New Rankings Out

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:00 pm

Michigan out of both the AP and Coaches Polls.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex

Has anyone ever gone from as high as #5 to dropped in the rankings? I remember Arizona was like #4 a few years back and lost the opener to a shit team on their way to a shit season. Don't remember if they dropped from the rankings after the first week, though.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:03 pm

Well, I guess I was thinking of 1999. They went 12-1 in 1998 and were like #4 in the preseason. They lost to PSU in the opener (not a shit team, btw) and went on to go 6-6 that season. So they probably didn't have the huge drop.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:03 pm

Arizona was #4 back in '99, when they got shellacked by PSU.

I think this fall is basically unprecedented.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:11 pm

Yeah, PSU was #3 when Arizona was #4 when PSU won 41-7. While they may have dropped, they in no way dropped from the top 25.

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:17 pm

Damn. That seems pretty harsh.

King Crimson · Post by **King Crimson** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:27 pm

seems a little reactionary to me as well. i guess the coaches don't REALLY believe in parity as much as they profess to the media. and the sportswriters, they hate to not bandwagon "the don't get caught on the bandwagon angle" and appear to "have an opinion". they have to provide the evidence for the craving need to produce hyperbole in every moment of sports.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:29 pm

The sad/funny thing is, if Michigan loses by 40 points to a below average 1-A team like Iowa State or something like that, they still remain in the top 25.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:30 pm

Would any team be considered a top 25 team if they lose their opening game of the season at home to a lower level school? I doubt it.

Stop putting so much stake in those preseason rankings...those are media expectations for these teams but none of these coaches and writers know what these teams will do until they play. If we didn't have a preseason poll going into the season and the same scenario played itself out and then we came out with the first poll this season...Michigan still wouldn't deserve to be a top 25 team. A top 25 team would lose the game the Wolverines lost. Yes, it's harsh but it's the way it should be. Beat Oregon's ass this weekend and maybe they return to the top 25 but right now, I don't think they're one of the 25 best teams after watching one game and that's what this poll should mean.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:30 pm

Regardless, it's a good message sent: If you schedule and lose to a 1-AA, we're going to ruin you. Don't risk such horrors for such a slight reward.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:31 pm

KC,

If votes were published each week, the knee jerk probably would not have happened. Of course, if votes are to be published, no votes should be done in the first few weeks much less preseason. A coach should not have to justify his pick in the polls when no games have been played.

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:33 pm

IndyFrisco wrote:The sad/funny thing is, if Michigan loses by 40 points to a below average 1-A team like Iowa State or something like that, they still remain in the top 25.

Yeah, that is my beef with this new ranking. App St. is a Div 1AA team, yes, but they were National Champions a year ago AND Michigan had 2 field goals blocked to lose the game. Its embarassing, but I don't think the loss justifies dropping 27 slots.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:34 pm

Shaolzie,

You kinda gotta put stake in the preseason rankings. If LSU, USC and West Virginia all win out, the fact USC and LSU are 1 and 2 in preseason means a lot becasue WV will be on the outside looking in.

I know it is not the case with Mich any longer, but you do have to put some stock in the polls preseason for positioning alone.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:35 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Regardless, it's a good message sent: If you schedule and lose to a 1-AA, we're going to ruin you. Don't risk such horrors for such a slight reward.

I'm in no position to make opinions about having a D-IAA opponent on the schedule but overall, they shouldn't be playing D-IA opponents in the first place. If we can get an even number of D-IA teams and limit scheduling to only teams within D-IA...you don't get weird scenarios like this. Adding a 12th game to the schedule should mean scheduling another D-IA opponent, not just throwing some random small school in their just to fill the slot. I want to see legit 12 game schedules made from now on...this isn't just because of loss on Saturday, I hope you all realize that. I've long hated the big boys scheduling alleged cupcakes lower level teams. Play teams on your level only.

RumpleForeskin · Post by **RumpleForeskin** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:40 pm

Shoalzie wrote:
I'm in no position to make opinions about having a D-IAA opponent on the schedule but overall, they shouldn't be playing D-IA opponents in the first place. If we can get an even number of D-IA teams and limit scheduling to only teams within D-IA...you don't get weird scenarios like this. Adding a 12th game to the schedule should mean scheduling another D-IA opponent, not just throwing some random small school in their just to fill the slot. I want to see legit 12 game schedules made from now on...this isn't just because of loss on Saturday, I hope you all realize that. I've long hated the big boys scheduling alleged cupcakes lower level teams. Play teams on your level only.

The 2 matchups featuring the Big 12 vs the SEC is what we need to see more in the opening weeks of the college football season. If these programs can embrace and implement what the ACC and Big Ten do every year in basketball, then the writers can get a better idea of how good a football team really is. I hope to see entire conferences taking on entire conferences if they are not going to install a playoff system anytime soon. Who wouldn't want to see The Big Ten vs. Big 12?

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:42 pm

IndyFrisco wrote:Shaolzie,

You kinda gotta put stake in the preseason rankings. If LSU, USC and West Virginia all win out, the fact USC and LSU are 1 and 2 in preseason means a lot becasue WV will be on the outside looking in.

I know it is not the case with Mich any longer, but you do have to put some stock in the polls preseason for positioning alone.

If a preseason poll has USC, LSU and West Virginia ranked 1-2-3 at the start and all three run the table and win out and the polls don't change...doesn't that screw West Virginia because they can finish unbeaten but won't play in the title game because they didn't move up to #1 or #2? If you don't rank teams before the season, you should wait a couple weeks and let teams play and then determine who are the best teams in the country when you actually have something tangible to make these judgements.

Do you really think any team below USC or LSU in the polls right now that goes unbeaten is going leapfrog either of them if both of them finish unbeaten as well? If you want to look at things right now...it'll be a USC-LSU national title game until one of them loses and then another team jumps up to #1 or #2. The preseason poll having USC and LSU at #1 and #2 pretty much locks them into the title game if they win every game instead of them waiting for 3 or 4 weeks and making the first rankings after games are played. It's another flaw of this system. Any other team team outside the top 2 can run the table and somehow get screwed just because they weren't as heralded going into the season.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:42 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote:Its embarassing, but I don't think the loss justifies dropping 27 slots.

If you're going to have a weekly poll, you need to rate teams on a weekly basis.

If you're 1-0, and you went out and beat a good team, you shouldn't be behind a team that lost at home to a D1AA squad. And hell, it's not even like Michigan lead for four quarters and choked at the very end. They got worked by App St from start to finish.

That just doesn't compute.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:50 pm

RumpleForeskin wrote:The 2 matchups featuring the Big 12 vs the SEC is what we need to see more in the opening weeks of the college football season. If these programs can embrace and implement what the ACC and Big Ten do every year in basketball, then the writers can get a better idea of how good a football team really is. I hope to see entire conferences taking on entire conferences if they are not going to install a playoff system anytime soon. Who wouldn't want to see The Big Ten vs. Big 12?

I think if we finally get an 8-team or 16-team playoff where losing a game or two isn't death for a team's title hopes...we'll see more risk-taking with schedule making. Don't you think more teams would rather play a schedule right now that gives them the best chance to go undefeated in the regular season? If you're a title contender...would you rather schedule a cupcake or a tough power conference opponent that could beat you? Why do you think App State ended on Michigan's schedule and not some other D-IA opponent? It was a game they thought they wouldn't have to sweat over. Oops...I guess that wasn't the case.

As long as we keep this current system where only two teams from the regular season play for the national title and where an undefeated season is pretty much you're ticket to the title game, you're just not going to see the great intersectional matchups you see in college hoops for example. You can see a national power in hoops schedule a murderous non-conference schedule and lose a few games out it and they win their conference and they're still tourney eligible and can play for the national title. In football, you're pretty much playing with fire if you have 3 non-conference games and you schedule all three against power conference schools and play one or more of them on the road.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:58 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:If you're going to have a weekly poll, you need to rate teams on a weekly basis.

I totally agree...but I think right now, polls are judged week to week based on what were the rankings the week before and whether or not a team should rise or fall from their last position. What should happen is every week should be a clean slate and if you still feel Team A is still the best, you rank them #1 and so on. If team suffers a bad loss, you punish them for it...but, in the case of #2 Michigan last year losing a close game at #1 Ohio State, you still keep Michigan at #2 because they were still the second best team at the time but because we already suspected they weren't better than Ohio State to begin within. If that was the case, then why wouldn't Michigan have been ranked #1 going into that game?

You look at a team's ranking as an expectation. If the #8 team plays the #15 team in the nation, you should expect the #8 team to win but if they don't, the #15 team should end up ahead that #8 team in the next poll. #5 Michigan lost to a team that isn't even in it's same level...literally. Is it the equivalent to losing to the worst team in D-IA? Probably not but if they aren't playing on your level and you lose to them, your overall status within D-IA is badly damaged...especially since no ranked team has ever lost to a D-IAA team before. It's unprecedented and the media feels Michigan had such a bad loss that they aren't one of the 25 best teams in D-IA following one week, which I totally agree with.

Cicero · Post by **Cicero** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:53 am

Michigan doesnt deserve to be in the Top 25.

M Club · Post by **M Club** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:58 am

whatevs, it's week 1.4 of an entire football season. these things shake out.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:18 am

Cicero wrote:Michigan doesnt deserve to be in the Top 25.

Neither does fsu from what I saw.

Roofer · Post by **Roofer** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:28 am

Damn, y'all have some pretty solid takes on this.

1. Good point about holding or not holding coaches accountable for their picks early on when no games have been played.

2. Just becasue #1, #2 and #3 win out, it doesn't inherently mean #1 and #2 play. SOS factors in and any one of the 3 could slip or jump.

3. Totally agree with the take on if the Wolverines lose to a 1A by 40 they don't get dropped from the Top 25. I think the media, fans and all are sensationalizing this thing like we tend do with anything newsworthy these days. I feel for the maize and blue for the witch hunt being put on them. Yeah, it was a bad loss at home to a lower division team, but App St. is a decent program and if I'm not mistaken, are TWO time defending champs of D1AA (FCS). I believe they could beat at least 25% of the D1A schools out there. Michigan should not have been dropped from the rankings. Time will tell if it was the right decision.

Solid takes. Now let me go find the latest in Trojan bashing.

Cicero · Post by **Cicero** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:07 am

WolverineSteve wrote:
Cicero wrote:Michigan doesnt deserve to be in the Top 25.
Neither does fsu from what I saw.

Show me where I said they did? I was disgusted w/ the way FSU game out last night and they dont deserve to be ranked. I would however rather lose on the road to a good team as opposed to being beat by a 1-AA team in my own house.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:27 am

Cicero wrote:
WolverineSteve wrote:
Cicero wrote:Michigan doesnt deserve to be in the Top 25.
Neither does fsu from what I saw.
Show me where I said they did? I was disgusted w/ the way FSU game out last night and they dont deserve to be ranked. I would however rather lose on the road to a good team as opposed to being beat by a 1-AA team in my own house.

Who wouldn't? BTW 8-5 last year does not = good team.

I was merely responding to your one-line no-take with one of my own. Live by the drive-by, die by it as well.

L45B · Post by **L45B** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:44 am

Live by the drive-by, die by it as well.

Cuz the boyz in the hood are always hard
You come talkin' that trash we'll pull your card
Knowin' nothin' in life but to be legit
Don't quote me boy, cuz I ain't said shit...

Sorry, couldn't help it. Carry on...

King Crimson · Post by **King Crimson** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:52 pm

chick is bad no body is badder
she got more crabs than a sea food platter

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:07 pm

Shoalzie wrote:
IndyFrisco wrote:Shaolzie,

You kinda gotta put stake in the preseason rankings. If LSU, USC and West Virginia all win out, the fact USC and LSU are 1 and 2 in preseason means a lot becasue WV will be on the outside looking in.

I know it is not the case with Mich any longer, but you do have to put some stock in the polls preseason for positioning alone.

If a preseason poll has USC, LSU and West Virginia ranked 1-2-3 at the start and all three run the table and win out and the polls don't change...doesn't that screw West Virginia because they can finish unbeaten but won't play in the title game because they didn't move up to #1 or #2? If you don't rank teams before the season, you should wait a couple weeks and let teams play and then determine who are the best teams in the country when you actually have something tangible to make these judgements.

Do you really think any team below USC or LSU in the polls right now that goes unbeaten is going leapfrog either of them if both of them finish unbeaten as well? If you want to look at things right now...it'll be a USC-LSU national title game until one of them loses and then another team jumps up to #1 or #2. The preseason poll having USC and LSU at #1 and #2 pretty much locks them into the title game if they win every game instead of them waiting for 3 or 4 weeks and making the first rankings after games are played. It's another flaw of this system. Any other team team outside the top 2 can run the table and somehow get screwed just because they weren't as heralded going into the season.

You reiterated the point I was trying to make.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:28 pm

Stop misreiterating my posts.

--Dr. Orcinus