Week Two BlogPoll Ballot Corrected

by T Kyle King on Sep 9, 2007 10:08 PM EDT in Football

Not long ago, I submitted my most recent BlogPoll ballot, in which I had Colorado ranked eighth. An attentive reader reasonably asked, "Didn't they actually lose 33-14 to Arizona State?"

Unlike some A.P. voters I could name, I figured out a way to double-check the score and, sure enough, he was right. Obviously, this required both a correction and an explanation.

The explanation is this: I got home late last night from Athens and, as often is the case after a Georgia game, I couldn't sleep, so I went ahead and got to work on my BlogPoll ballot. I was checking scores on Sports Illustrated's website until the wee hours and I kept track of the Arizona State-Colorado game until it the score was final.

It's not impossible that, because it was late and I was tired, I misread the score, but I'm almost positive that the real-time game tracker had the score reversed, showing Colorado was winning by a 33-14 margin, rather than Arizona State. When I double-checked it earlier this evening, though, I saw that rmcleave was right, for which I am most apologetic.

Regardless of the reason for this error, whether it was Sports Illustrated's mistake or mine, a correction was in order, so I went back in and recast my BlogPoll ballot, which now looks like this:

Rank	Team	Delta
1	LSU	4
2	Oklahoma	6
3	UCLA	4
4	Washington	21
5	Missouri	21
6	Boston College	20
7	South Carolina	19
8	Iowa	18
9	South Florida	17
10	Clemson	12
11	Texas	1
12	Rutgers	7
13	Oregon	3
14	Arizona State	12
15	Wisconsin	11
16	Southern Cal	15
17	Cincinnati	9
18	Penn State	1
19	Alabama	7
20	West Virginia	18
21	California	18
22	Michigan State	4
23	Florida	8
24	Georgia	13
25	Georgia Tech	5

Dropped Out: Boise State (#6), TCU (#9), Louisville (#10), Virginia Tech (#13), Auburn (#14), Ohio State (#18), Nebraska (#21), Oregon State (#23), Brigham Young (#24).

The lone change involved removing the Buffaloes and inserting the Sun Devils, who beat San Jose State and Colorado convincingly to earn a No. 14 ranking. Every intervening team moved up one notch.

Once again, I apologize for the error and I appreciate the correction. Next time, I'll know better than to check scores when I'm sleepy.

Go 'Dawgs!

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

UCLA is over rated

... in my opinion.

I'd have LSU, OK, UW, Oregon, and Cal as my top five. I count UW's win over Boise State, Oregon's wins over Mich and Houston, and Cal's wins over TN and Col State as more impressive than UCLA's resume.
So UCLA is fourth in the PAC-10, not third in the country, in my mind. I hate UCLA.

by 34hawk on Sep 9, 2007 11:13 PM EDT reply actions

GT

Whether or not it's homerism to have Georgia be the only 1-1 team on the ballot, it does seem to me that bias is the only thing that would place GT at #25.

If the pride of the Dawg Sports ballot is strict resume ranking, then let's compare GT to some higher-ranked teams. South Florida beat Elon 28-13, Cincinnati beat Southeastern Missouri State, Bama beat Western Carolina, and Florida beat Western Kentucky. That means Tech isn't the only team to have played a AA squad on the ballot (although Samford may admittedly be the worst of those AA teams). It's also worth noting, I believe, that Tech's starters were gone by the half, so the 69 points are somewhat impressive, I believe.

But even if you think that all of those other wins were more impressive than GT over Samford, I question whether a win over OkState plus a loss to the Gamecocks should be looked at as a better resume than decisive wins at Notre Dame and against Samford.

by Jeff on Sep 10, 2007 9:40 AM EDT reply actions

Fair enough

Georgia Tech has played two games, against Notre Dame and Samford. Those two teams are a combined 1-3, with their lone win coming against West Alabama. None of the three losses was competitive.

Nothing a Division I-A team does against a Division I-AA team will ever win it points on my ballot. I don't believe Division I-A teams that are serious about football ought ever to play Division I-AA opponents, period. Playing poorly against a Division I-AA opponent causes a team to lose ground. Losing to a Division I-AA opponent causes a team to drop out of the rankings altogether. Beating a Division I-AA opponent, no matter how badly, counts for next to nothing; it is, as Brian Cook puts it, a "Functional DNP."

Georgia Tech's win over Notre Dame looks worse than it did a week ago. Georgia's win over Oklahoma State looks better than it did a week ago. The Bulldogs get credit for playing the toughest opening two-game stretch of any team in the country, winning one convincingly, and losing a tight game to a good team.

Accordingly, I don't believe it's unreasonable to conclude (based upon the scant evidence before us right now) that convincing wins over an 0-2 Notre Dame team and a Division I-AA opponent represent less of an achievement than a convincing win over a solid Oklahoma State squad and a narrow loss to a solid South Carolina team.

However, it's early and there is a lot of football left to be played. Georgia does not stand to profit from this weekend's shameful game against Western Carolina, but Georgia Tech could benefit immensely from its outing against Boston College. A win over the Eagles would count for more than both of the Yellow Jackets' previous victories combined.

by T Kyle King on Sep 11, 2007 8:31 AM EDT up reply actions