BLOGPOLL FINAL BALLOT, WEEK (?)
Thanks to readers who chided us for obvious errors in our draft, including undervaluing the only team undefeated in SEC play and other disasters. Here’s hoping we’ve scaled down the blunders and left only “horrid errors.”
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ohio State | — |
| 2 | Southern Cal | — |
| 3 | Michigan | — |
| 4 | Tennessee | — |
| 5 | Texas | — |
| 6 | Louisville | — |
| 7 | California | — |
| 8 | Auburn | — |
| 9 | Florida | — |
| 10 | Notre Dame | — |
| 11 | Georgia Tech | — |
| 12 | West Virginia |  1 |
| 13 | Wisconsin |  1 |
| 14 | Arkansas | 4 |
| 15 | Oregon | 1 |
| 16 | Clemson | — |
| 17 | Nebraska | 2 |
| 18 | Pittsburgh | 3 |
| 19 | Texas A&M | 3 |
| 20 | Rutgers | — |
| 21 | Oklahoma | 4 |
| 22 | Missouri | 1 |
| 23 | Wake Forest | 2 |
| 24 | LSU | 9 |
| 25 | Boise State | 1 |
Dropped Out:
Loading ...
28
You know…its not all the Big East’s fault. When Rutgers scheduled Illinois for this two game series they were actually good. Same with UNC. And how was Louisville to know that their signature win against Miami would look worse and worse as the year wore on?
Comment by Dave K. — October 19, 2006 @ 11:39 am
27
I concur about the Big East - you can’t help the conference you’re in, but you can do something about your non-conf spots, and scheduling a lot of cupcakes is not the way to get taken seriously. I’m not thrilled with Vandy going out of conference against Temple and Tennessee State, but when the rest of the schedule includes Florida, Tennessee, Georgia and Michigan, I think we’re entitled to a breather. But simply saying “they’re undefeated so they deserve to be there” means that we’re going to see a steady diet of games against the Louisiana-Monroes and Eastern Michigans of the world.
This is where the BSC screwed up in giving everything back to the human voters just because they thought a one-loss Trojan team got done wrong in favor of a one-loss Oklahoma or LSU. Too much of the formula is composed of human polling by a bunch of dilettantes who are more likely to react to “11-0″ than “9-2, but they played seven ranked teams and lost one on a last-second field goal”. (Not to mention the preposterous voting that coaches do in their poll.)
Long story short - the BCS rankings don’t mean anything until the final poll, and watching them get there is going to be a show. I’m sure the AP and BCS will converge as they approach December, like a bad calculus problem, but I wonder how much of the AP voting will be influence from seeing those BCS scores.
And of course it goes without saying that I’d rather see the formula as the basis for a 4-team playoff. Notre Dame ‘77 notwithstanding (and Bama fans are still sore about it I assure you), I don’t think anybody ranked #5 has a beef that they were left out of the national title picture.
Comment by VandyJ — October 18, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
26
BC should be in the mix, they are one Hail Mary from 6-0
Comment by Short Yellow Bus Rider — October 18, 2006 @ 6:00 pm
25
“I do not like Notre Dame, but they deserve credit for scheduling traditional powerhouses such as Michigan and USC every year”
When tOSU schedules tough OOC games what’s the excuse for WVU’s OOC schedule?
tOSU will get lots of credit for USC and Michigan being on their schedule next year, but ND does that EVERY YEAR. I’m fine with ND’s traditonal Navy game and one other academy per year as long as the 3rd best and 4th best opponents are the Big 11’s 3rd and 4th or equivalent.
Now if we could just get tOSU to drop the I-AA game, ND to drop Kevin/Ty’s San Diego State game, and MSU to redact [NAME ALSO REDACTED].
Comment by Canuck — October 18, 2006 @ 5:18 pm
24
cardiac kid,
If you’re in a poor conference schedule at least decent OOC games. Louisville should get consideration for scheduling Miami and K-State even if they both disappointed this year.
Remind why we’re even talking about WVU? Something they did last year?
Comment by Canuck — October 18, 2006 @ 5:00 pm
23
Canuck: I obviously do not have the answers, but I agree completely with your analysis. That is as good a short explanation of ranking methodology as I have seen, and it is far better than most.
Cardiac Kids: I think the problem with that argument is it entirely ignores strength of schedule. If you are in a historically weak conference or an independent, then it should be incumbent upon you to schedule quality out of conference opponents. (I do not like Notre Dame, but they deserve credit for scheduling traditional powerhouses such as Michigan and USC every year.) Otherwise, teams should — and will — line up a series of terrible teams and then cry they desere a shot at the MNC over one loss teams that have more quality wins.
Comment by Allaha — October 18, 2006 @ 4:58 pm
22
I still have a tough time arguing that an undefeated team will not play in the Nat. Championship. If these awful-conference teams will never compete for the NC, what is the point of them even having a program?
Comment by Cardiac Kids — October 18, 2006 @ 4:35 pm
21
“how do you evaluate presumably decent teams that have no quality wins (e.g., W.Va., L, etc.)”
“how do you evaluate the mass of presumably good one loss teams, particularly this SEC chain of Arkansas beating Auburn beating Florida beating Tennessee beating Cal (that may beat USC that beat Arkansas)”
Allaha, There are no easy answers, but at this point I’d START with the following basic scheme and then MOVE teams based on quality wins:
Tier I. PAC 10/Big 11 undefeateds (tOSU, USC, Michigan)
Tier II. one loss Pac10/SEC/Big 11 teams & one loss teams that lost to the PAC 10/Big 11 undefeateds (Cal, Oregon, Auburn, Florida, Tenessee, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Texas, ND)
Tier III. zero loss Big East teams (Louisville, WVU, Rutger)
Since the Big East teams have no quality wins all 3 would end up roughly where Orson has WVU.
I’d move the winner of GT/Clemson game into Tier II and also any Big East teams that survive the Lousville/WVU & Lousiville/Rutgers games.
Comment by Canuck — October 18, 2006 @ 4:19 pm