Dawg Sports: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Backing the Pack for NC State Fans!


spread the word

Week Eight BlogPoll Ballot Submitted

The weekend is almost over and we have had ample opportunity to reflect upon the latest college football action, so the time has come for us as BlogPoll voters to take a stand by casting our ballots for the top 25 teams in the land.

Although I considered ranking a team with two losses this week, I didn’t see one such squad that truly separated itself from all the others, so I put together a wholly unsatisfactory list of unbeatens and once-beatens, which produced this dog of a ballot:

RankTeamDelta
1 Texas 1
2 Alabama 1
3 Penn State 1
4 Oklahoma State 1
5 Southern Cal 2
6 Oklahoma 2
7 Ohio State 5
8 Georgia 7
9 Florida 2
10 Texas Tech 4
11 Utah 11
12 Pittsburgh 4
13 TCU 11
14 Georgia Tech 12
15 Boston College 11
16 South Florida 1
17 LSU 9
18 Boise State 13
19 Ball State 2
20 Minnesota 5
21 Florida State 5
22 Northwestern 4
23 Cincinnati 3
24 Tulsa 2
25 Brigham Young 1

Dropped Out: California (#9), Michigan State (#10), Virginia Tech (#13), North Carolina (#14), Vanderbilt (#18), Wake Forest (#19), Missouri (#20), Kansas (#23).

Let’s start with the easy one: Texas (7-0) is No. 1, and it isn’t even close. Four of the Longhorns’ wins came over teams with winning records, only one was against an opponent that is more than one game below .500, and none of their victories came against a Division I-AA squad or by a single-digit margin. The ‘Horns have back-to-back quality victories over Oklahoma (6-1) and Missouri (5-2), the most recent of which wasn’t remotely as close as the final margin suggested. The ‘Horns are No. 1 with a bullet, period.

I went back and forth over which team to place in the second spot, though. Ultimately, I came down on the side of Alabama (7-0) rather than Penn State (8-0), but it was a close call. Discounting the Nittany Lions’ meaningless season-opening victory over Division I-AA Coastal Carolina, both teams have beaten seven Division I-A opponents, including two with winning records.

Although ‘Bama had to survive scares at home from Kentucky (5-2) and Ole Miss (3-4) while P.S.U. throttled all of its opponents, the Crimson Tide have the better pair of quality wins, as a road victory over Georgia (6-1) and a home win over the Wildcats outclass home victories over two 4-3 teams in Oregon State and Illinois.

There was a significant drop-off between No. 3 and No. 4, but the next spot in the standings went to Oklahoma State (7-0). Half of the Cowboys’ six Division I-A victories came against teams that are over .500, including a marquee win at Mizzou which was followed by a win over Baylor (3-4) in which the Pokes showed no letdown. O.S.U.’s unbeaten record and quality victory kept the team in the top five.

"I’m a man! We’re No. 4!"

Once again, the best of the once-beatens was Southern California (5-1). The Trojans’ close loss in Corvallis becomes less damaging as the Beavers continue to improve and U.S.C.’s season-opening triumph at Virginia (4-3) gains greater luster as the campaign continues. The Wahoos are one of three teams with winning records to have lost to the Men of Troy by large margins and Pete Carroll’s club boasts a pair of quality wins over Ohio State (7-1) and Oregon (5-2). Southern California did not receive extra credit from me for scoring 60+ on Washington State (1-7), because, honestly, who hasn’t scored 60+ on the Cougars?

The Sooners, victors over Texas Christian (7-1), Cincinnati (5-1), and Kansas (5-2), earned the No. 6 ranking ahead of the Buckeyes, whose wins over Minnesota (6-1) and Michigan State (6-2), while impressive, carry less heft than Oklahoma’s best triumphs. Ohio State is not helped by the magnitude of the beatdown it received in Los Angeles---Bob Stoops’s troops at least were competitive in Dallas---nor by a tight win at Wisconsin (3-4) which looks increasingly suspect.

I wrestled with whether to award the eighth spot to the Bulldogs or the Gators. There certainly was a valid argument to make in favor of Florida (5-1); viz.: Georgia beat South Carolina (5-3) by a touchdown in Columbia, and the Saurians blew out Louisiana State (5-1), which also just beat the Gamecocks by a touchdown in Columbia.

What tipped the balance in favor of the Red and Black were the facts that (a) Georgia beat Vanderbilt (5-2) to give the ‘Dawgs a pair of at least moderately respectable wins, and (b) three of Florida’s five wins came against teams with 3-4 records . . . and so did the Gators’ home loss to Ole Miss, which lacks a resume comparable to Alabama’s, no matter how close the Rebels came to pulling off the upset in Tuscaloosa. I would respectfully suggest to those of my colleagues who have Florida ranked more than one spot above Georgia that they are paying too much attention to two games---U.F.’s win over L.S.U. and the Red and Black’s loss to ‘Bama---and are ignoring completely the two teams’ achievements against the remaining opponents on their respective schedules. (Certainly, such voters are not looking beyond the final score when comparing Georgia’s and Florida’s wins over Tennessee.)

Hey, Phil, which was a worse whipping . . . having Florida hold the ball for 29:58 and gain 243 yards and 16 first downs against you while scoring 30 points in a game in which y’all turned the ball over three more times than the Gators did or having Georgia hold the ball for 42:04 and gain 458 yards and 29 first downs against you while scoring 26 points in a game in which the Bulldogs turned the ball over two more times than y’all did? Yeah, that’s what I thought.

A pair of college football’s less impressive unbeatens appears at Nos. 10 and 11, in the form of Texas Tech (7-0) and Utah (8-0). The Red Raiders’ unblemished record and margins of victory cannot be ignored, but Mike Leach’s squad did not rank higher because Texas Tech has not beaten a Division I-A opponent with a ledger better than 4-3, two of the Red Raiders’ seven victims were Division I-AA squads, and the gunslingers from Lubbock struggled at home with mediocre Nebraska (4-3).

That, though, was better than the Utes had to offer, as the club from Salt Lake City has played in a trio of nailbiters against a schedule that features Division I-AA Weber State and five victims with losing records. Utah’s win at Michigan (2-5) has lost all its luster, but the Utes made it to the cusp of the top ten on the strength of a win at Air Force (5-2) and a victory over Oregon State that is gaining value.

The cumulative value of wins over South Florida (6-1), Iowa (5-3), and Navy (4-3) helped Pittsburgh (5-1) to overcome the Panthers’ loss to Bowling Green (3-4) enough to receive the No. 12 ranking. Despite beating only one team with a winning record and losing handily to Oklahoma, T.C.U. vaulted itself into the top 15 with a convincing win over Brigham Young (6-1).

I haven’t done the math on this, but, if it’s still possible for every team in the A.C.C. to go 4-4 in conference play and have all 12 league members finish in a six-way tie for last (or, I guess, first) place in its division, that will come to pass in the most crushingly mediocre B.C.S. conference. The fact that Georgia Tech (6-1) and Boston College (5-1) were able to give the illusion of being worthy of top 15 rankings attests to this sad state of affairs.

Which A.C.C. really is more deserving of an automatic B.C.S. berth?

The Yellow Jackets, of course, got the nod because they defeated the Eagles head-to-head, but egad! Boston College is the Golden Tornado’s lone Division I-A victim with a winning record and the Ramblin’ Wreck’s pitiful resume includes two Division I-AA opponents (one of which the Engineers barely beat) and a narrow escape against a Clemson team in total disarray that now boasts a 3-4 record. The Eagles have a victory over Virginia Tech (5-2) and not a whole heck of a lot else. I’ll be glad when every team in the A.C.C. has two losses and I can drop the lot of them from my ballot.

The Bulls rode their win over the Jayhawks and their quality loss to the Panthers to a No. 16 ranking, ahead of the Bayou Bengals, who have bolstered a resume weighted down with a huge loss to Florida and wins over Division I-AA Appalachian State and winless North Texas by putting together a respectable road win over the Gamecocks.

Boise State (6-0) edged out Ball State (7-0) because the Broncos’ best win (at Oregon) trumps the Cardinals’ best win (over Navy). A close road win over an Illinois club with a 4-3 ledger, coupled with a road loss to Ohio State, gave the Golden Gophers the upper hand over Florida State (5-1), since the Seminoles have a less impressive close road win over a Miami (Florida) club with a 4-3 ledger, coupled with a less impressive home loss to Wake Forest (4-2).

If it is not clear to you by now that there are not 25 teams deserving of a top 25 ranking, the fact that Northwestern (6-1) received the No. 22 spot on my ballot should make that reality readily apparent. Close road wins over a .500 Duke club and the Hawkeyes are all the Wildcats can claim, but it’s better than the resume compiled by the Bearcats, half of whose Division I-A wins were close scrapes against a schedule that includes no bowl subdivision teams with winning ledgers.

How did Brian Cook get me to list 25 teams on my BlogPoll ballot? He got Luca Brazi to hold a gun to my head and he told me that either my brains or 25 teams would appear on my ballot.

This brings us to Tulsa (7-0). There is no reasonable measure by which the Golden Hurricane’s undefeated record is worthy of inclusion in the top 25. More than half of Tulsa’s wins came against the likes of Division I-AA Central Arkansas, North Texas (0-7), Southern Methodist (1-7), and U.A.B. (2-6). The Conference USA frontrunner’s best win is over Rice (4-3). Make no mistake: Tulsa is this year’s Hawaii.

Finally, B.Y.U. brings up the rear with a 6-1 record that includes a blowout loss to Texas Christian in which the Cougars were exposed and wins over Division I-AA Northern Iowa, Washington (0-6), Utah State (1-6), and Wyoming (2-5). Brigham Young’s best win was over either U.C.L.A. (3-4) or New Mexico (4-4).

Let’s not mince words. This ballot sucks. Please, please, please, please make an argument for one of the two-loss teams to be included in place of any of the bottom six or seven teams in my top 25. I didn’t find one that really seemed to separate itself from the pack of other twice-beatens, but I am more than open to hearing a defense of one or more of those squads. I’m begging you.

Finally, for what it’s worth, I watched the Florida State-N.C. State game on Thursday and the Boise State-Hawaii game on Friday before attending the Georgia-Vanderbilt game with my son, Thomas. Being a five-year-old boy, he wasn’t able to make it all the way through the whole game, so I listened to part of the contest on the radio on the way home---and, man, was this ever a game when I was glad not to be listening to Larry Munson, who would have seen doom and gloom in every second-half snap---before tuning in to the Michigan-Penn State and Louisiana State-South Carolina games later in the day.

Go ‘Dawgs!

0 recs | Comment 36 comments | Share on Facebook Digg!

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

No Subject

Dude, you are so much a typical UGA fan that it’s not even funny. How about your “dawging” of the ACC where you totally bash a conference that has competitive in-conference games. I tend to see some competitive games in the SEC that probably shouldn’t be competitive.

For one thing, if you want to put things into perspective, Georgia Tech beat Miss. State 38-7. That Miss. State team beat Vandy 17-14, and your dawgs beat Vandy by 10. Not so much an impressive win when you look at it that way, is it?

You talk about how competitiveness in the ACC means it’s weak, but what about your competition in the SEC? Florida got beat by Ole Miss (and oh yeah, Wake Forest beat them), and Vandy got beat by Miss. State. And our lowly Miami team held its own for most of the game against Florida. Another thing: I don’t know how you look at it, but I think that Clemson didn’t do too much worse against the Bama team that handled your Dawgs.

Now I don’t think the ACC is the best conference out there. They definitely aren’t, but they deserve more credit than you’re giving them. You can’t say that the ACC is the worst conference out there when you have the Pac-10 with 4 teams under .500 and only one team with one loss.

Please consider giving the ACC a little more credit. If you still don’t think we deserve it, then so be it.

Oh, and if you want to talk more on this subject, I will gladly converse with you. The email is dpearson6@gatech.edu (Yes, I go to Tech).

by dpearson6 on Oct 20, 2008 2:24 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You go to Georgia Tech? No kidding?

Young man, let me give you some advice that will stand you in good stead in adulthood:

If you want to “converse” with someone in a reasonable manner, don’t begin with the statement, “Dude, you are so much a typical UGA fan that it’s not even funny.”

After that point, I tuned you out altogether.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 20, 2008 9:12 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I wish he would refrain from the "dude", but

he does make some good points.

SMQ discussed this last year, finding that the ACC is most similar to the NFL in that everyone plays close to the vest, clutches and grabs on defense, and generally attempt to put themselves in winning range at the end of the game.

by FSUncensored on Oct 20, 2008 11:24 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

There were some pretty good points made there,

But who is the best ACC team? I will say that the league is competitive, but its hard to prognosticate when the teams that look like the best one week end up losing to teams that don’t appear to be all that great. That does happen to a certain degree in every conference—as that SEC example demonstrates—but in the ACC it just happens on a weekly basis—so much so that until just one ACC team demonstrates some ability to be consistent, ranking them will continue to be an incredibly arduous process.

by The ArchDawg on Oct 20, 2008 1:53 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well, judge the in conference games and pay attention to OOC games.

UNC over Notre Dame, killing Rutgers in Rutgers
Va Tech smacking Nebraska
Wake beating Ole Miss and Baylor on road
FSU smoking Colorado
Ga Tech giving Miss St their worst loss of the year.

by FSUncensored on Oct 20, 2008 2:05 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Anyone know how to get in touch with Kyle?

It’s important that I contact him and I’d appreciate any assistance. Thanks!

by ziemianski on Oct 20, 2008 2:27 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

BYU

DIdn’t they get spanked this week and yet they move up a place? /scratches head/

by fotodog on Oct 20, 2008 8:14 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's a fair criticism, fotodog

Generally, the arrows on my ballot are meaningless; as a resume ranker, I start from scratch every week and order the teams as their records of achievement warrant. Obviously, the value of an early-season win or loss changes over time, depending upon whether that opponent improves or declines, so it is never simply a matter of whether a team won or lost last Saturday (or, in this case, Thursday).

However, I agree with you that there is something troubling about ranking B.Y.U. at all after the concerns about the Cougars’ legitimacy which kept them off of my ballot altogether last week were confirmed by their loss to T.C.U.

Here is my challenge, though: Brigham Young was the last unbeaten or once-beaten team. I would love to drop B.Y.U. and put the country’s best two-loss team in the No. 25 spot. I honestly don’t know who that is, though.

If anyone has an argument to make for a particular two-loss team as more deserving than Brigham Young, I will hear them out and, if persuaded, adjust my ballot accordingly. In short, you’re right, but I don’t know who else to put there and I welcome input upon that point.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 20, 2008 9:09 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Put Va Tech or UNC over BYU

2 close losses to decent but not great teams.
@ UNC (3) GT (3) @ NEB (5) WKY (14) BC (-5) @ ECU (-5)
CONN (26) ND (5) @ MIA (4) @ RUT (32) VT (-3) @ UVA (-3)

by FSUncensored on Oct 20, 2008 11:12 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Pretty sure he meant "last team in the poll" there, TN

FWIW Kyle, I’d recommend Va. Tech in BYU’s place. They handed Ga. Tech their only loss of the season and one of their other losses was a competitive roadie at another one-loss team in the poll. The ECU loss isn’t pretty but to me, it’s more impressive than what BYU’s done, which is scrape by one of the worst BCS schools in the country, wipe out some other assorted chaff, and then get annihilated in their first actual test of the season.

Congrats on putting Pitt and Okie State up where they belong, though. The hate for Okie St. below in this thread baffles me; they’re one of all of five undefeated BCS teams and unlike Texas Tech, they’ve both beaten someone with a pulse (on the road, no less) and handled their business comprehensively against lesser foes. I don’t know if they’ll beat Texas, but they’ll cover the spread.

by JCCW Jerry on Oct 21, 2008 10:04 AM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

To borrow a NASCAR team, this is "Restart Week"

Also, check out the huge list of 2-Loss teams from BCS Conferences:

Maryland, Wake Forest, Va Tech, UNC, WVU, UCONN, Louisville, Michigan State, Kansas, Missouri, Oregon, Arizona, Cal, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, and Notre Dame.

16 of them. Tough. A lot of games feature (in terms of losses); 0-0, 1-0, 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, 2-2, and 2-3.

by FSUncensored on Oct 20, 2008 11:10 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I vote for Missouri

Yes I know they got housed by Texas, but “on a neutral field, in a certain phase of the moon….yada,yada” I think they can hang with anyone 2-25 on offense at least.

by RocketDawg on Oct 20, 2008 11:40 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Standings

Kyle, First of all, great blog. I love your writing. I know you and know you mean what you say. Why then did you refer to your “rankings” as “standings”? As my 5 year old would say – were you kidding?

by dawgfan97 on Oct 20, 2008 12:08 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That was a poor word choice on my part

You’re right; “rankings” and “standings” are not synonymous; I used the latter in place of the former for variety, but, because there is a valid distinction between the two, I used the word improperly. My bad.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 20, 2008 12:17 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No Subject

Okay, I just deleted the opening statement. I’m sorry if I upset you. Now will you care to listen to what I have to say next?

For one thing, if you want to put things into perspective, Georgia Tech beat Miss. State 38-7. That Miss. State team beat Vandy 17-14, and your dawgs beat Vandy by 10. Not so much an impressive win when you look at it that way, is it?

You talk about how competitiveness in the ACC means it’s weak, but what about your competition in the SEC? Florida got beat by Ole Miss (and oh yeah, Wake Forest beat them), and Vandy got beat by Miss. State. And our lowly Miami team held its own for most of the game against Florida. Another thing: I don’t know how you look at it, but I think that Clemson didn’t do too much worse against the Bama team that handled your Dawgs.

Now I don’t think the ACC is the best conference out there. They definitely aren’t, but they deserve more credit than you’re giving them. You can’t say that the ACC is the worst conference out there when you have the Pac-10 with 4 teams under .500 and only one team with one loss.

Oh yeah, I just found out that the ACC has 3 teams in the top five in total defense. I doubt the Alpine Club of Canada could compare to that.

Please consider giving the ACC a little more credit. If you still don’t think we deserve it, then so be it.

by dpearson6 on Oct 20, 2008 1:34 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Credit where credit is due

Evidently, the Atlantic Coast Conference is as lacking in a sense of humor as it is lacking in offense, but, just to be clear: I believe that the Atlantic Coast Conference champion would, in fact, beat the Alpine Club of Canada champion head-to-head.

I would respectfully suggest that the comparison of the final scores of the Georgia Tech-Mississippi State, Mississippi State-Vanderbilt, and Georgia-Vanderbilt games is misleading. For one thing, those games were played in Atlanta, Starkville, and Athens, respectively, which cannot be discounted. For another, it should have been evident to anyone who saw the game that two turnovers and two missed field goals made the Georgia-Vanderbilt game look much closer on the scoreboard than it actually was.

Beyond that, I believe the Commodores were caught looking ahead to their big game against the Bulldogs, just as Arizona State was caught looking ahead by U.N.L.V. If we are going to make the mathematical error of applying the transitive property to college football, though, how do you think Georgia, Mississippi State, and Vanderbilt would fare against Gardner-Webb?

Finally, and most importantly, how does my ballot disrespect the A.C.C.?

The current A.P. poll ranks Georgia Tech 21st, Boston College 23rd, and Florida State 24th.

The current coaches’ poll ranks Georgia Tech 21st and Florida State 23rd.

The current BlogPoll ranks Georgia Tech 18th and Boston College 22nd.

My BlogPoll ballot ranks Georgia Tech 14th, Boston College 15th, and Florida State 21st.

Who is showing the A.C.C. more respect than me?

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 20, 2008 4:52 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sorry DP - I agree with Kyle on this one

The ACC kind of blows this season. To say that Miami held its own for for most of the game is a correct statement, but we did end up winning that game 26-3. The game is 4 quarters. Florida has started slow in several games and then pulled away in the 4th. So you don’t get any credit for that game because Miami failed to cover a 3 TD spread.

The problem is that you have no elite team this year. While UGA, LSU & Florida all have one loss, they all legitimately believe they can win it all. Add Bama to the mix, who has no blemishes to date. There really isn’t a team in the ACC that can legitimately say it can go to Miami. FSU, BC and Tech appear to be the 3 best teams right now. Can you imagine your championship game if BC and Tech play for the title? Attendance might be worse than last year, if that is possible.

Also, the transitive property does not apply to football. Otherwise, I sure you could come up with some scenario to prove that Toledo is better than Alabama.

Finally, it is fine to say “dude” in a blog. We’re not writing dissertations here. Kyle should not have attacked you for that. I am sure you are a bright student if you attend Tech – that dosn’t mean you are precluded from using slang terms.

by skigator93 on Oct 20, 2008 3:58 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Just to clarify . . .

I am genuinely surprised that anyone thought this was the least bit unclear, but, since it appears inexplicably to have confused some folks, I will spell it out in no uncertain terms:

As I would have thought was utterly apparent, my objection wasn’t to the "dude," it was to the "you are so much a typical UGA fan that it’s not even funny."

When you treat a person like a stereotype, you had better expect that he is going to treat you exactly the same way.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 20, 2008 4:51 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I agree with your argument skigator93

I’m not saying that the ACC is great, but to put us down so much in a blog is horrendous. There are plenty of other conferences to pick on besides us, yet somehow we get picked on because we’re the ACC. When you have conferences like the Big East and Pac-10 putting up teams with very disappointing seasons, it just doesn’t seem right to be steadfast in your argument that the ACC is the worst conference.

Sagarin of the USA Today has the ACC ranked right behind the SEC as the 4th best conference.

Obviously, I don’t agree with his take on my school’s performance this year, but I just hope it comes back to bite him in the butt come Thanksgiving.

by dpearson6 on Oct 20, 2008 4:38 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Jeff Sagarin carries no weight with me

As I indicated in my comment above, despite my jabs in the spirit of interconference and intrastate rivalry, I ranked the Yellow Jackets higher than the sportswriters, coaches, and bloggers as a whole ranked them.

I’m sure you’re sincere when you say you want it to come back and bite me on the Saturday after Thanksgiving, but you’d want that, anyway, and, as a student at the Georgia Institute of Technology, you’re fully aware of the problem of drawing conclusions from small statistical sample sizes.

If you have a problem with my rankings rather than my rhetoric, let’s get down to cases. If I do not have Georgia Tech or any other A.C.C. team ranked appropriately, where do you believe that team or those teams should be ranked, and why? Which of the teams that I have ranked above the Ramblin’ Wreck do you believe deserve to be ranked below the Golden Tornado, and why?

Despite our dislike for one another’s tone, I remain open to legitimate arguments. If my rankings are wrong, give me a rational argument why.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 20, 2008 5:06 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm sure most people

When looking at the BCS conferences, would agree that on the aggregate the PAC-10 and the Big East are worse than the ACC. But the ACC really has no team that, as of now, stands out from the pack. That’s why ranking its teams is a hassle.

by The ArchDawg on Oct 20, 2008 7:34 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

100% right.

I posted on DocSat today:

The ACC has 6-7 teams that are somewhere between the top 15-40

by FSUncensored on Oct 20, 2008 7:55 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Honestly i can't stand Oklahoma State at #4

I know they are an undefeated team, with a close win against an offensively talented Missouri Team. But the rest of their schedule is trash. I agree they are a top ten team right now, but i can’t see them in the top five at all, i just hope Texas beats them this next week so they can drop from the top ten finally.

Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win.

I Corinthians 9:24

by Southern Dawg on Oct 20, 2008 7:58 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sagarin

Appears biased against the SEC. He has both UGA and UF ranked way lower than the other polls. Also, the reason we are so hard on the ACC is because so many of our bitter state rivals play in the ACC. See Tech, FSU, Miami, Clemson……

Well, that and this:

Of course we are going to make fun of you!!!

by skigator93 on Oct 20, 2008 9:43 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

As I understand it, Sagarin’s model disproportionally penalizes teams for home losses. If UGA and UF had the foresight to lose on the road or at a neutral site, they would be relatively unscathed a la Southern Cal and OU.

proud to swim home

by learned hand on Oct 20, 2008 9:55 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

About your rankings

I have no problem with the rankings you made. That is apparent in the fact that I made no comments about the rankings. The only thing I really don’t like about the rankings is the fact that USC is ranked above UGA, but that is the way it is in every poll, so I understand it. USC has done well besides the fact that they lost to Oregon State, but I guess I just don’t like USC very much and refuse to give them credit after they lost. And I know it’s hard to believe I would like UGA to be ranked above USC, but that’s how it is.

I actually think you did a good job on the rankings. My USC thing is just dislike most likely.

Anyways, the thing I was perturbed about was the fact that you said we gave the “illusion” to being worthy of this respect. I guess I just don’t understand why you ranked Georgia Tech so high (probably higher than I would have) when your comments don’t justify your reason behind that at all.

As far as the biting you in the butt thing, I am sincere about that. It’s just a rivalry thing. I just want to see my team finally beat UGA and gain some respect by doing that. I’m sour about the whole 7 years in a row, and I’m just hoping we open up a new era with PJ.

Sorry for getting off on the wrong foot with you. As long as I know your comments were just from rivalry, I’m okay with that.

by dpearson6 on Oct 20, 2008 10:46 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I just saw your other comment, so

Okay, I just saw your comment on my use of the transitive property. I agree that it is stupid, and I don’t know why I used it. I guess it was a feeble attempt to make a case for my team.

As far as the Gardner-Webb game goes, I was highly embarrassed by it, and I was glad to see Nesbitt back for us, although I did kind of miss Jaybo’s running of the option. As long as we keep winning, though, I’m okay with close games.

Like I said, I do not disagree with the rankings you gave the ACC teams. I just don’t understand why your blogging and rankings of the ACC teams don’t match up.

Any clarification on that would be appreciated. Is it just because you were showing your SEC/ACC competitive side?

Oh and I was just kind of going along with your Alpine Club joke. I wasn’t fighting back at it, but merely joining in.

Also, I saw your joke about the ACC’s offense, so I decided to research it. I went on ESPN.com and looked up the ACC and SEC national rankings in scoring offense (that’s the only rankings for total offensive production that there was on ESPN). I found the average rank for each conference (in Matlab, lol) and the results are as follows:

ACC scoring offense: average rank of 66.67

SEC scoring offense: average rank of 67.25

I thought these results were pretty interesting. While I agree the SEC does have some high-powered offenses, the ACC as a whole is better than the SEC as a whole in scoring. This could be different, though, if I found stats for total offensive production in yards. Maybe I’ll do that later.

by dpearson6 on Oct 21, 2008 1:08 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Offensive YPG Ranks

SEC YPG Ranks Average: 74.58

ACC YPG Ranks Average: 83.33

So ya’ll do lead the ACC in YPG, but our offenses are closer-matched than one would think.

by dpearson6 on Oct 21, 2008 1:18 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

For the most part . . .

. . . those are just partisan conference jabs, which I exaggerate for the sake of humor.

The A.C.C. isn’t that bad; it’s more that the entire league seems to be clustered around the middle, which makes it very difficult to distinguish the above-average teams from the below-average teams. In most conferences, there are extreme deviations from the norm in both directions, but nearly every team in the A.C.C. appears, at first glance, to be closer to the mean. The S.E.C. numbers are a reflection of good offenses (Florida, Georgia) and bad offenses (Auburn, Tennessee) effectively offsetting one another statistically; the A.C.C. averages seems to reflect a conference-wide averageness.

Of course, that could just be perception. I recognize that Georgia Tech (at this point, apparently the best team in the A.C.C.) beat Duke (a much improved, but still not what one would call particularly good, team) by 27 points, so it isn’t as though every game is 20-17. It just seems that way sometimes. When Vanderbilt jumps up and bites someone, it’s surprising but not shocking, because the Commodores have been giving tough teams a tough time for a while now. Every week, though, it feels like an A.C.C. team that has been left for dead leaps up and knocks off a conference frontrunner. It’s disconcerting.

In any case, I rank teams where it appears to me that their on-field accomplishments have earned them the right to be ranked, but, where I’m somewhat uncomfortable with a team’s placement, I usually comment on it. In this case, again, I exaggerated somewhat for the sake of humor. I genuinely question whether Georgia Tech and Boston College really are top 15 teams, but they appear to have done more than the teams ranked 16th through 25th, so I ranked them where I thought they deserved, commented on the oddity of it, and went over the top to emphasize the point. (Hence, the Alpine Club of Canada crack, which I’m glad to learn was not taken seriously.)

The bottom line is that miscommunications occur over the internet between people who have never met face-to-face, which is an occupational hazard of blogging. I’m glad we cleared up the misunderstanding. Good luck in all of your remaining games but one. I hope you will continue to come by and comment.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 21, 2008 7:30 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Postscript

The phenomenon I am describing about the A.C.C. was, naturally, best addressed by Dr. Saturday here.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Oct 21, 2008 7:32 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Offensive rankings

Comparing the scoring and yards per game rankings of offenses in the ACC and SEC is misleading, because (this year at least) in the SEC, teams appear to have much better defenses than offenses. We are the opposite of the Big 12, where the offenses are light years ahead of the defenses.

ACC offenses go against some pretty weak conference defenses, while SEC offenses face tougher defensive foes on a weekly basis. Despite all that, our offenses are ranked very closely in overall numbers. I’ll bet if you compared the defensive rankings, they would be more skewed. If I am wrong about that, then I’ll just chalk it up to perception!

by skigator93 on Oct 21, 2008 9:37 AM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Defensive Rankings

For total YPG allowed, here are the average rankings in each conference:

ACC- 40.5

SEC: 24.67

So yes, the ACC does have worse defense than the SEC. That explains why the ACC is so close to the SEC in offensive rankings.

by dpearson6 on Oct 21, 2008 7:28 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'll probably be back come Thanksgiving

Thanks for the explanation on your ranting and raving about the ACC, Georgia Tech, and Boston College. I understand your thoughts behind your rankings and your explanations now.

I’ll probably be back to make a case for my team in the “Good Ole-Fashioned Hate” game taking place after Thanksgiving.

Then we can debate about who’s team has the edge, and hopefully my team will have done well enough up to that point that I can make a case for them to win.

Good luck in all your games, too, up to that point.

by dpearson6 on Oct 21, 2008 10:18 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation community devoted to the Georgia Bulldogs.
Start posting about the Bulldogs »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Flowerchucker_small
Quick Question re: Branden Smith
Small
College Football Preview Luncheon
Photo_69_small
Individual/Composite calendars for iCal/Outlook?
Small
College Football Preview Luncheon
Small
muschamp recruits in georgia
Associated_20press_clayliston_1965_l_small
How to Taunt a Georgia Fan
Mtsu_sm_small
Going to UGA
Small
oklahoma state blog
Small
2009 Competition Improves
Small
100 Cocktails

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Managers

Beard_47_series_wins_and_42_points_in_2007_small T Kyle King

Official Partner of CBS Sports