#25 - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: #25 (/thread-7948.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: #25 (/thread-7948.html)
#25 - Hank 91 - 10-05-2014
Stanford is ranked #25 in the latest poll, preserving the streak by the skin of their teeth. I wouldn't have thought we'd be punished that badly for such a narrow road loss to an undefeated top-ten team. Interesting.
Re: #25 - thunder_chik - 10-05-2014
Pac12 teams ranked above us in this latest AP poll: Arizona-10th, Oregon=12th, UCLA=18th, ASU=20, Utah=24. Coaches poll has us at #22, the highest ranked 2-loss team. Small consolation, but we will have opportunities to elevate ourselves IF we can put together some W's.
Re: #25 - stupac2 - 10-05-2014
I didn't think we'd drop at all, I guess logic might be that the USC loss looks way worse now.
Re: #25 - Hank 91 - 10-05-2014
(10-05-2014, 11:46 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:I didn't think we'd drop at all, I guess logic might be that the U$ loss looks way worse now.I think the problem is that people don't always look beyond the records and are hesitant to put two-loss teams ahead of one-loss teams.
Re: #25 - BostonCard - 10-05-2014
No, a big drop was expected. One loss can be excused as a fluke; two losses and people start to re-evaluate how good of a team we are. For what it is worth, we are still the only ranked team with two losses, and there are numerous one-loss teams that are unranked.
BC
Re: #25 - 81alum - 10-05-2014
I thought that if you lost to a team ranked higher you seldom lost ground, but if you lost to a team ranked lower you plummeted. That is a brobdingnagian drop considering that the opponent was ranked higher. It only makes sense if people actually watched and agreed that we looked even worse than we played. That I can believe--the nation has seen our offense and found it sorrowful.
Re: #25 - Rally - 10-05-2014
(10-05-2014, 12:26 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=10803.msg100986#msg100986 date=1412534766]I think the problem is that people don't always look beyond the records and are hesitant to put two-loss teams ahead of one-loss teams.
I didn't think we'd drop at all, I guess logic might be that the U$ loss looks way worse now.
[/quote]
We are the highest ranked 2 loss team on both polls (the only one on Coaches.). I think that reflects who we lost to (both ranked at the time.). U.SC on the other hand lost to two unranked teams and dropped off. Someone paid at least a little bit of attention.Â
As for other teams also having problems, yes, true, every team. I said a few weeks ago this season has a very different vibe than last. I wonder, just a little, if too many (or at least some) of our players, maybe coaches, have spent too much time reading our Press. Seriously, how many players has Shaw called "phenomenal" this season? Too many, IMHO.
Re: #25 - fullmetal - 10-05-2014
There's a problem when we have all the phenomenal players and not a phenomenal product on the field...
Re: #25 - doubledub - 10-05-2014
Maybe we dropped so far because voters actually watched the game, saw how much we struggle on offense and figured that there is no way we don't lose a couple more games, especially given our road schedule.Â