Georgia predictably fell to 3rd in both polls. I can't really argue with that right now. If I had a vote, I'd probably put UGA at #3 right behind Oklahoma. When I look at the rankings, Auburn and Wisconsin both seem a bit high, but who are you going to rank above them?
The polls will sort themselves out. For instance, I don't think Auburn being ranked in the Top 10 lasts beyond their match-up with LSU on Saturday. If we keep winning the polls won't matter. If we lose, we'll have bigger issues than the polls.
PWD
Georgia Sports Blog FanShop
- Georgia Bulldogs Women's Sideline Clutch
- Price: $84.99
18 comments:
You say that with such conviction, but all the talking heads who get to vote seem to think otherwise. USC is in barring any unforeseen mind cramps, and Oklahoma's schedule is much, much easier than ours. If we three go undefeated, and Oklahoma has dominated their defensively challenged conference once again, that leaves us on the outside looking in a-la Auburn 04. Just because it happened once doesn't mean it won't happen again.
If both us and OK go undefeated, I will bet my unborn child that we go to the NC over them.
blackertai,
Auburn's schedule wasn't comparable to ours and they started the season around 15th or so.
The talking heads mostly say that if UGa wins out, we're in because of our schedule.
AU's non-conference slate in '04 was UL-M, La Tech and The Citadel.
Heck, if UGA keeps winning, they may just drop out of the top 25 altogether.
I noticed some parallels in Oklahoma and PSU's first three outings while reading Mayor T. Kyle's blogpoll explanation, I wonder why they didn't jump the dawgs for ripping inferior competition in similar fashion.
AH, but you forget the flashy nature of their victories. The Big 12 is largely seen as the 2nd best BCS league overall, and if Oklahoma runs through it dominating it in a manner similar to some of its recent games, that will be an interesting choice for the voters. A Big 12 champ who routinely hangs 45-60 points on major conference opponents, or an SEC champ which gutted its way though a season with less than standout margins. I'm no psychologist, but most likely the networks would prefer the high flying team over the defensive strugglers, considering that while D might win championships, O wins ratings. And for some reason, the talking heads always end up going with the better ratings matchup than the best football one...(See last year's UGA/Hawai'i game, instead of the much better UGA/USC Rose bowl that didn't happen).
blackertai, you may be right about being left out if the current top 3 remain undefeated (way too early to be worried about it, by the way), but the talking heads had nothing to do with creating the UGA-Hawaii match last year over a UGA-USC game: Hawaii was in the BCS as the token, sufficiently highly ranked non-BCS FBS team; the BCS bowls were in control the rest of the way, not the talking heads -- a UGA-USC game was possible only if the Sugar released UGA and the Rose forewent the Pac 10 - Big 10 addiction, and neither of those was going to happen.
Plus, if ratings were the driving force, I think UGA-USC would have pulled a much bigger audience and national interest than the Sugar and Rose did as played, the attempts to puff Hawaii up as some kind of juggernaut notwithstanding.
But back to the hypothetical, I can definitely see your point. If USC, Oklahoma, and UGA are all undefeated, we're going to see a fierce controversy over strength of schedule versus margin of victory, and I can easily see the polls settling that controversy by not moving anybody. In that regard, query: is it true that SOS is a factor in the computer polls and MOV is not? Things could be interesting.
But still too early.
the only problem i can see here is a developing meme is see on the horizon. not to count our chickens before they hatch, but hypothetically... if we go undefeated and both UO and USC go undefeated, will it really be as cut and dry as kicking one or the other out of the top 2?
i'm not so sure it is. mostly because i don't see USC going undefeated and then not making the MNC game, no matter what the circumstances surrounding it are.
i know that i'm getting ahead of myself here, but i can easily see a scenario where our opponents who are supposedly the cream of the crop are in fact not (this is already developing with teams like SCar and ASU). that leaves a choice between us (team that plays strong schedule with close games) against UO (team with not as strong schedule who blows out their opponents). voters are supposedly more enlightened these days, but i'm not sure they are (evidenced by the disparaging remarks re: our blowout victory of CMU vs. USC's blowout victory against functional equivalent of CMU, UVA).
i'm the first to say that the whining re: the hurdle was not what we as a fan base need. but the back end of that is that the squeaky wheel gets the grease. most have been good about saying that this is a SEC victory, there is no shame in 14-7, etc etc. however, i'm not sure how good the media and college football fandom to a larger extent have taken that to heart after watching A LOT of college football over the weekend.
nct,
The Sugar Bowl did not have "dibs" on UGA last year. The Sugar Bowl only has "dibs" on the SEC champ. Since the Rose Bowl lost tOSU, they got first pick. In fact, if they were to lose both teams, they'd get the first two picks (stupid BCS contract). So, they did pass on UGA for Illinois. Unfortunately, it had nothing to do with ratings and everything to do with loyalty. Now you know why the Big 10 and Pac 10 are so firmly against a playoff.
Keep in mind that this is the Coaches poll...NOT the BCS poll. The BCS has a formula that factors in the other polls, as well as strength of schedule, that should arguably put us at 1 or 2 if we go all the way undefeated. The coaches will take notice, too, and probably put us up there anyway. But let's not count the chickens just yet...
Football Dude,
You are wrong.
The Rose did pick before the Sugar, but no bowl is allowed to pick an at-large replacement from a conference with an automatic tie-in to another bowl who lost its champion to the title game without consent from the other bowl.
In other words, if OU is in the Title game, the Sugar, Orange and Rose can't pick a Big 12 team as an at-large until the Fiesta has made its selection.
The Rose had nothing to do with UGA not playing Southern Cal.
Count me in among those worried that even if UGA were to plow through the hardest NCAA schedule in recent memory, they'll somehow be on the outside looking in.
It's ridiculous, and I wish "style points" didn't translate to higher rankings.
That said, the polls won't matter if we don't focus on Arizona State, then Alabama, then Tennessee, etc. One game at a time.
I was hoping for a blowout against So. Carolina. It worries me we weren't able to achieve that, but I'll take a sloppy and ugly win over a clean and crisp loss any day.
1985 turned out pretty well for the Sooners...
I absolutely understand why Southern Cal & Oklahoma have jumped us, but when's the last time a preseason #1 went 3-0 and dropped 2 places?
Way way way too early to get all worked up about this... but please note Oklahoma's recent accomplishments in BCS games:
2007 Fiesta Bowl
West Virginia 48 - OU 28
2006 Fiesta Bowl
Boise State 43 - OU 42
2004 Orange Bowl MNC Game (the year Auburn got screwed)
USC 55 - OU 19
2003 Sugar Bowl MNC Game (the year USC got screwed)
LSU 21 - OU 14 and it wasn't that close.
I'm not sure if this matters as much to the voters as it should, but OU has been Ohio State's equally embarrassing sister in BCS Bowls.
The argument is so premature now. I don't think that all three of these teams will be undefeated anyway. Maybe a 10% chance. BYU and ECU are more likely be undefeated. For what it is worth, which isn't much.
The more I think about it, playing a fairly sloppy game on Saturday and barely pulling out a win helps us in the long run. We know what we need to improve on as the schedule gets tougher. OU on the other hand stil have two more cupcake games before Texas with Baylor and TCU. We really have no idea how good that team really is because they have not played anyone. Hopfully these blow out wins will get them really cocky and they will fall...
Not that I'm not concerned about being on the outside looking in if we, USC, and Oklahoma all go undefeated, but the "talking heads" that I've read/watched/listened to for the past two days have had kind words about UGA's close win (even Mark May on College Gameday Final didn't have anything negative to say). As long as our opponents don't go in the toilet for the rest of the season, we should still be fine if we win out. Getting in with 1 or 2 losses, that might be a different story.
This is why the BCS needs to go. There are idiots out there who say the BCS makes the regular season more interesting, and that it gives people things to talk about, but look at WHAT we have to talk about as a result.
Almost nothing in this discussion has been about actual football. It has been about this poll or that poll, how the voters might go because of X historical example, etc. The same discussion is happening everywhere else too. I don't fault people, because the sad thing is that this garbage is equally important as the actual Wins and Losses.
Ridiculous!
-Michael Hartman
Blogging about Online Gaming and Virtual Worlds:
http://www.muckbeast.com
Post a Comment