BlogPoll Ballot Week 7: Irish Rising
As always, not a power poll or predictor of future success. The previous week's ballot isn't considered, so teams that move up or down a few spots aren't necessarily being punished or rewarded.
One Foot Down Ballot - Week 7
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | LSU Tigers | -- |
| 2 | Alabama Crimson Tide | -- |
| 3 | Oklahoma Sooners | -- |
| 4 | Boise St. Broncos | 3 |
| 5 | Oklahoma St. Cowboys | -- |
| 6 | Clemson Tigers | -2 |
| 7 | Wisconsin Badgers | -1 |
| 8 | Stanford Cardinal | -- |
| 9 | Oregon Ducks | 8 |
| 10 | Kansas St. Wildcats | 1 |
| 11 | Arkansas Razorbacks | 10 |
| 12 | South Carolina Gamecocks | 2 |
| 13 | Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets | -3 |
| 14 | Michigan Wolverines | 1 |
| 15 | Illinois Fighting Illini | -3 |
| 16 | West Virginia Mountaineers | 2 |
| 17 | Virginia Tech Hokies | 5 |
| 18 | Arizona St. Sun Devils | 2 |
| 19 | Nebraska Cornhuskers | -- |
| 20 | Baylor Bears | -4 |
| 21 | Notre Dame Fighting Irish | 4 |
| 22 | Houston Cougars | 2 |
| 23 | Georgia Bulldogs | -- |
| 24 | Texas Longhorns | -15 |
| 25 | Texas A&M Aggies | -- |
| Dropouts: Auburn Tigers, Florida Gators, Texas Tech Red Raiders | ||
SB Nation BlogPoll College Football Top 25 Rankings "
- People are really overreacting to Oklahoma shellacking Texas. First off, Texas had five wins last year. Secondly, it’s not like Bob Stoops destroying Mack Brown is some new thing, he just hasn’t done it in a few years. LSU and Alabama remain at the top, and I don’t see them moving much between now and their showdown unless something drastic happens. In the Sooners’ favor, they’ll surely jump the loser if they win out and beat a highly ranked Oklahoma State team in December.
- Boise State is just clinical at this point. They're going to start falling, but their dissection of Georgia in Atlanta is gaining value and they're just so good at what they do. They won't stay here, but I'm pinning them behind the clear favorites for now.
- Stanford hasn’t beaten anyone. It’s not really their fault the schedule is backloaded with Southern Cal, Oregon and Notre Dame all coming October 29th or later or that the PAC12 teams they’ve played have all been terrible, but it is what it is. Wisconsin is sort of in the same boat, but they do have the Nebraska win. I don’t think either of those teams have the scheduling juice to jump an undefeated SEC West or Sooner State participant. (Should go without saying the same applies to Boise, who doesn’t have a ranked opponent left on the schedule.)
- Kansas State has actually put together a very respectable resume, with wins against Baylor, Missouri and at Miami (FL). Their next two games are very winnable (Texas Tech and Kansas), then they go on a brutal stretch of OU, OK State, A&M and Texas. Godspeed, Wildcats. Michigan, Georgia Tech and Illinois don’t exactly inspire confidence, but they are undefeated with wins that are kind of respectable. If Michigan gets past Sparty, they’ll be looking at 9-0 and a chance at a BCS bowl. I want to start stabbing things into my eyes.
- I’ve got Notre Dame at number 20. Houston has beaten no one, Georgia and A&M both have two losses and Texas doesn’t really have a win to hang its hat on. Also, if you’re voting for Penn State ahead of Notre Dame, I would like to talk to you. I’m not angry, I’d just love to know if your rationale is something other than "Notre Dame is 4-2, Penn State is 5-1." My sister is a Penn State alum and I get sad texts from her every Saturday. "This sucks." "You are winning." "Yes, but we are terrible
- Auburn is Number 26. Their losses are both respectable, and you could probably justify them being in there instead of any of the teams at the tail end. They'll have plenty of opportunities to earn their way back up/get bludgeoned by the Tide and Bayou Bengals.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Man this is a really weird year.
Those 1st four teams are definitely it. 5-9 look really good but vulnerable. After that it is a half a crapshoot. Lot of 1-2 loss teams out there that are damn near impossible to differentiate between just yet. Kills me that we dropped those 1st two games with all of those mistakes. Geeeeez.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
I agree with you, but I would put Wisconsin in the "it" category. I recognize they haven't played many good opponents...
but you can still tell they’re playing really good football.
@papaalphakilo
The people who suggest Brian Kelly should not curse are the reason the rest of us created profanities. - Spencer Hall
TCU being crappy this year REAAAALLLY screws Boise State.
Penn State and Michigan State being ranked above Notre Dame in the polls is just…. yeah. It just mystifies me. Nothing the team can do besides keep winning and they’ll keep climbing.
I have also concocted in my brain a wonderful plan for Michigan. I want them to go undefeated into The Game so they can lose in some heartbreaking fashion to An Ohio State University, but still back-door into the B1G title game. Wisconsin will crush them, but they’ll still end up in a BCS game, because, well, 2 loss Michigan in a non-title game is still 2 loss Michigan, and they’ll end up playing whichever of LSU and Alabama isn’t playing for the title, and they get just VAPORIZED. Likely scenario? Not really. But I would love it so hard.
@papaalphakilo
The people who suggest Brian Kelly should not curse are the reason the rest of us created profanities. - Spencer Hall
by PAK on Oct 10, 2011 8:47 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd for hatred.
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 10, 2011 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
If Oklahoma wins out, I would bet the NCG will be OU-LSU/Bama
But if Oklahoma drops a game, then all bets are off. If Okie State beats them and finishes undefeated, they might get in. But what if A&M beats OU, and OU beats the Cowboys? Does Wisconsin sneak in, assuming they go undefeated, or does Clemson or Stanford if they finish without a loss?
There’s potential for pure CHAOS this season. We could end up with LSU/Alabama, Oklahoma/Oklahoma State, Wisconsin, Clemson, Stanford, and Boise all finish undefeated. It’s unlikely, but it would be interesting to see how all that gets sorted out.
One Foot Down
On teh Twitterz
I want this chaos so bad
Nothing will make a playoff come faster than 5 undefeated teams.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Oct 10, 2011 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Read my mind
I would love to hear how the BCS and conference commissioners would justify this event. The world would say, “Well, wouldn’t a playoff make it easier to find out who among the five undefeated teams is the best, I mean it’s the most logical method, right?” The BCS and conference commissioners would say, “Well sure, but logic doesn’t line my pockets.”
I want a +1, not a full blown playoff
5 teams undefeated is a once in a lifetime event and I’m not going to hold my breath over it. Every year at this time we look at the polls and count up how many teams could end undefeated, and it never ever happens that way. 3 at the most will make it that far, and even then it’s unusual.
The problem is you’ll never have 8 teams with legit claims, and with 8 teams you’ll have teams get in who didn’t win their conference. That’s my biggest problem with it—if you’re in a conference and you don’t win it, I don’t care if you’ve only got one loss, you don’t deserve to be in the NC game, you didn’t win the smaller pool.
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 10, 2011 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions
1-loss LSU with one close defeat to Alabama doesn't deserve it more
Than undefeated Clemson?
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Oct 10, 2011 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions
This season? Perhaps. But if Alabama beat LSU, then hypothetically they'd beat Clemson.
So if they meet in the NC (or semifinal) and Clemson wins, then doesn’t Clemson deserve it more than LSU by default?
I’m of the school of thought that if you are complaining about how you’re ranked and that you didn’t get a shot, then you shouldn’t have lost in the first place. This is why I think it’s crap that Boise State never gets a shot. Win all your games, you deserve a shot, unless your entire schedule is FCS teams. Boise State does everything it can to schedule OOC games with BCS teams. Clemson, if undefeated, will have won the ACC and an OCC game against the defending national champs, an SEC team.
Look, I’m not saying AT ALL that Clemson is better than the loser of Bama-LSU. NOT AT ALL. The loser of that game would beat them by 30. My point is that if the loser of that game wants to be in, then they shouldn’t lose. Win them all, and you don’t have to lobby—well, you do under the current system, but…
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 11, 2011 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions
KG normally I can agree with a shred of what you're saying...
But, not this time, haha. I have to say that schedule means everything when it comes to who deserves to make it into the playoffs. I love watching Boise St. and I think it’s BS that BCS teams don’t like to schedule them because they know that the Broncos are an excellent team and that they gain nothing from playing/losing to them.
Why do you have to stop at just eight teams, KG? Wouldn’t a 16-team playoff make more sense? It would allow each of the conference champions to get in as well as at-large bids who rightfully deserve it.
I’m pretty sure the winner of the Sun Belt will get crushed by whatever at-large bid made it in, but at least they are properly represented rather than not even being included in the discussion because they aren’t a “BCS-eligible Conference”
Under this plan, Boise St. has a chance to make the playoffs if they win their conference (or make it as an at-large bid) and it also gets steam of off ND for being independent but maintaining automatic BCS qualifier status that so many people disagree with and deem unfair.
I know it may never happen because greed is the name of the game, but this makes most sense to me and allows many teams to get a shot at the title. Think about the upsets that could potentially happen…man that would be fun!
16 TEAMS, 16 TEAMS, 16 TEAMS!!!
It would be awesome.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Oct 11, 2011 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, awesome.
When the SEC championship games is simply about who gets the #1 seed and who gets the #5 seed? I don’t really think that’s awesome.
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 11, 2011 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions
It's never that simple.
Alabama could beat LSU this year in an epic regular season game.
The Tide could go to the SEC title game and play a 4-loss Georgia team who has no chance to go to a playoff.
This is basically the same scenario we saw last year with unbeaten Auburn playing 3-loss South Carolina.
And what if Alabama loses to Georgia? It’d be a great game, an upset for the ages. If it’s a small playoff, Bama doesn’t get in and the loss is crushing. If it’s a larger 16-team playoff maybe Alabama sneaks in as an at-large bid but loses on the road in the 1st round.
There are certain aspects of a playoff that would hurt the regular season, but there are also many ways in which a playoff would help the regular season and the conference title games.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Oct 11, 2011 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions
See, this is my point:
“And what if Alabama loses to Georgia? It’d be a great game, an upset for the ages. If it’s a small playoff, Bama doesn’t get in and the loss is crushing. If it’s a larger 16-team playoff maybe Alabama sneaks in as an at-large bid but loses on the road in the 1st round.”
Or, they sneak in and win the whole thing, in which case the SEC Championship game didn’t matter. Also, you’re ignoring half of the equation: does a 4-loss Georgia team deserve to be in the “playoffs”? They won the SEC, after all….
Had S. Car. beaten Auburn, then Auburn wouldn’t have been in the NC game. You act like a loss in the SEC Championship game would have kept out a deserving team. I disagree—-I believe that had they lost in the SEC Championship game, they wouldn’t have deserved to be in the NC by default. Oregon or TCU would have been the deserving national champion.
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 12, 2011 1:09 AM EDT up reply actions
But, the SEC Championship DID mean something...
It made the seeding. If an undefeated Alabama team loses to a 4-loss Georgia team in the Championship game, sure Georgia gets in, but they are not going to be seeded #1 like Alabama would have if they had won that game.
Therefore their road to the NC is much more difficult because Georgia has a chance to make it in as a lower seed and play more difficult teams than Alabama would have if they had taken care of Georgia in the Championship game.
Boiled down one of two things can happen: Alabama wins and eliminates any postseason aspirations for the Bulldogs and the Crimson Tide keep their high seed. Georgia wins, gets in, and pulls Alabama’s seeding down, which makes their road much more difficult. That is more intriguing to me than what’s already out there. How can you not vote for something like that? To me, it strengthens the various Conference Championship games, not make them meaningless.
My rebuttal:
Or, they sneak in and win the whole thing, in which case the SEC Championship game didn’t matter.
Like jkra said, the SEC title game would still matter. IF Alabama was able to “sneak” in a playoff after losing their conference title game (let us not forget a team did the same thing not too long ago and still made the national title game), they would be looking at an uphill battle to win the whole enchilada because of their slip up.
Also, you’re ignoring half of the equation: does a 4-loss Georgia team deserve to be in the "playoffs"? They won the SEC, after all….
I don’t really care who is “deserving” and who isn’t. If Georgia wins the SEC, then they are in. If a playoff had rules by which the conference winners got in—-I’m fine with that. If a clearly great Bama team stumbles in the title game, well they should have won, right? Isn’t that your argument too?
I also don’t act like a loss in the SEC title game would have kept out a deserving team either. If Auburn lost, they feel the repercussions. I’m not sure where you came up with this idea that I thought Auburn deserved something. The SEC title game matters—-either with or without a playoff.
The thing is, with the way things are constructed now we’re still in love with those matchups of undefeated teams meeting in the conference title game like we had with Alabama and Florida a couple years ago. Clearly games like that really matter. In a perfect world, we could have one or two of those games every year.
But we don’t.
Too often we view this through the lens of undefeated teams, when we know in many years the system is not that perfect. I’ve said in the past that the regular season would take a little bit of a hit if there was a playoff in terms of say, the LSU vs. Alabama game coming up in a couple weeks. With how it is now, the loser is knocked out of the national title picture——even though we know there’s a decent chance the winner falters later in the season and the loser can get back in the natty title picture anyway.
We still have this romantic notion of OMG THIS ALABAMA VS. LSU IS SO IMPORTANT, IT WILL DETERMINE THE NATIONAL TITLE GAME IN THE FIRST WEEK OF NOVEMBER!!!
In some seasons it turns out that yes, a game like that was epic, the winner went on to win it all, and the regular season game was super important. But in other years, that game (which was viewed as super important at the time) turns out not to be.
All of this and I haven’t even brought up how much the system sucks anyway. We can have an epic battle in the regular season between LSU & Bama, but still end up with four undefeated teams at the end of the season. What did the holy regular season mean for those two teams left out?
The thing with a playoff is—-it makes more regular season and conference title games matter. It just does.
Some people like to look at a team that goes 12-0 and then loses in the conference title game and misses the playoff and say, “Seeeee, the regular season didn’t matter!!!”
Or even a team going undefeated to the title game, and losing to a 2-loss team that got hot and won it all. There’s a lot of whining that stuff like this devalues the regular season.
Which to a point it does.
However, a playoff would add A LOT to the regular season.
In the vast majority of seasons, the only games that really truly matter are the ones involving an undefeated team. Naturally as we move through the season, less and less games really matter. Again, some people like this romantic notion of an undefeated team going all the way, but the truth is, fewer and fewer fan bases around the country are invested in games outside their favorite team as the season moves on.
What you get by November is 60 games that don’t really matter and maybe two or three that do. Maybe those two or three games matter so much that it makes up for the other 60 -something games every week the rest of the season not meaning much, but then we also run into those pesky seasons like TCU’s last year where those so meaningful games they played without losing really didn’t amount to much.
With a playoff in place, maybe CFB becomes more like the NFL. But that means so many more games matter. More games will matter all season long. They might not be the epic games with undefeated teams, but I think having 20 or more games every week that have implications is pretty exciting.
The example I like to use is ND going to USC to play the last game of the season.
Let’s say ND has 1-loss and USC has 1-loss but cannot get to their conference title game because they lost to another 1-loss team in their division.
If this exact situation unfolds next year with the system we have in place—-what does it matter? Sure we’d be fighting for a likely BCS bowl and the national attention would be decent.
But with a playoff, suddenly this game is beyond huge. ND can go to California, grab an auto-bid into the playoffs and crush the Trojans’ dream of doing the same. I’m sorry but that game would be so huge and the national attention would be much larger than with the current system.
And the thing is, we’d have jockeying like this down to the wire with dozens of teams. Right now we’re focused mainly on teams getting knocked out of the national title game and by late October that focus is down to a handful of teams. So many games just don’t matter, and that would all change if there was a playoff.
It just opens up so many scenarios that would make every season awesome. I don’t really care about getting into philosophical discussions about what is fair and what is right—-a playoff would make college football more exciting and generate so much more money. Conference title games, undefeated teams, and such would still matter, but so would many other games down to the wire involving top 25 teams.
Long post is long.
Sky rockets in flight.
by Eric Murtaugh on Oct 12, 2011 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If a team didn't win its conference, it's not the best team in its conference. Therfore, it cannot by definition be the best team in the country.
Win your conference, and you have no reason to complain. If we let in teams that didn’t win their conference, then what’s the point of having them? We might as well be the NFL.
I would support a sliding playoff that limited itself to the # of teams who had the best record. 3 undefeated teams? #1 gets a bye, the other two play each other for the right to play #1. 5 1-loss teams? Again, give #1 a bye and play it off to see who plays them. It’s completely undoable because of the logistics, but it’s the fairest system I can think of. The only playoff that has legitimacy includes only conference champions, otherwise it undermines the regular season. It’d be a travesty if Michigan-tOSU, for example, was only about “seeding”. For independent teams like ND and Navy, we should be in if we go undefeated or have an equal record to the top team, so if everyone has at least one loss, we should be eligible with one loss.
Also, no, I don’t think the Sun Belt conference champion deserves a shot over the #2 team in the SEC—that’s not what I’m talking about. If the Sun Belt conference champion does what Boise State has done, demonstrate over the course of a decade that it deserves to be in the conversation, then we’d have a discussion. this is why I think there needs to be an element of human/computer poll involved in ranking. A #24 Sun Belt champ is only wasting a spot. A #4 undefeated Boise State deserves as spot.
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 11, 2011 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the chaos is highly likely at this point.
I don’t think it will be as clean as the LSU/ Bama winner playing the OU/ Okie Light winner.
whiskey
www.onefootdown.com
by whiskey OFD on Oct 10, 2011 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
We go through this every year.
It’s always the middle of October and people start saying “We could have 4 or 5 undefeated! Chaos!” and then conference play starts and we’re down to 1 or 2 undefeateds by mid-November.
Granted, it’s slightly MORE likely this year, due to lack of mid-level quality in the B1G and SEC, but I don’t think it’s a given we have multiple undefeated teams this year.
OU has to play a number of very good B12 teams. I can totally see them dropping a game to KSU or Okie State this year. Clemson gonna Clemson at some point. Stanford’s late-season schedule is brutal, so even if we don’t beat them, someone probably will. LSU and Alabama play each other. Wisconsin dropped an inexplicable game to MSU last year so don’t act like a Wiscy loss is impossible, and the same goes for Boise – and Boise isn’t as good this year as they were last year.
I’d go so far as to say that the only way we end up with 3 undefeated teams at the end of the year is if one of them is Boise State, who will get left out of the BCS NCG due to a really weak schedule. They do their best to get a good schedule but the conference is just so bad, TCU isn’t good this year, and neither, really, is Georgia.
@papaalphakilo
The people who suggest Brian Kelly should not curse are the reason the rest of us created profanities. - Spencer Hall
I think if the Irish take care of business against USC in two weeks...
I believe they will creep into the Top 25 in both the AP and coaches polls. I’m thinking 23rd ranked…
an impressive win agaist USC should put them into the top 25
but they do not deserve it yet
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Oct 10, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I'll second this
I agree we don’t deserve to be ranked yet and that a good win over USC will get us in. Put if we win ugly (like we did last year) we may have to wait another week. But if we follow that with a win against Navy, we’re a lock for the polls at 6-2.
One Foot Down
On teh Twitterz
We might not deserve it
but tell me in the 15-25 range who does?
"Coach, I'm having a really tough time getting open with that Tyrannosaurus out there."
進者往生極楽 退者無間地獄
Notre Dame Fightin' Irish + Hawaii Warriors
The Japanese History Podcast
by Kelly's Gyros on Oct 10, 2011 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
True
It’s like BK said before the season started, once you get past number 10 you might as well draw names out of a hat. Still, it’s nice to be ranked.
One Foot Down
On teh Twitterz

by 
3
-2















