BleacherCoaches.com

somebody has slipped mind altering drugs into your myoplex buddy.

you're worse then any poll voter that is ever alive. You jump on the hype band wagon more then any poll voters do. Why don't ya just put Notre dang and Ohio suck at 1 and 2, that would make as much sense as having them at 4 and 5 ahead of Big ten champ PSU (i know they split, but they beat OSU) and potential ACC champ VT (who by the way, both only have 1 loss while the former have 2.) I know you're trying to go by some mathematic formula and what not, but that's just ridiculous.

Hey, tell your team not to schedule Cincinnati and USF and CMU in their first 3 games. Then tell them to play well against them and not get off to a somewhat slow start, even with 3 cupcakes. Then they won't jump into my poll late. I won't let them jump in my pool either.

i wonder how many people skip right past the rules you follow at the beginning of the post??

Everyone does, count. I started with a system, and I am following that system until next season. My top 25 has no effect on anything. I can rank teams however I want, and so can you and everyone else. I am following a formula. The only problem with this formula, THIS SEASON, is Penn State's ranking. But they played 3 crappy teams, and did not do that well against them. Therefore they entered my rankings late. Because of how other teams have fared, PSU's progress was held back. I'm not going to jump them from 20 to 4. I despise rankings based on "what you feel in your heart". I make changes every year. I know what I'm adding next season. There are very little arguments with my top 25 with the exception of Penn State. For the most part, it looks a lot like the other top 25 rankings.

Didn't do well?

You must not have seen those games. I was at them...they DEMOLISHED both Cincy and CMU. Cincy scored late and went onside to score again to add two late scores. CMU couldn't do squat.

Check out PSU's against the spread record, and you'll see that they did very well. They beat a lot of opponents by MORE than the experts and money men in Vegas thought they would.

Like any poll, you had to have a preconceived notion as to what teams were what to get ranked initially. Start rankings after week 5 or something for a "truer" ranking. These would allow you or anyone else focus more on the current season instead of using preconceived thoughts in their poll picks.

The USF game...sloppy first game, but USF was better than many thought. The Nits were up 23-7 late.


Two late scores for Cincy or it is 42-10. Cincy scored twice in 39 seconds. They did score though...so....

CMU- PSU up 26-3 at the half. They win 40-3. Total yards...PSU 519 to 172. They had 172 on 77 offensive plays for 2.2 per play. That is super.



[web]http://bwi.rivals.com/schedule.asp?team=PENNST[/web]

I saw the games, Coach. But let's not forget that Psu now is a lot better than PSU back in week 3-4. We were all worried about Minnesota, don't forget.

I ranked them after week 3. That's why I had FSU #2 for awhile. Cincinnati, USF, and CMU are not regularly very good. That was before USF was in conference contention, and CMU as well.

I'm just saying they did look good in those games....they didn't look bad in any sense of the word. The problem with any early poll is the preconceived notions of things. Teams get ranked even though they haven't stepped on the field yet. That is tough to do.