Iggy's Week 4 College Football rankings

[iggymcfly 0]

No commentary yet. I don't think I'm sober enough right now, but if I feel up to it, I might get some commentary tomorrow.

 

However, everything except switching UCLA and Georgia Tech was done before I was drunk, so I stand by these rankings 100%.

 

They're more controversial than in recent weeks, so I will be glad to defend my selections if they're questioned. Anyway, without further ado:

 

(Previous week's ranking in parenthesis)

 

1. USC 4-0 (1)

2. Virginia Tech 5-0 (2)

3. Texas 4-0 (3)

4. Alabama 5-0 (17)

5. Florida State 4-0 (5)

6. Ohio State 3-1 (8)

7. Georgia 4-0 (9)

8. Tennessee 3-1 (6)

9. Wisconsin 5-0 (10)

10. Miami 3-1 (11)

11. Michigan 3-2 (21)

12. Michigan State 4-1 (6)

13. Florida 4-1 (4)

14. Notre Dame 4-1 (13)

15. LSU 2-1 (12)

16. Arizona State 3-2 (15)

17. California 5-0 (16)

18. Penn State 5-0 (23)

19. Texas Tech 4-0 (19)

20. Boston College 4-1 (20)

21. Georgia Tech 3-1 (25)

22. UCLA 4-0 (24)

23. West Virginia 4-1 (NR)

24. Auburn 3-1 (NR)

25. Iowa State 3-1 (18)

[Art Sandusky 0]

Notre Dame goes DOWN? WV loses and goes up?

 

Screwy, man.

[UZI Suicide 0]

Why is Michigan ahead of Notre Dame when they A.) Have a worse record B.) LOST TO NOTRE DAME

[Damaramu 0]

How is it that ISU is still in the Top 25 when the team that beat them and is undefeated isn't? I mean either put Nebraska at 25 or take them both out.

And I'm not going to make the case because I kind of like seeing 'Bama back on top but do you think they should switch places with FSU?

[Guest I miss Test.]

Michigan ahead of ND? I'm not understanding that one. Not just because ND beat them, and they only have one loss, but that was a ragged game against MSU.

 

WVU loses and gets ranked? Again, they didn't put up a great fight vs. VT.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Georgia Tech going up 4 slots on the basis of not playing and ergo not losing by 44 points this week is my pick for goofiest move (drunk, I know). I know teams lost, but after an ass-whooping like that you need to show me something before you go up at all. I like your top 10 a whole lot, though, even if I would still have Texas at number 2. That win over Missouri was much better than the win over WVU, and though Tech looks good, they still don't have anything as impressive as taking down Ohio State on the road yet.

 

Why is Michigan ahead of Notre Dame when they A.) Have a worse record B.) LOST TO NOTRE DAME

 

Although I don't agree with that move either, we're getting to the point in the season where the transitive property of victories doesn't mean all that much. I mean, Notre Dame beat Michigan, but Michigan State beat Notre Dame, but wait, Michigan beat Michigan State! You can't just play that easy game now that teams have 4-5 games under their belts.

[Guest]

Cal's too low. Everything else is where it should be.

[iggymcfly 0]

I figured putting Michigan that high would cause some attention, but look at it this way. If Mike Hart had never gotten injured, do you honestly think the Wolverines would have a loss right now? Their losses against Notre Dame and Wisconsin both came down to the very last possesssion, and I'm pretty sure that a presence of a 200 yards per game rusher could have been enough to make the difference. The healthy Wolverine team that's on the field right now is just better than Michigan State and Notre Dame, regardless of the fact that they played a tough road game that gave them an extra loss.

 

As for Notre Dame, yes they did have a nice win, and I rewarded them a little by letting them jump LSU, but with what Michigan and Alabama did this week, I had to move them above the Irish. Also, it's not really fair to drop MSU below ND when the Spartans were one point away from beating Michigan with Mike Hart, and they already had a road win over the Irish. Finally, the Purdue win looks impressive, because Purdue was supposed to be good, but really what have they done? They played two cupcakes, lost to Minnesota, and then got blown out by Notre Dame. Meanwhile, Minnesota, the only real team Purdue played all year, just lost by 30 to Penn State. I think at the end of the year, when the Boilermakers are 4-7 or 5-6, we won't think this win by Notre Dame was all that impressive.

 

Finally, Iowa State was the last interesting ranking that I did. The way I figure it, at this point of the season, a home win in overtime doesn't guarantee that you're better than the other team. It basically says "we won because we were at home, but if we played you on the road, we would have lost." Now combine that with the facts that Iowa State actually accomplished something earlier in the season by curbstomping Iowa, and that Nebraska got lucky just to beat Pittsburgh earlier, and I think the Cyclones are more worthy of being ranked than the Cornhuskers.

 

As for Georgia Tech, ideally teams don't go up in my rankings without doing anything, but sometimes it just happens that way. Actually, I think I'm much better at not automatically moving teams that do nothing up than most people, as I managed to keep Florida State, Texas Tech, and Boston College in exactly the same spot, and only moved Wisconsin, Miami, Arizona State, and Cal a spot each. LSU moved down four spots due to the teams around them, the same way Georgia Tech moved up four spots, but sitting around and playing no one isn't the road to the Top 10 in Iggy's rankings.

 

And on that note, the toughest opponent Cal's faced this year was Illinois at home. That's the reason the Golden Bears are only 17. As soon as they play an opponent with a pulse, I'd be glad to move them up.

[therealworldschampion 0]

I figured putting Michigan that high would cause some attention, but look at it this way. If Mike Hart had never gotten injured, do you honestly think the Wolverines would have a loss right now? Their losses against Notre Dame and Wisconsin both came down to the very last possesssion, and I'm pretty sure that a presence of a 200 yards per game rusher could have been enough to make the difference. The healthy Wolverine team that's on the field right now is just better than Michigan State and Notre Dame, regardless of the fact that they played a tough road game that gave them an extra loss.

 

As for Notre Dame, yes they did have a nice win, and I rewarded them a little by letting them jump LSU, but with what Michigan and Alabama did this week, I had to move them above the Irish. Also, it's not really fair to drop MSU below ND when the Spartans were one point away from beating Michigan with Mike Hart, and they already had a road win over the Irish. Finally, the Purdue win looks impressive, because Purdue was supposed to be good, but really what have they done? They played two cupcakes, lost to Minnesota, and then got blown out by Notre Dame. Meanwhile, Minnesota, the only real team Purdue played all year, just lost by 30 to Penn State. I think at the end of the year, when the Boilermakers are 4-7 or 5-6, we won't think this win by Notre Dame was all that impressive.

 

Finally, Iowa State was the last interesting ranking that I did. The way I figure it, at this point of the season, a home win in overtime doesn't guarantee that you're better than the other team. It basically says "we won because we were at home, but if we played you on the road, we would have lost." Now combine that with the facts that Iowa State actually accomplished something earlier in the season by curbstomping Iowa, and that Nebraska got lucky just to beat Pittsburgh earlier, and I think the Cyclones are more worthy of being ranked than the Cornhuskers.

 

As for Georgia Tech, ideally teams don't go up in my rankings without doing anything, but sometimes it just happens that way. Actually, I think I'm much better at not automatically moving teams that do nothing up than most people, as I managed to keep Florida State, Texas Tech, and Boston  College, and only moved Wisconsin, Miami, Arizona State, and Cal a spot each. LSU moved down four spots due to the teams around them, the same way Georgia Tech moved up four spots, but sitting around and playing no one isn't the road to the Top 10 in Iggy's rankings.

 

And on that note, the toughest opponent Cal's faced this year was Illinois at home. That's the reason the Golden Bears are only 17. As soon as they play an opponent with a pulse, I'd be glad to move them up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Lloyd Carr finds ways to lose games, believe me. Once he retires and Michigan goes out and gets an innvoator (Petrino) instead of a "Michigan man", they'll win another national title.

[Guest I miss Test.]

I figured putting Michigan that high would cause some attention, but look at it this way. If Mike Hart had never gotten injured, do you honestly think the Wolverines would have a loss right now?

 

I think it's very possible. Michigan still had an effective running day against Wisconsin.

[Gert T 0]

I figured putting Michigan that high would cause some attention, but look at it this way. If Mike Hart had never gotten injured, do you honestly think the Wolverines would have a loss right now?

 

 

If Jim Tressel settled on one QB, do you honestly think Ohio State would have a loss right now? I demand we be placed above Texas!!!

[iggymcfly 0]

Well, if Texas lost to Iowa, you might have a good case. Of course, I haven't even gotten into Lloyd Carr's coaching mistakes; I'm just saying that with the current players, the Wolverines are an extremely good football team.

 

The point is that the three teams are 1-1 against each other, and in their current forms, Michigan is the best out of the three. The only reason people want to punish Michigan is that they also lost on the road to Wisconsin, but I think that ND and MSU would have done the same thing, given Michigan's schedule, and I also think that if Notre Dame was missing Darius Walker for three games, there's no way they'd be 4-1 right now.

[cabbageboy 0]

I can already see the "Petrino to Michigan" rumors starting now. Why should he limit himself to flirting around with SEC programs?

 

It's no shock to see Iggy overrate Georgia Tech. He constantly pimps them and overhypes them for reasons that kind of elude me.

 

Incidentally I won't argue FSU's ranking since they are 5-0, but don't they seem like a lame top 5 team? Personally I think any of USC, Va Tech, or Texas would eat them alive. But they don't have Chris Rix, so I guess that counts for something.

[lomasmoney 0]

Lloyd Carr finds ways to lose games, believe me. Once he retires and Michigan goes out and gets an innvoator (Petrino) instead of a "Michigan man", they'll win another national title.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Lloyd Carr serious while he underachieves people act like the guy is a total loser. 95% of coaches would kill for 5 conference titles and a national title in 10 seasons. Since 1997, only Carr,Coker,Carroll,Stoops,Bowden,Fulmer,Saban have titles, and you can argue only Carroll and Stoops have been more consistient as far as being good every year, and only in the last 3 or 4 years has SC been good to great before that they were fucking wretched. Michigan won't hire Bobby Petrino because they don't need him, they will promote someone within, it seems to be something thats worked for those last three coaches we've had in the last 35 or so years. I'm mean Michigan does find ways to lose at least a game or two a year they shouldnt, but they seem to always find a way to win some games they have no business winning, (MSU the last two years,Minnesota the last two years, Ohio State from 95-97). You have to consider also that this year, they have had about 6 or 7 starters injured and still are in the hunt for the Big Ten. If Hart, Long, and company are healthy right now I am pretty sure Michigan is up there with Va. Tech, and Texas as potential USC beaters

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Lloyd Carr finds ways to lose games, believe me. Once he retires and Michigan goes out and gets an innvoator (Petrino) instead of a "Michigan man", they'll win another national title.

 

Michigan has won one national title in the past five decades. It was Lloyd Carr's team! I know Michigan fans want to win more now, and I fully acknowledge his problems, but there's no "national title level team" to go back to, per se, since he's the only guy who's managed to win one for the Wolverines in the modern era anyway.

[iggymcfly 0]

I can already see the "Petrino to Michigan" rumors starting now.  Why should he limit himself to flirting around with SEC programs?

 

Lloyd Carr would hang himself before he would lose to South Florida. Bobby Petrino can suck my cock.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

Since 1997, only Carr,Coker,Carroll,Stoops,Bowden,Fulmer,Saban have titles

 

 

So in 8 years only 7 coaches have won a title? How is that making your point?

 

Anyway... The thing about Carr that I think is insane is that with the talent they have every year UofM should be contending for a national title EVERY year. The school recruits itself, ANY coach in college could have a record similar to Carr's with the ability to recruit that the name Michigan brings to the table. How many road openers have they lost in a row??

[CanadianChris 0]

Since 1997, only Carr,Coker,Carroll,Stoops,Bowden,Fulmer,Saban have titles

 

 

So in 8 years only 7 coaches have won a title? How is that making your point?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Missed Jim Tressel and Tom Osborne, too. The point gets weaker.