T1B

Rank Team (first-place votes) Record Points Preseason rank
1. Ohio State (41) 1-0 1,534 1
2. Texas (14) 1-0 1,475 2
3. Southern California (4) 1-0 1,436 3 (tie)
4. Auburn (2) 1-0 1,272 6
5. (tie) Notre Dame (2) 1-0 1,248 3 (tie)
5. (tie) West Virginia 1-0 1,248 7
7. Florida 1-0 1,112 8
8. LSU 1-0 1,096 9
9. Florida State 1-0 1,074 10
10. Oklahoma 1-0 1,019 5
11. Georgia 1-0 899 14
12. Louisville
1-0 820 13
13. Michigan 1-0 786 15
14. Virginia Tech 1-0 700 16
15. Iowa
1-0 647 17
16. Miami (Fla.) 0-1 605 11
17. Tennessee
1-0 579 23
18. Clemson 1-0 570 18
19. Penn State 1-0 459 19
20. Oregon 1-0 458 20
21. Nebraska
1-0 313 22
22. TCU 1-0 265 21
23. California 0-1 194 12
24. Texas Tech
1-0 178 25
25. Alabama 1-0 156 24


Others receiving votes
Arizona State 92; UCLA 56; Boise State 31; Boston College 31; South Carolina 21; Fresno State 19; Wisconsin 15; Maryland 9; Pittsburgh 9; Texas A&M 7; Rutgers 6; Tulsa 6; Georgia Tech 5; Purdue 5; Utah 5; Arizona 4; Iowa State 4; Minnesota 4; Oregon State 2; Northwestern 1.

Dropped out: none

It would seem that despite the lobbying efforts of SEER, Arizona St. owns the title of "best un-ranked team in the country".

Is it too soon for voters to punish WVU for their pussified schedule? I say no. They need to be voted much lower so they don't ruin my January. I seriously think they would lose to the next 10 teams ranked behind them.

Cal managed to stop the freefall just in time to stay ranked.

Next weeks will be more jumbled after the big games in Austin and South Bend.

I can see where they pretty much have to go high with USC but #3 is way too high for them at this point...

Following the OSU-Texas game the issue will be compounded since USC will automatically move up to #2, unless maybe ND looks incredible against Penn State.

Also, I think I'd have to put LSU above both W. Virginia and ND...

Van wrote:Following the OSU-Texas game the issue will be compounded since USC will automatically move up to #2, unless maybe ND looks incredible against Penn State.

Auburn could also make the jump, although they may be a few too many points behind to leapfrog USC at this juncture.

But since you brought it up . . .

If ND can't make the BCS championship game, I'd love nothing more than a tOSU-USC matchup. Given that the Rose Bowl would be deprived of it, that would be the death knell for the BCS, right there. I do realize that we're a long way away from that point.

Terry, also, USC has Nebraska the following week and Auburn hosts LSU that same week so things will start to shake out and cement themselves a bit there...

USC doesn't deserve this ranking yet though, at least not unless or until they demolish Nebraska.

I can already very easily envision a scenario whereby Auburn gets screwed again...

-Texas or OSU romps this week and firmly cements their #1 ranking as theirs to lose for the rest of the year...which they don't. They run the table.

-USC demolishes Nebraska and ND on the way to running the table and cementing their #2 ranking.

-Everybody else, including the LSU-Auburn winner, is stuck playing for the right to get truly pissed at the BCS by season's end.

Horrible.

Van wrote:-USC demolishes Nebraska and ND on the way to running the table and cementing their #2 ranking.

What about the loss against Kal where USC will have 82 yards rushing and 238 yards passing where Kal will have 98 yards rushing and 256 yards passing? Oh, and the score is USC 24 - kal 17

Kal wins/losses don't count. They play in a separate time/space continuum. In case you missed it, Kal's already in the BCS title game, which will be held on the Kal campus.

Kal's got it locked up.

And how did Kal get there?

Remember?

They became media darlings because they beat THE GREATEST TEAM IN CFB HISTORY during the 2003 season. They've been riding that wave ever since, to the glee of teams like Texas Tech...

You guys shut up.

I'm still riding the 98 upset over OSU.

Don't remind me, PSU...

Actually though, in 2003 TGTICH...wasn't, not just yet. They were still breaking in an inexperienced Leinart.

Still though, fuck you again for bringing it up. You probably just gave m2 carny wood.

Van wrote:Actually though, in 2003 TGTICH...wasn't, not just yet. They were still breaking in an inexperienced Leinart.

I'm guessing that TGTICH is a long-term reference. But in that regard, I'd throw Miami circa late 1980's as a contender.

From 1983 to 1991 Miami won three national championships (1983, 1987 and 1989), shared a fourth (1991), and had two other near misses (in 1986 and 1988). What's more, they accomplished that run under three different head coaches.

And I'm not pimping Miami, in fact, I hate them like no other. But back in the day, I feared that program like no other, before or since.

We don't deserve a number 3 ranking yet. Period.

don't think OU is a top ten team.
at this point,with Thompson at qb,closer to 20.

Jimmy Medalions wrote:We don't deserve a number 3 ranking yet. Period.

Let's be honest, no team deserves any ranking at this point of the season.

Agreed, but on a relative basis I don't think we're number three.

i would agree that rankings at this point are useless...

Jsc810 wrote:There is no way that Cal or Miami should be in the Top 25.

FTFY-NC

buckeye_in_sc wrote:i would agree that rankings at this point are useless...

A.M.E.N.

the rankings are useless at this point, NO WAY, should michigan and penn st. be higher than nebraska,
and, when we beat usc, it will clarify things a lot,
did you see the pathetic wins that penn st and michigan had? sure they won against crap opponents, but they didnt dominate the way nebraska did,
anyway, things will become crystal clear in just a couple weeks,

Bradhusker...

Louisiana Tech?

Nicholls Fucking State???

Way to reach for the stars there, champ. Hopefully controlled scrimmages like that did a decent job of preparing you to travel to the Coliseum...

:chuckle:

I have no problem with USC at #3 the only other teams I might consider ahead of them would be LSU or Auburn. I don't see anyone else that deserves to be ranked ahead of them.

I am indifferent to where Texas is ranked, if they beat tOSU they deserve it, if they don't then they won't be there anyway. I feel the same way about ND, if they beat PSU they will have earned the spot if they lose they will fall.

Call me a conspiracy theorist but isn't kind of ironic that Texas moves up to #2 this week in the AP and now the ABC primetime game will be a #1 vs. #2...a little too ironic if you ask me. I really don't give about rankings at this point. The polls should be voted upon until at least the end of September when you actually have a few games to judge teams upon. If we went by what we saw already...did Notre Dame play like a #2 this past week? They did beat the team they were scheduled to face though...kind of funny how you can punish a team for winning. They won a tough road game by a few points but because they didn't kick GT's ass, they drop a couple spots. After only one game, it's strange to see a shift like that. Maybe Notre Dame didn't deserve their high ranking to begin with...blame that on the voters for buying into the preseason buzz.

That's not irony.

Conspiracy, perhaps, but not likely. Texas would have been ranked higher pre-season if it weren't for a few question marks on offense.

Apparently, some of those questions were answered this past weekend for voters.

No problems here and, as Vito said, they get a quick opportunity to justify that spot.

^^ You may be right. That'll make it the first regular season #1 vs. #2 matchup since 1996, I believe. But really, at this point in the season the rankings are nothing but a marketing tool.

WolverineSteve wrote:Is it too soon for voters to punish WVU for their pussified schedule? I say no. They need to be voted much lower so they don't ruin my January. I seriously think they would lose to the next 10 teams ranked behind them.

I think this is a shortsighted take.
Hey, I was with you even up until the Sugar Bowl. I had my doubts about WVU. I thought UGA would finally expose 'em. Funny how that turned out. I'm a firm believer in WVU now. WVU is getting no respect simply because they play in a weak conference. How does that work again? You mean, WVU (or Pitt, Louisville, etc for that matter) can NEVER field a good team because their conference sucks? I don't see that logic and whomever tries to float it is not very smart.

WVU is damned good.

Remember the last time WVU fooled the country into believing they were NC material. Remember what Major Harris and co. did on the national stage against ND.

It's the same logic that makes the country squirm at the thought of Utah, or Boise St., or Miami OH, running the table. If you can go through an entire season being barely tested, you don't deserve the nod. A one or maybe even a 2-loss team from the Big10, SEC, or ACC would more than likely hand WVU their ass.

Your take is flawed by putting so much stock in a single game from last season.

WolverineSteve wrote:Remember the last time WVU fooled the country into believing they were NC material. Remember what Major Harris and co. did on the national stage against ND.

It's the same logic that makes the country squirm at the thought of Utah, or Boise St., or Miami OH, running the table. If you can go through an entire season being barely tested, you don't deserve the nod. A one or maybe even a 2-loss team from the Big10, SEC, or ACC would more than likely hand WVU their ass.

Your take is flawed by putting so much stock in a single game from last season.

Oh, it's fucking on now :wink:

#1. I don't care waht happened to WVU w/Major Harris. If you can show me how that's relevant to today's WVU team, we can have a discussion 'bout it. 'Til then, nice fluff you floated out there.

#2. I'm not here to argue whether or not the country will squirm at the thought of WVU in the MNC game after running the table. What does that have to do w/anything? And like I said, simply because you are in a weak conf. does preclude a team from being good. Still haven't heard your take on that.

Btw, you say a one or maybe two loss B10, SEC, or ACC team would hand WVU their ass. Ask UGA 'bout that seeing as how they were a two loss SEC team at the time of their matchup. Mind you, this is essentially the EXACT same WVU team as last year PLUS experience. You were saying something about 'flawed takes'?

Calm down Kenny.

My point is that with their schedule they are the team most likely to run the table, something that's been discussed in here throughout the off-season. I'm not saying WVU isn't good, but that they're too highly ranked at this juncture. Imagine a top-tier conference team running the table but being trapped behind WVU because they were ranked behind them before a game had been played. Just bemoaning the fact that pre-season polls suck is all.

I see it both ways. I agree with Ken that WVU is a legit squad...can probably "hang" with anyone in the country. I too became a believer after the UGA ass kicking.

But I agree with Steve (in a sense), that regardless of how good (or overrated) they may be, they won't have the resume necessary to prove why they belong. It's not their fault the Big East is so weak (sorry mucho, but it is), yet at the same time, they shouldn't be rewarded pity points because of that circumstance. As unfair as it may seem, you have to file this one under, "tough shit."

Of course, the computers at the end of the season might see things differently than the rest of us about this whole "deserving" thing.

Ken, the point is that there's really no way to know if a team is very good when they don't play anybody all season long who can prove their relative worth.

Boise St and Utah ran the table and maybe they actually were very good teams but by playing absolutely nobody all season long there was no way to know their worth and so they got stiffed by the BCS.

Same deal with W. Virginia. Beating Louisville as your one barometer game just doesn't cut it. That one win simply doesn't provide any sort of reliable indicator as to how W. Virginia would hold up against a real schedule. You simply can't give equal weight to their won/loss record.

Rank Team (first-place votes) Record Points Preseason rank
1. Ohio State (41) 1-0 1,534 1
2. Texas (14*) 1-0 1,475 2

*Note: One of those votes was Jim Tressel's

Van wrote:Ken, the point is that there's really no way to know if a team is very good when they don't play anybody all season long who can prove their relative worth.

I understand this. But don't you give the benefit of the doubt to the team that mows down team after team and DID prove their relative worth by kickin' UGA's collective knees in last year... even though they hail from a weak Big East? To not do so is shortsighted and a middle finger to the face of Rodriguez.

WolverineSteve wrote:Just bemoaning the fact that pre-season polls suck is all.

Well that's fine and all. Hell, I'd happily join in. But WVU is a piss-poor example to use as your poster child for your platform. ND, FSU, or hell, Miami would have been better examples, not WVU. Ill-advised choice, is all.

Ken wrote:

Van wrote:Ken, the point is that there's really no way to know if a team is very good when they don't play anybody all season long who can prove their relative worth.

I understand this. But don't you give the benefit of the doubt to the team that mows down team after team and DID prove their relative worth by kickin' UGA's collective knees in last year... even though they hail from a weak Big East? To not do so is shortsighted and a middle finger to the face of Rodriguez.

I don't think the thought of WVU in the title game is so awful. However, I don't think they should have the luxury of controlling their own destiny, like say an Ohio St or Texas would. If they go undefeated, and so does a SEC and Big Ten power, for example, WVU should be denied...end of story. No arguments. However, if they go undefeated, and there is only one other undefeated power, or no undefeated powers, then those could be situations in which I might consider making a case for WVU.

(and I hope any sane, rational person would agree with that much)

But again, they shouldn't be able to control their own fate. They shouldn't be weighted on the same scale as the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, or Pac 10 schools...at least not yet.

If there are 3 undefeated with WV being one of them I would probably take the other two unless once came from a non-BCS conference. If there are two undefeated teams and WV was one them I would not have a problem with WV being in the BCS championship game. If WV is the only undefeated team then I believe they belong.

Right now I guarantee they are not better than Texas Ohio State USC or about 4 other teams but they can only play the schedule they are given.

Vito Corleone wrote:If there are 3 undefeated with WV being one of them I would probably take the other two unless once came from a non-BCS conference. If there are two undefeated teams and WV was one them I would not have a problem with WV being in the BCS championship game. If WV is the only undefeated team then I believe they belong.

Right now I guarantee they are not better than Texas Ohio State USC or about 4 other teams but they can only play the schedule they are given.

That was also true of Utah and Boise State and potentially TCU too and what held true then still holds true now: W-L records alone aren't enough. Knowing full well that there's no way in hell a Texas, OSU or USC could ever lose a game on Boise State's schedule, that pretty much obviates the Boise State (or Utah, or W. Virginia) W-L argument. A one loss Texas, OSU, USC or Auburn team is still a much more attractive and much more deserving team than an undefeated team who beat absolutely nobody on their way to running a barren table.

Van wrote:Bradhusker...

Louisiana Tech?

Nicholls Fucking State???

Way to reach for the stars there, champ. Hopefully controlled scrimmages like that did a decent job of preparing you to travel to the Coliseum...

:chuckle:

Louisana Tech has beaten (I think) 3 ranked opponents in the last couple or three years. Nichols State is a joke but so are the 30 or 40 other 1AA opponents on early season 1A schedules. Husker have sold out Memorial Stadium since 1962...I hardly think the coliseum is going to intimidate them. Most of these guys have played in Norman, Manhatten, Boulder and Austin.

USC has this one in the bag right? You betcha. Hope the D improves for ya.

My homer prediction: Nebraska 35 USC 24
Realistically: USC 38 Nebraska 30 (USC should take advantage of NU's depleted secondary)

It was great to see WVU spank Georgia in the Sugar. They definitely deserved that BCS bid...and I guess that's why folks are regarding them highly now, because most of their guys are back, and presumably they've developed more as players.

WVU's staff is excellent. In the past few years, RR's schemes have been studied by just about everybody.

WVU has to get through their season undefeated. People are just assuming this will happen...but it's going to be tough. I think Louisville, Pitt, BC, and even Maryland can offer them real challenges.

#6 might be high for WVU right now...just as #12 for Louisville seems a bit too lofty...but these are very early polls. Thankfully, there's a whole lotta of football to be played.

L45B wrote:

Rank Team (first-place votes) Record Points Preseason rank
1. Ohio State (41) 1-0 1,534 1
2. Texas (14*) 1-0 1,475 2

*Note: One of those votes was Jim Tressel's

Not so fast my friend............

Ballot contradicts Ohio State's Tressel, who says he voted Texas No. 1
Updated 9/6/2006 1:48 PM ET E-mail | Save | Print | Subscribe to stories like this



From staff reports
Ohio State coach Jim Tressel told reporters at his weekly media luncheon he voted Saturday opponent Texas No. 1 in the USA TODAY Coaches' Poll. However, Tressel's official ballot on record at USA TODAY shows he did not vote for the Longhorns as No. 1.
USA TODAY's policy is that when a vote is made public and the paper knows it to be inaccurate, then USA TODAY, in its oversight role as administrator of the poll, will set the record straight to protect the integrity of the poll, according to Jim Welch, deputy managing editor for sports. The newspaper's policy is to not reveal coaches' ballots, except in the final regular-season poll under an agreement with the American Football Coaches Association.

USA TODAY editors became aware of the quotes when a story appeared on Gannett News Service by The (Mansfield, Ohio) News Journal quoting Tressel at the luncheon saying he voted the Longhorns No. 1 because "I think they deserve that." A transcript on the Ohio State athletics website confirmed Tressel's words, including him saying, "I've got them ranked No. 1 on our ballot." Ohio State is No. 1 with 41 first-place votes, Texas No. 2 with 14.

Stan Jefferson, OSU director of player development, told The News Journal the Texas vote was a case of miscommunication between Tressel and him: "When it came time to vote on the preseason poll, we voted Texas No. 1 and us No. 3 after talking about it as a staff. When I called in his poll (Tuesday), he did not tell me to put Ohio State No. 1. I put that down because we were No. 1 in the preseason poll. ... I did not have time to get with him (Tuesday) before the press conference. It was an honest mistake on our part. It was not meant as a psychological ploy."

A coach can have another person call in his vote as long as the head coach is the one making the selections.

Posted 9/5/2006 11:55 PM ET

Damn you, scUM fan.

So Tressel meant to vote Texas #1. And Stan Jefferson is currently updating his resume.