BLOGPOLL, WEEK TEN DRAFT
The draft follows, along with notes. You’ll hate it, because it’s a poll, and how dare you [holy shit polling complaints are as tiresome compaint goes here.] For the eleven millionth time: due to editing during the draft and saving it, the arrows indicating change in position MAY NOT REFLECT CHANGES FROM LAST WEEK. Don’t let that stop you from complaining about HURR HOW DID YOU MOVE HOUSTON UP 11 TORCHES OUTRAGE GRRRR??!?!??! Never mind the deltas, in other words.
![]() |
||
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas | 1 |
| 2 | Florida | 1 |
| 3 | Alabama | 2 |
| 4 | Iowa | |
| 5 | Cincinnati | |
| 6 | Boise State | |
| 7 | TCU | 1 |
| 8 | Oregon | 1 |
| 9 | Georgia Tech | 1 |
| 10 | Penn State | 1 |
| 11 | LSU | 1 |
| 12 | Houston | 11 |
| 13 | Miami (Florida) | |
| 14 | Southern Cal | 5 |
| 15 | Ohio State | 4 |
| 16 | Utah | 1 |
| 17 | Pittsburgh | 3 |
| 18 | Notre Dame | 2 |
| 19 | Wisconsin | |
| 20 | Oklahoma State | 7 |
| 21 | Virginia Tech | 6 |
| 22 | Oklahoma | |
| 23 | California | |
| 24 | Arizona | 3 |
| 25 | Brigham Young | |
| Last week’s ballot | ||
Si, Tejas. They looked the best and played a team without Joe Cox playing quarterback, a team that has Zac Robinson, a real live boy unlike Richtetto’s albino puppet son. Upon losing in Jacksonville Cox was kidnapped by a cruel carnivale, and was forced to perform giddy little musical numbers to crowds of drunken peasants who delighted in his almost lifelike actions. Only late at night, sleeping in a small patch of moonlight on his cage floor, would he recall the kindness of his maker and father. In this version of the story, Coxocchio is eaten by a huge whale named Carlos Dunlap, and suffocates in his belly.
So, yeah. The quality opponent makes a difference here, and they could flip-flop just as easily over the next few weeks.
Boise still over Oregon. Were it not for the head-to-head, we’d have Oregon over them after the Dishumilarassment of USC this weekend, but that’s all we have to go on: what actually happened on the field. The rest is just guesswork based on perceived goodness and the assumption that Iowa has a cornfield of cult-children casting powerful runes to protect their every play this season. Hezekiah, a fifth interception! Fetch the young schoolchild! Their innocent blood will guide Stanzi’s hand in victory. Enoch! More nachos!
The rest: Bloody mess. Get to the bottom and do your own 18-25 and find sheer arbitrary shuffling in every direction. HOW COULD YOU because after a certain threshold in the mid-teens they are all the same team: error-prone, saddled with two losses, and deciding internally between a bowl game named after an insurance, financial services, or tech company or one named after a household product or truck stop.


1
2 







1
Kevin@LSU says:
Forget Rich Brooks, Kevin@LSU thinks this is bullshit.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:00 am
2
Kevin@LSU says:
Actually I don’t care, but LSU could beat JoePa’s team.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:01 am
3
Yeah BoYeeEe says:
Idaho must do their job so the Ducks get eternal retribution for the Dennis Dixon knee explosion that cancelled their 2007 season.
Did anyone ever think we’d be counting on the Vandals to clear up the BCS picture?
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:09 am
4
SC'Eer says:
After watching countless replays of the Iowa pinball pick-6, I’m thinking you might just as well move the corn-children to numero uno. Apparently the football gawds want it that way.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 am
5
My Shorts are made of Denim says:
Why is this relevant? I’m not trolling, I just never understood why of all the awful poll choices out there, another had to be made? Is this just Papa Orson’s poll? Is it decided by others? Please do the needful and help me to understand.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:17 am
6
Blue Turf says:
@ #3: On November 14th, Idaho is going down harder than a coed out of a 3rd floor frat house window. Buh-lee-dat!
Thank you Orson for being the only person not from Boise, Idaho who remembers the 19-8 (that should have been much, much worse) final score beatdown that took place immediately before Byron Hout’s real-life beatdown.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:21 am
7
Mich-Placed Gator says:
…so what you’re saying is Carlos Dunlap eats Cox?
….this guy agrees: http://walterfootball.com/mattblog091014.php
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
8
CincySooner says:
Ever get the feeling COTG is just fucking with Iowa?
You know… because he’s crazy like that.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
9
TGISaturday says:
@#5
I guess because this blog makes it possible for some of us to get through the week. It’s a community of mine, so I want the conversation-starter that is the poll. I don’t have to agree with it, I just use it as a place to start jawing with the other useless slackers that need a way to make it until Saturday.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:35 am
10
Philip says:
The COTG giveth and the COTG smoteth away…
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:36 am
11
tzubear says:
CincySooner @ 8,
Yes, and messing with the rest of the CFB world in the process. COTG will hopefully finnish his bender sometime soon.
No offense to Iowa fans but DAMN, their wins challenge my entire understanding of the universe.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:38 am
12
My Shorts are made of Denim says:
@#9
Makes sense, by Fridays I can probably tell you the shoe size of the opposing team’s water boy. More material throughout the week = less work getting done = good times.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:39 am
13
Erik says:
I don’t know why we’re not allowed to think a team can get drastically better as the season goes on, especially under a new coach with a new offensive line. We know teams can explode midseason and turn from decent to a nice pasty mush; [NAME REDACTED] has given us uncontrivertable evidence. Yet it’s heretical to suggest that a team’s first game may be less reflective of the current state of the team than the following half-dozen.
Fanatical unthinking adherence to a rigid “on-the-field” philosophy ultimately results in entertaining but meaningless “vicotry chains” stemming from assumed transitivity in football. This is not a good thing.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:51 am
14
Leavitt Town says:
If the game were played again today, Oregon would beat Boise State by 3 TDs. They started the season without even knowing what a football was.
And not that it matters, but:
South Florida > BYU
USF has 2 losses to the #5 and #17 teams on your poll. BYU got blown out by 1-16 FSU at home (who consequently lost to USF @ home)
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:53 am
15
jester says:
@12…is that b/c you are a Michael Jackson impersonator?
Oh, and Pitt 17? Come on…the ‘Stache is rolling.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:01 pm
16
paper says:
Houston was down 7 notches last week for no reason other than to make way for some newcomers, so they’re back to where they belong. If they keep the coaches together nobody will want to play them in a couple of years. As it is, half their starters now are freshmen and sophomores.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 pm
17
janus09 says:
In the case of Boise St. and Oregon. It’s not a one game season, when one team’s schedule is roughly (spitballing here) 57 times harder than the other you can throw the head to head out as the only thing that matters. In a much less extreme example, consider Oklahoma and Texas.
I agree with Leavitt Town that Oregon now would beat Boise badly (though perhaps not 3 td’s badly) and would also add that Oregon now would beat Oregon then by 4 td’s.
The real injustice is in the BCS polls where USC managed to drop 8 spots and Oregon only gained 2 for a game that was somewhat free of mistakes and overall well played.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
18
ohiodawg says:
Miami @ #13 is the only choice that seems totally drank-induced.
Aren’t all of these blog polls rolled up into a composite?
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:15 pm
19
Leavitt Town says:
And Houston being ranked at all, let alone at #12 is just plain silly. Sure they beat Oklahoma State by 10, but they lost to 3-5 UTEP by giving up 58 points and they gave up 43 to southern miss.
If want them in your poll 21-25 is far more fitting to reality.
I’m undecided if I want to complain about Utah. Their only quality game is a loss to Oregon. I guess I’m ok with them in the teens, or at least respect the Stache and swap them with Pitt.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
20
dgdawg says:
Blue Turf:
The entire State of Washington will never forget the events of that night. Thank you, Boise State, thank you.
If you’re going to dismiss head-to-head records, then what is the point of actually playing the games?
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:34 pm
21
gtne91 says:
@17, Oklahoma-Texas doesnt apply. That was a 3 way tie, in which head-to-head was 1-1 for all 3. Other factors had to come into play to break that tie, and SOS made the most sense.
As long as “the regular season is a playoff” losing to an undefeated team puts you behind that team.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
22
Leavitt Town says:
@ 21
Boise State has 1 quality win, in a game that was putrid to watch. Oregon completely blew out USC and Cal. Two very impressive wins. They are clearly not the team they once were.
While following the Oregon game Boise State has played 7 1AA teams, and only 1 counts toward bowl eligibility, if I read the rules correctly. Meaning they wont even qualify for a bowl since their next 5 games are against 1AA teams as well.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pm
23
squibby says:
I would agree that Oregon belongs behind BSU. Until last Saturday, when they destroyed one of the most talented teams in the nation.
BSU: 1 quality win (Oregon), no quality losses, no bad losses.
Oregon: 3 quality wins (Utah, Cal, USC), 1 quality loss (BSU), no bad losses.
If you took the names away and just looked at the numbers, I think you make a case for Oregon right now. Boise needs to schedule a second nonconference power each year, or get in the Mountain West. Both teams are playing some of the best ball in the country. While Oregon should be punished for that abortion in Boise, so should Boise be punished for not building a better schedule.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:07 pm
24
FatTen says:
I guess if Slowhio State only played winless MWC teams all season they’d finish between New Orleans and the Colts?
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 pm
25
NittanyJackets says:
I’d find a reason to complain but I don’t think I’d fill out a poll any different right now besides said arbitrary assignments from 18-25. As always more teams will lose and the polls will become more matter of fact.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
26
JD says:
Leavitt Town -
The WAC is still in I-A. Those teams all suck but they are still in I-A. Although you are right on one count. If Oregon and Boise played again this weekend the Ducks would kick some tuber ass.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
27
lowercase says:
So if USC wins out, are we going to put them above Oregon and just say “well, they’re better now than they were in week 9?”
If week 1 doesn’t count, then the tickets should at least be cheaper.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 pm
28
Leavitt Town says:
@ 26 – JD
I was obviously joking about the WAC being a 1AA conference (though, I’m sure most of it’s teams would struggle at 0.500 records in some 1AA conferences). Just illustrating their schedule is so bad, it’s a joke to put them above even some 2 loss teams.
@ 27
You’re missing the point of the argument. Boise States schedule is so bad they have proved less. The only other team they play in the top 50 is Idaho. After that your lucky to find them play someone in the 80s.
USC and Oregon dont belong in the same paradox. You’re dismissing evidence to be a contrarian.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:39 pm
29
Erik says:
We’re not saying a single game “doesn’t count”, you simpletons. We’re recognizing that we have to formulate an entire body of evidence and compare teams based on that body in some nontrivial way. Again: do you want absurd victory chains that claim WSU > SMU > ECU > UAB > UTEP > Houston > Oklahoma State?
This is the result of taking single data points and using them far beyond reasonable statistical significance.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:39 pm
30
lowercase says:
@29 – You’re charging way down a slippery slope that doesn’t apply here. The only victory chain in this question is Boise > Oregon because Boise beat Oregon. The fact of the matter is that if Boise beat Oregon in Week 9, this argument wouldn’t be an issue. But because Boise came ready to play in week 1 but Oregon didn’t, it’s somehow less important.
If CFB is all about the regular season, and it is until we do away with this BCS nonsense, then either the regular season all counts or it doesn’t.
Now, if this were an argument about a 7-2 Oregon vs. an 8-1 Boise State somehow, it might be different. But Boise State has beaten EVERYONE on their schedule, and Oregon hasn’t.
All that being said, it’s not Idaho that will threaten Boise, it’s Nevada. Idaho is good but has almost no discernible defense- Nevada has been rolling after a crappy start.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:55 pm
31
janus09 says:
Erik
Absolutely agree.
For people that say “hey, you’re not counting that Boise St – Oregon game in that ranking if you put Oregon in front of Boise” I would say that of course we are counting it, however that is the ONLY thing you’re counting if you put Boise in front of Oregon.
You need to look at the whole body of work with Boise and Oregon. Oregon plays one of the toughest schedules in the nation this year. Along with playing in the Pac-10, 2 of their 3 nonconference games are against ranked opponents and the other (Purdue) being a BCS conference school that’s, sadly, probably tougher than any other team that Boise has played with the exception of Fresno St.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:58 pm
32
vegas_buckeye says:
I think the blog poll should be renamed the “WHARGARBLE Poll”
blind outrage is seldom more delicious
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
33
Erik says:
What’s the point of a poll, if not to quantify which teams you think play* superior football to which others?
Lowercase, do you think that Boise’s victory over Oregon is reflective of how the teams are playing now?
* note the verb tense; I see polls as attempting to be predictive, not descriptive. The latter is not, to my eyes, useful in and of itself. The past is most useful in terms of predicting the future, outside of the trivial case of win-loss records.
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:20 pm
34
tzubear says:
Erik @ 33,
It does not matter who is playing better now. Within the flawed BCS system the best and only really credable method we have to evaluate teams relative rank within the poll is head to head matchup.
You can not compare ‘Team B would beat team A if they played (again)—-speculation
with “Team A DID beat team B’——fact
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pm
35
anon says:
#14, 17 Good Lord. Now you want a best 3 out of 5? You do understand that losing home and away is generally not good. Kudos to Oregon for scheduling Boise when other BCS teams avoid the risk and then complain about Boise’s SOS. But to play the games and then ask not to count them is a bit much. Only a flesh wound, indeed.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
36
Steve says:
Here’s my crazy irrational transitive win chain:
BSU > Oregon, and actually
BSU > (by a lot) Oregon
Ok, BSU hasn’t played the competition that Oregon has. So you think that Boise can control the game against Oregon, but would lose more than one game against the rest of the competition Oregon has played? I think Boise’s expected losses, to date, against Oregon’s non-Boise competition would round to one. Same as Oregon.
They beat Oregon, in a game that wasn’t that close, therefore they deserve to be ahead of Oregon.
But, against a non-Oregon one loss team that has played competition comparable to Oregon, you’d have a better argument.
If Oregon wins out and Cal, USC, Arizona, and Utah all still look legit, I’ll saddle BSU with a second hypothetical loss and put them ahead of Boise.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 pm
37
Steve says:
Also,
Boise should stop whining like a bunch of bitches about how no one wants to play them. Play on the road. Take any game you can. Schedule the two toughest non-conference games you can get (which will almost certainly be on the road), play one more decent smaller school (like Central Michigan or Troy), and one cupcake. Then, you have a schedule you don’t have to apologize for.
Also, can anyone confirm the rumor I heard that BSU has turned down a 2 for 1 with Oklahoma? I don’t recall where I heard it, so it’s probably BS. The only reason I thought it may have a kernal of truth is because Oklahoma has shown a willingness to play @Tulsa, @Air Force, @TCU in recent years.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:15 pm