Official 2007 NCAA Football Season

[ACCBiggz]

It wasn't put the right way, but he's got a point. Michigan isn't the only team this year (or the past few) that lost to a Div 1-AA team. The thing is, is that it was MICHIGAN. Everyone here knows that they are in the top 25 teams in the nation. It isn't that they are back in the rankings, but that App St isn't even getting votes. App St showed that they can play with anyone. One off or not, they beat MICHIGAN .... that says everything right there (of course, the fact that it was in the Big House just adds to it.) App St should at least be getting votes for the top 25, if not ranked in it.

Edited October 20, 2007 by ACCBiggz

[Magus978]

How's this for surprising...in the early going of the Big East season (while we're still on the conference), UConn of all teams leads it after beating Louisville tonight 21-17.

UConn is now bowl-eligible at 6-1 (2-0).

[ACCBiggz]

That whole fair catch thing.... ummm....I give up this season.

[HailtotheYo]

The thing is, voters aren't even really looking at the rule. A lot of analysits didn't like the rule change to allow ranking of D-1AA schools to begin because they have their own polls. The AP/ESPN/BCS/Etc. are designed for D-1A, not D-1AA.

Besides, the main reason they are not getting votes is because they lost by 11 at Wofford.

Don't get me wrong, I completely understand about the loss, but in this case ... it SHOULDN'T matter (see Stanford over USC for reference to what I mean). You're talking about a team that the last two years has only lost TWO games to 1-AA competition and has won the last 2 1-AA titles. Their other losses are to Kansas, NC St, and LSU. It isn't like they just up and played well in that one game. They ARE among the best 20 - 30 college football teams in the country.

I'm not really sure what you mean by what the polls are designed for. They are simply a poll. The coaches/sports writers/etc vote for who they think is the best. Period. Until this year, only 1-A teams were eligible. Now 1-AA teams are. If the win was monumental enough to have that changed, why isn't it enough for them to at the least get votes ? Doesn't add up. If it is so feasable, and real that Michigan dropped out of the top 25 entirely because of that loss ... how is it that it is such a bullshit thought for App St to be considered ? Hell, I'm just talking about them getting votes, not actually being in.

Wofford by the way, has only lost to NC St this year ... and also beat Furman. App St lost to a GOOD football team (Wofford only lost by 7 to South Carolina last year).

[ACCBiggz]

You're talking about a team that the last two years has only lost TWO games to 1-AA competition and has won the last 2 1-AA titles.

[HailtotheYo]

The past doesn't matter. They lost this year. For a 1-AA team to be ranked in the 1-A poll they have perform above and beyond what anyone else does. Trust me, I know all about ASU and those schools, I don't need to hear their schedules again.

I didn't point that out because I think you didn't know. Point is, they have performed above and beyond everyone else in 1-AA, and the beat Michigan. That game wasn't an abberation, it was just a marker of how good the team has become. The past does matter in these kinds of polls, you and I both know that ... don't pretend it doesn't. That isn't the issue here though. They are a one loss team that beat a top 5 team in the AP poll. They should at least have votes.

The AP Poll itself doesn't actually have any designation as 1-A only. That's merely the way it evolved as college football grew. The purpose of the AP Poll is to rank the "25 best college football teams." It doesn't say in 1-A.

They are for 1-A. 1-AA has thier own. D2 has their own, and so forth. That's why many voters don't even bother to look at 1-AA schools and vote for them, because they have thier own poll. There isn't one universal poll for every division.

Yeah, I know ... each division has one. Got it. They aren't designed any different or anything like that. They're merely markers for each division. We already know that the top teams in 1-AA can compete with, and BEAT some of the better teams in 1-A (see ASU/UMass for this year's examples). If the voters wanted to actually vote for the "top 25" teams in the country, then there is absolutely no way that ASU doesn't even get a vote (the rule change helps make the point I'm getting at). Yeah, there is a 1-AA poll and ASU sits atop all three of them. So, because there's a 1-AA poll, ASU can't be one of the top 25 teams in the nation ? That makes absolutely no sense.

It was changed because some people thought they should get votes and perhaps show up there, but a lot of the voters disregard it because they have their own poll. At this present time if they were undefeated they may have gotten some votes... but they lost so they are forgotten about.

It isn't a big deal that they aren't getting voted for. They have thier own poll.

Exactly. It changed because people saw that the top 25 teams in the country may not be all 1-A schools. Simply saying that they lost doesn't disregard the team from contention (the key word here). The loss to Wofford isn't even a thought considering the WIN @ MICH. As it sits right now, ASU could very well have beaten the Big 10 champions (it's possible at this point). What if that happens ? Oh wait, they have there own poll so it doesn't matter right ? .... sorry, you're sounding like a broken record now.

Hell, Grand Valley State is THE team in DII. They could easily compete and be in the top 25-30 teams in 1-AA ... but because they have their own poll, we shouldn't even go there. Sorry, that's just dumb.

I need something more than "they have their own poll" to convince me that ASU shouldn't even be getting votes at all for the top 25.

[Typical Phenom]

You want Appy State ranked? Tell em to meet 1-A requirements and apply. When they play a full 1-A schedule, then we'll talk. Until then, it's purely speculation. And you CANNOT realistically compare their schedule to a Big 10 schedule. They lost to Wofford. A good Wofford team? Because they hung with NC State? C'mon. That's a stretch, a big stretch.

[DMN in the House]

NC State isn't even a good D-1A team.

Any given Saturday. Thats all it was. App. State is NOT one of the best 25 teams in the nation.

[ACCBiggz]

Point is, they have performed above and beyond everyone else in 1-AA, and the beat Michigan. That game wasn't an abberation, it was just a marker of how good the team has become. The past does matter in these kinds of polls, you and I both know that ... don't pretend it doesn't.

[oldskool]

Man, set in your ways much? According to TP and Biggz:

1) If an FCS team beats an FBS team, it's a fluke that can happen on any given Sunday and it means nothing for the FCS team so they get nothing and they lose, good day sir.

2) If they hang with but don't defeat an FBS opponent it's still a fluke, and it's "a stretch" to consider that they may be *gasp* equally matched.

By that logic, every FBS team is better than any FCS team, which makes my "App State would be overall ranked #120 or worse, should there be a complete ranking system of college football teams" argument valid, and in which case #5 lost to #120, and yet somehow because teams #6-25 lost to teams above 119 (most losing to teams I'd consider in the top 50) that somehow makes Michigan a top 25 team again? I'm going to have to say no on that one, not this year. You lost to a FCS team, how are you better than 94 teams that didn't?

Hell in these rankings alone they're above Kansas State. K-State's only losses were to a ranked Auburn team and to a now-ranked, currently undefeated Kansas squad, and they've got a win over #7 Texas for god's sake. Michigan's "big" win was against #10 Penn State.

UM loses to a FCS team, their "big win" of the year thus far is against a team currently 3 spots lower than Kansas State's "big win" was against, and App State & Oregon are no Kansas & Auburn...yet Michigan's better ranked?

[Typical Phenom]

I'm saying you cannot rank Appy State. You can't rank them 120, you can't rank them 1. They play a completely different schedule, a much weaker schedule, therefore it's not in comparison. You can give them props for a big win at Michigan, they got paid and they got exposure, that's HUGE for their program. That is their reward. Nothing else. No top ten ranking in a division that they're not in. No bowl bids in a division that they're not a part of. They've got a chance to build their program now, congratulations, that's it.

And I can't say that Iowa State is better than Appy State, but you can't say that Appy State's better than them. Unless Appy State comes in, plays that Big 12 + Iowa schedule and wins more than Iowa State did, you'll never know. That's my point. They had one big win, that's awesome, but they're not doing it week in and week out against the same opponents as 1-A schools. Really, if anyone actually thought Appy State was equal to Michigan, then why is the win such a big deal? Think about it.

You cannot base things on ONE game, win or lose. You have to take into account the entire season.

[ACCBiggz]

1) If an FCS team beats an FBS team, it's a fluke that can happen on any given Sunday and it means nothing for the FCS team so they get nothing and they lose, good day sir.

2) If they hang with but don't defeat an FBS opponent it's still a fluke, and it's "a stretch" to consider that they may be *gasp* equally matched.

By that logic,

[oldskool]

My point is that if App State and Michigan are closely matched enough that Michigan can be one of the top 25 teams in the nation despite losing to them, doesn't App State deserve the look if not the votes? And if App State isn't close enough to Michigan to warrant a look, then doesn't that mean Michigan shouldn't be good enough to warrant a vote?

Enough about App State and their own rankings, answer me this:

Michigan needed to do a lot more than rough up Notre Dame, Northwestern and Eastern Michigan to somehow charge "back up" the rankings...they were tied for 32nd after the loss to App State, so how does losing to a team in an inferior divison mean you're better than 75% of your own division?

[Hugar Twriker Eats Spam]

Honestly, have Michigan and Appalachian State play ten weeks in a row? How many times do you think Appalachian State would win? Ap. State won that one time out of ten or heck if you want to give Ap. State some credit they won that one out of five.

You want to know why Michigan is in the top 25? Because the Voters voted them there? If you have such a big problem with it than why don't you dedicate your life to becoming one of the voters so you can ban Michigan from the top 25. Did the voters vote for Appalachian State, yeah, until they lost. But Ap. State beat a number five ranked team so the deserve a spot in the top 25 right or Michigan deserves to banned from the top 25? Well lets take a look at this... USC was number two when the lost to FBS Stanford. Did Standford even get one vote for the following week? NO THE DIDN'T. Did you complain? Did you say they deserved it?

[Typical Phenom]

About Michigan, I'd agree they shouldn't be back in the top 25 yet. That's the problem with pre-season rankings. If there were no pre-season rankings and we created the top 25 after week 6, they wouldn't be there in my opinion. And I'm a diehard Wolverines fan. Blame the writers.

The Appy State agument is completely seperate from that though. If they were a 1-A school with a 1-A schedule, then yes, certainly I'd give them top 25 mention if they were 5-1. But there just can't be a discussion with teams from completely different divisions.

[HailtotheYo]

But there just can't be a discussion with teams from completely different divisions.

See, that's one dimensional thinking.

Just as ya'll are telling us that "because they don't play a 1-A schedule" they can't be one of the top 25 teams in the nation. Well, because they don't play that schedule you can't tell me they can't. There is no doubt in my mind that if you put App St/UMass/Northern Iowa/Montana/North Dakota State/Southern Illinoi/New Hampshire in the Sun Belt, MWC, WAC, MAC ..... you'd be singing a different song. Yes, I know they aren't so there's no need to point out the obvious. Let's look though:

This year = Northern Iowa beat Iowa State .... Southern Illi beat Northern Illi ... New Hampshire beat Marshall ... McNeese State killed Lousiana Lafayette ... North Dakota State romped on defending MAC Champion Central Michigan ...

My entire point here, is that there are teams in 1-AA that are not just good for 1-AA, but GOOD ... Period. If this argument were about ASU or any of those teams above being good enough to be in the afore mentioned conferences, then this conversation wouldn't be so far fetched now would it ? Everyone knows that the top teams in 1-AA are just as good as, if not better than many of the 'lower' level 1-A teams. With anyone who watches multiple divisions of college football knowing that .... it shouldn't be such a far stretch, nor an absurd thought to give a top team in 1-AA votes towards being the top 25 team in the nation.

Again, I state ... the AP poll never actually made the distinction that it is the 1-A football poll. It merely rates the top 25 teams in the nation.

As for ASU not being number one in their polls .... Yeah, I know because I do watch 1-AA as well as DII and DIII. They're #7 #5 and #5 respectively ... which would put them at the top of the polls, which is what I said. Put that little kid finger pointing 'omg you don't even know' crap somewhere else. Hell, I could point right back at you and say that you don't watch it all because if you did ... then there'd be no way you could think that 1-AA schools can't be better than 1-A schools simply because they aren't in 1-A. Of the two, who really sounds like they don't watch ?

[Lowerdeck]

Michigan to me just seems like one those teams you need to go 3-7 to be unranked. The voters have to have some sort of "OMG iT"Z mIChIGaN" bias, after getting slapped around by Oregon and losing to a I-AA team, then coming back with five wins... three against blah.

The Big Ten is just over rated in general, outside maybe Ohio State. I'd really like to see Wisconsin or Illinois or one the "better" Big Ten schools to get dragged around by a good Pac-10, Big East, or SEC school.

[ACCBiggz]

HttK, I never said they aren't better than some 1-A teams, but I am saying they don't deserve votes. They aren't even #1 in their polls yet you want them voted in the 1-A poll. That makes zero sense.

Again, I state ... the AP poll never actually made the distinction that it is the 1-A football poll.

[sahyder1]

Tonight should be fun. USF/Rutgers ...... South Florida should beat Rutgers by 10-20 points. Ray Rice is good, and Teel is an efficient qb, but the Bull's defense is just damn good. Rutger's D just can't stay with the athletes that USF has

[HailtotheYo]

Having been there amongst a school record crowd wise.......how did that prediction go for you? It was a great game to be at. I'm loving my decision to get season tickets. The crowds have been great all year. The atmosphere on campus is crazy right now. How about the 7 sacks from the Rutgers D? Was that good enough to "stay" with USF?

Oy Vey .... It's called a prediction for a reason. USF's D has already outplayed offenses, and athletes better than Rutgers this year. Did they Thursday Night ? no ... if they played again this year, or the whole 9 out of 10 thing .... I'd take USF every time. They've been more consistant and honestly that game Thursday was their first poor showing this year. That said, even with USF's worst game Rutgers still needed trick plays to win. That says something. Of course, if penalties wouldn't have miraculously become reviewable .... that game would have been different.

Still, Rutgers won ... and I had a prediction that was wrong. Wow, the world must be over. Then again, I said something about 'things going right' for ASU @ Michigan too how'd that work out for me ?