in a playoff world.

Also, it matters for playoff seeding.  When the Big Ten does manage to overcome perceptions and get in, we don't want to always be the "4th seed" and be matched up against the #1 team.  If that happens a lot and we lose those games it will become a vicious circle of constsntly being left out or being the 4th seed when we make it in.

 

youn2948

January 7th, 2014 at 9:48 AM ^

Lets make this like the old basketball tournament.  32 teams baby!  Have it go right up to March Madness.  Clearly 64 would be too many, then you'd get stuck playing pushovers like Akron.. oh wait... ;)                     I do agree with conference championships but then which conferences get in?  ACC/Atlantic/P10/B1G/B12/SEC? That's 6 is there a first round bye for the SEC and another conference or are we scraping for the MAC and um....Sunbelt champions?

SWFLWolverine

January 7th, 2014 at 4:59 PM ^

THe AAC, ACC, Big 12, B1G, C-USA, MAC, MWC, PAC12, SEC, SBC plus Independents. Of these, the AAC, Big 12, and SBC do not have a conference championship game, so they can play each other plus the highest ranked independent or highest ranked remaining team. This would be a 16 team playoff system. This really only adds 1 additional week to the schedule compared to what is currently played. Obviously there are flaws, but it does give everyone a shot and takes it out of the hands of the voters, save for 1 spot. If independents don't want to get the shaft, join a conference.