First Draft of Final BlogPoll Ballot Submitted
I don’t know about you, but, now that the season is over, I’m spent. A report on last night’s gymnastics meet will follow tomorrow; a full explanation of---and, if necessary, revision of---my postseason top 25 will follow shortly thereafter.
For now, here is the preliminary BlogPoll ballot draft I submitted this afternoon, which (to reiterate) will be explained soon. Ignore the arrows; I started from a clean white piece of paper (several, actually) and organized the entire top 25 anew, without regard to my own earlier ballots.
Here is how my resume-based rankings break down:
![]() | ||
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Florida | 2 |
| 2 | Utah | 6 |
| 3 | Texas | 1 |
| 4 | Southern Cal | 2 |
| 5 | Oklahoma | 4 |
| 6 | Texas Tech | 2 |
| 7 | Alabama | -- |
| 8 | Penn State | 3 |
| 9 | Ohio State | -- |
| 10 | TCU | 8 |
| 11 | Boise State | 1 |
| 12 | Virginia Tech | 4 |
| 13 | Georgia | 8 |
| 14 | Missouri | 12 |
| 15 | Mississippi | 2 |
| 16 | Oregon | 2 |
| 17 | Oregon State | 6 |
| 18 | Georgia Tech | 7 |
| 19 | Cincinnati | 7 |
| 20 | California | 6 |
| 21 | Pittsburgh | 6 |
| 22 | Florida State | 4 |
| 23 | Oklahoma State | 4 |
| 24 | Michigan State | 11 |
| 25 | Iowa | -- |
Your constructive criticisms are appreciated. I’ll let you know how I distinguished the teams---and, particularly, why I came down the way I did on choosing the No. 1 team, a question with which I wrestled extensively---in short order. As always, persuasive cases made in the comments may sway me and convince me to change my rankings before the final deadline.
Go ‘Dawgs!
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
USC below Texas??
I can’t say i agree with that. Texas had to win on a final drive to take the lead, and against a team that USC beat with great ease.
I also think UGA at 11 is more appropriate (and hey its a new year why not be a little more optimistic) than Boise. Not that UGA at 13 is pessimistic or straight bangin’ but i just can’t stomach seeing a cupcake inhaling smurf ahead of my dawgs.
Iowa seems to have had too convincing of a bowl win against spurrier and their D to leave them on the cliff of the 25. I would argue the 20 spot for them.
Other than that everything looks good. A reasonable ballot. My objections are mere suggestions and not all out criticisms for your ballot.
Dawg Sports! First Poll. Last Poll. Every Poll!
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
One quibble.
Georgia Tech got absolutely destroyed by LSU. I mean, 38-5. I’m not sure they deserved to be ranked, and they certainly shouldn’t be 18th if you’re going to leave LSU off the ballot entirely.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
While the full explanation will be up later . . .
. . . I did not consider ranking any five-loss teams, of which Louisiana State was one.
Go 'Dawgs!
It's not that LSU should be ranked, it's that GA Tech should be lower
due to their thrashing by said 5-loss team.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
by displacedute on Jan 11, 2009 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
What's up with Oregon?
They beat Oklahoma State by 10 in a bowl game the Pac 10 has traditionally done poorly in and they move down?
Other strange things (to my mind, anyway)
- Texas Tech is blown out by a borderline top-25 team, and drops only two spots?
- Alabama is manhandled by Utah, and doesn’t drop at all?
- Missouri moves up 12 when they needed overtime to beat Northwestern, and the Big 12 had a pretty poor bowl season? I mean, I know the preseason meme was that Missouri was supposed to be really good, but I don’t know why pollsters keep trying to reassert it in the face of all sorts of evidence to the contrary.
- You moved Georgia up 8 and Michigan State down 11 after a game decided by all of 12 points. Doesn’t that seem a bit extreme?
Once again . . .
. . . the arrows are meaningless.
I re-evaluate every team’s entire resume after each week, which means not only that whether a team won or lost matters, but also how every team that team played over the course of the season fared matters. The arrows are absolutely inconsequential.
Go 'Dawgs!
The arrows were what jumped out at me...
… but the teams in question still have problems. Especially Oregon (which seems much too low) and Missouri (which seems much too high). There aren’t many three-loss major conference teams, and it’s pretty much a coin flip whether Ohio State or Oregon was the best of them (you might argue for Georgia, but that’s really pushing things). Whereas Missouri’s a four-loss team with no wins over teams in the final top 25, and I just can’t see how that ranks a spot in the top 15; they should be well below Oregon, not bizarrely above them.
The explanation for my rankings should be up . . .
. . . late tonight/early tomorrow morning.
As always, I welcome counterarguments and am more than willing to reassess my top 25 in light of compelling points.
Go 'Dawgs!
A little late...
But I agree…
How in the world can Missouri be ranked higher than Oregon, by any metric? Missouri accomplished nothing the entire season. Their best win is Nebraska, and they were non-competitive in a few games. Missouri should barely be ranked.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by 
2
1 















