I think that if you go by what teams have earned on the field after two weeks, Houston at 2 isn't unreasonable -- just as BYU at No. 1 after one week wasn't unreasonable. Nor is keeping USC behind Florida and Texas -- maybe more teams. Or Cincinnati in the Top 10, ahead of Penn State. Or having teams debut and/or drop out fairly violently.
The season goes along, we get more real data points (not preseason conjecture), we can see whether Week 1 wins were "quality" or not (see Miami over FSU, which struggled with Jax St.), we can affirm or reject biases. Anyway, my ballot is here:
Rank | Team | Delta |
---|---|---|
1 | Alabama | 1 |
2 | Houston | |
3 | Brigham Young | 2 |
4 | Florida | 1 |
5 | Texas | 1 |
6 | Southern Cal | 1 |
7 | California | 4 |
8 | Cincinnati | 5 |
9 | Boise State | 5 |
10 | Penn State | 2 |
11 | TCU | 2 |
12 | Mississippi | |
13 | Georgia Tech | 3 |
14 | LSU | |
15 | Nebraska | 4 |
16 | Virginia Tech | 7 |
17 | Kansas | |
18 | Utah | |
19 | Baylor | 3 |
20 | Pittsburgh | |
21 | Michigan | |
22 | Boston College | |
23 | UCLA | |
24 | Miami (Florida) | 2 |
25 | Ohio State | 10 |
Last week's ballot |
Dropped Out: Oklahoma State (#3), North Carolina (#20), Notre Dame (#21), Georgia (#24), Oklahoma (#25).
3 comments:
As a BC Alum, I feel this is one of the few times we will been considered a "Top 25" team. Blowout wins over Northeastern and Kent State are nothing to get ranked for...then again you could argue we are better than half of the Big 10 (11) just based on those two wins.
I think Houston at No. 2 is unreasonable. Their claim is based on beating Oklahoma St, whom you have just dropped completely from the rankings. OKSt.'s claim to being good is based on beating UGA, who you also dropped from the rankings after they gave up 37 points to S. Carolina.
Wait, why is USC behind anybody except Alabama? In YOUR top 5, Alabama is the only team with a W against anyone in YOUR top 25. At 6 is USC, with a win over YOUR #25 Ohio State. What gives?
Post a Comment