Monday, September 29, 2008

Blogpoll ballot

Saturday shook up my ballot a bit. I hammered USC and Florida more than Georgia, because I think they lost to average teams. Georgia lost to my new No. 1. I also gave Maryland a bump for beating Clemson.

Games I watched
Rhode Island-BC 100%
Purdue-Notre Dame 20%
Wisconsin-Michigan 20%
Colorado-Florida State 20%
USC-Oregon State 50%
Louisville-UConn 25%

1 Alabama 8
2 Oklahoma 2
3 Missouri 2
4 Texas Tech 3
5 Texas 6
6 Penn State 6
7 LSU 1
8 South Florida 2
9 Georgia 7
10 Utah 4
11 Vanderbilt 10
12 Virginia Tech 13
13 Georgia Tech 11
14 Brigham Young 1
15 Oklahoma State 1
16 Northwestern 10
17 Ball State 2
18 Boise State 2
19 Southern Cal 18
20 Florida 17
21 Tulsa 5
22 Kentucky 1
23 Connecticut 3
24 Maryland 2
25 Ohio State 1

Dropped Out: Wake Forest (#6), Wisconsin (#13), Nebraska (#17), TCU (#18), Colorado (#22).


Goberry said...

Have you seen who Texas Tech has played? Eastern Washington, Nevada, and Our Sisters of New Rochelle.
It seems to happen every year. They jump up in the rankings against awful teams then crumble when they play solid D-1 competition.

eagle1331 said...

I have a hard time believing that UConn will be able to maintain since their QB is out for AWHILE now...

Bravesbill said...

Week after week, your rankings are an absolute joke. USC and Florida worse than Ball St and OK St? Please. It's like you try your hardest to make your rankings as ludicrous as possible.

ATL_eagle said...

Bravesbill, I've said I base it on record and resume. OK State and Ball State haven't lost yet. Florida just lost to a very average Ole Miss team. USC lost to an average Oregon State.

Deacon Drake said...

Ball State's #1 WR is also out for the year... they will be lucky to finish over .500.

I just can't imagine BSU staying within 70 on a neutral field with USC or Florida.

Bravesbill said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bravesbill said...

I thought rankings were based on how good a team is, not its record. You might as well make a list of unbeaten teams and call it just that instead of "rankings." And cut this you base rankings on resume as well. If that was true, there is no way a Ball St., Northwestern, Ok St. or any other ludicrous school you have in there should be ahead of a USC or Florida. And if it is truly based on record/record like you claim it to be, how is Georgia still in the Top 10? Georgia got blasted by Alabama and looked as bad, if not worse, than USC or Florida did. If you do base rankings on record (which is dumb to begin with), then at least keep it consistent. Just like with the BC bias earlier this year, this Georgia bias of yours is pretty loud and clear.

Darius said...

The difference is that Georgia lost to a far better team--possibly the team with the best resume in the country, as ATL agrees--than USC or Florida. Personally, I think the placement of Georgia is fine, given what they've done (@South Carolina, @Arizona State), but I'd have Florida and USC higher than ATL puts them. Ohio State and Miami aren't complete slouches.

Bravesbill said...

I agree that Georgia should be around the #9 spot. I actually do not really have a problem with his Top 10 at all. It's the rest of the rankings that are ridiculous. He ranked Ball St., Northwestern, and Ok St. higher than USC and Florida simply because they have better records. Then he attempts to say that he also put resume into the equation. However, Ok St., Ball St., and Northwestern have played nobody whereas USC and Florida have played decent to good teams already. There is just no consistency to his rankings and the methodology is borderline idiotic.