The CardBoard
AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - 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: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 (/thread-704.html)

Pages: 1 2

AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - jayasena - 11-07-2010

We jumped over Nebraska and Ohio State in the AP poll, moving from #10 to #7 (we were already ahead of Oklahoma and Missouri in that poll).

Coaches merely moved down the teams that lost this weekend (we were #12 last week).

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - dabigv13 - 11-07-2010

Stanford is at least very close to Nebraska in terms of total points in the Coaches poll, clearly ahead of Mich St at #10. In the AP we\'re closer to Wisco at #6 than Ohio State at #8.

Still very dissapointing, in my estimation we should be at #6, behind all the unbeatens and maybe LSU.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Pastor - 11-07-2010

Yes but when was the last time you thought that Stanford would be ranked ahead of Ohio State in football?

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - dabigv13 - 11-07-2010

At least Touchdown Tommy is one of the Harris poll representatives, I\'m sure he was watching the game last night!

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/vault/HI-News-Release-HICFP-Panelists-2010-09-24.pdf

Full list of all 114 Harris Poll Voters above

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Pastor - 11-07-2010

GG:

Pigs may not be flying but the smell of bacon is in the air and hell is sure getting cold.

People are really going to hate us if this football success continues....we\'ll be winning everything except the Capital One Men\'s title.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - jayasena - 11-07-2010

#8 in the Harris poll.

Quote:Yes but when was the last time you thought that Stanford would be ranked ahead of Ohio State in football?

Well, in the two human polls that count for the BCS, we are not ranked ahead of Ohio State.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Pastor - 11-07-2010

The AP has us at 7 and Ohio State at 8...that\'s enough for me.



Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - dabigv13 - 11-07-2010

Scary to think the AP is the more accurate of the polls, when idiots like Jon Wilner are voting in it (his AP poll this week is particularly atrocious, no surprise that he\'s pretty much universally hated, and a runaway regular winner of the worst AP voter award). How mentally deficient are the sports information directors voting in the Coaches poll?

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - fullmetal - 11-07-2010

#6 in the BCS!

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - washingtonismoney - 11-07-2010

And Ted Miller projects us to go to a certain bowl which shall be unnamed: http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/15619/pac-10-bowl-projections-9

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - fullmetal - 11-07-2010

I\'m not sure if Auburn will stumble, but this is a team that got taken to overtime against Clemson.  Maybe Alabama will stomp a mudhole in them.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Card Fan in OR - 11-07-2010

Quote:And Ted Miller projects us to go to a certain bowl which shall be unnamed: http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/15619/pac-10-bowl-projections-9

That\'s what I have been rooting for since after the second half at Autzen.

Go Card!
Go Ducks!
Go Card!

Something tells me Harbs will keep the guys on an even keel the last three games. The past two games gotta\' make believers out of anybody who saw them. #6 BCS. Even the computers are coming around--if not all the human voters.

Just have to hope for a stumble by Auburn. Thought TCU might catch them after they decimated Utah, but, no, they\'re ess eee cee.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Farm93 - 11-07-2010

Folks cry that Stanford fans were just not there on Saturday.  To me it is frustrating that crowd size somehow equates to team quality in the eyes of the media.  So crazy, so annoying.

Thankfully, the computer formulas do not use attendance.  Massey\'s review of all rankings places Stanford at #5, and most of those polls and rankings do not care about crowd size.

Either way, in prior years the fans of the team at #5 or #6 in the BCS in early November usually entertain the big dreams.

For example, LSU has no chance of winning the SEC or even entering the SEC championship game.  And yet, LSU fans are dreaming of a BCS Championship game invite tonight.

So, as the team just behind LSU here is the official dream list.  Now that Stanford has a virtual 2 game lead over Arizona only Alamo and better need to be entertained.  Yes I know politics and dollars may force Stanford to the Holiday, but that would be a doomsday scenario.  Obviously Stanford could lose two or three games, and end up in Las Vegas.  Yet that\'s not how the crazed SEC types think, so off to the dream list.

Alamo - Auburn and Oregon win out, BCS formula or a Stanford loss leaves Stanford outside the top 4 in the BCS standings, and a non-AQ gets to go to the Rose Bowl.  FWIW - this outcome would have looked good to me at the start of the season.

Fiesta, Sugar, Orange - Stanford finishes 11-1 and in the top 4 in the BCS.  Therefore Stanford EARNS an automatic at-large BCS invite.  The non-AQ takes the Rose, but Stanford automatically goes somewhere.

But that is just the start of the dream.

Rose Bowl - Stanford finishes 11-1, a non-AQ is in the BCS game with Oregon (highly likely) or Oregon loses twice (highly unlikely).

But time to play the SEC style dream game....
BCS Championship game.  You KNOW!!!  Why? Because the formula does not exclude the possibility.

The Path? - Stanford gets to 11-1.  That is clearly required for all non-Alamo paths so that is not unique to the dream.  Oregon falls very late and very ugly at Oregon State.  The media then questions Oregon\'s spotty road play and concludes the show was only great in Eugene.  Better to lose in October than lose in November or December.  It is so unfair, but history is rich with examples.  Obviously, other things need to happen, but oddly none are impossible or even improbable.

Auburn loses against Alabama.  Bama will be favored
LSU loses at Arkansas.  The razorbacks will be favored
And no other AQ team jumps Stanford, so style starts to matter.  Luck and JH help a lot.

That leaves TCU and Boise State.  All that needs to happen is for one of the two of them to lose just one game.  That would leave Stanford against a non-AQ in the BCS Championship game.

OK, I know, I know, that was very SEC-like.

But if Stanford wins out 11-1 is beginning to look like a record that will get Stanford AUTOMATICALLY into a BCS bowl.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - dabigv13 - 11-07-2010

I\'d rate it like this-
Alamo - 50%
Rose 35%
Sugar 10%
NC 5%


Sounds crazy but it\'s not outside the realm of possibility. We would need to win impressively against Oregon St, and hope Arizona or Oregon St. takes out Oregon. Auburn and LSU have both looked vulnerable. Also have to hope Nebraska doesn\'t jump us with a win in the Big 12 champ game. A nice win against Arizona State would also help differentiate us from Wisco, which nearly lost at home to them.

The ESPN guys were giving us a lot of love as the top 1 loss team, perhaps the polls will come around next week. Our computer rankings are now pretty decent, a top 4 finish is more of a possibility than I thought last week.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - JeffInCorvallis - 11-07-2010

Just out of curiosity - I don\'t think it will end up happening - BCS #1 plays BCS #2 no matter what, right?  Even if it is a re-match of two teams that have already played each other in the current season?

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Spiny_Norman - 11-07-2010

I read through the BCS Selection Process - http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597

I did not find wording that a top 4 ranked team receives an automatic bid.  That may have been the case in the past, but it is not evident in the current rules.

The only way for Stanford to automatically receive a BCS bid is to win the Pac 10.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - dabigv13 - 11-07-2010

Quote:6.      If any of the 10 slots remain open after application of provisions 1 through 5, and if no team qualifies under paragraph No. 5 and an at-large team from a conference with an annual automatic berth for its champion is ranked No. 4 in the final BCS Standings, that team will become an automatic qualifier provided that no at-large team from the same conference qualifies for the national championship game.

That\'s the relevant stipulation.

ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, and SEC champs will soak up 6 spots. At least one non-AQ will take another. There is no scenario where a #4 ranked team would not have a spot, so rule 6 will apply.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - jayasena - 11-08-2010

Mandel\'s take: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/11/07/tcu-boise-state-bcs/1.html):
Quote:My reaction to the latest AP and coaches\' polls:

Underrated: Stanford (AP: No. 7; coaches\': No. 9)
The Cardinal, who throttled Arizona on Saturday and have only lost to No. 1 Oregon, may be the best one-loss team in the country. The coaches disagree; they have Stanford ranked behind four other one-loss teams, including ...

Overrated: Ohio State (AP: No. 8; coaches\': No. 7)
The Buckeyes started high (No. 2 in both polls), so they remain high despite the fact that they haven\'t beaten a single team currently ranked in either poll. Their best win is ... Miami? Illinois? But hey, GameDay\'s coming to town. That\'s something.

And later in the page:
Quote:Meanwhile, Stanford is staring at its own BCS snub. The Cardinal could go 11-1, finish in the top five and have nowhere to go because of the Rose Bowl\'s non-AQ obligation and the Fiesta Bowl\'s inevitable Big East condemnation. Perhaps the Orange Bowl or Sugar Bowl would see fit to reward Andrew Luck and Co., knowing Stanford\'s large national alumni base might travel well. One thing\'s for certain: Boise State and Stanford aren\'t both getting in.

"knowing Stanford\'s large national alumni base might travel well" :o

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - yvonne - 11-08-2010

I dunno. If the Facebook campaign is anywhere near as successful as the Toby for Voldemort campaign was, we may have entered a new era of alumni involvement.

Re: AP #7, Coaches\' #9 - Spiny_Norman - 11-08-2010

It pains me that the national media is playing the "empty seats" story alongside the "Stanford is really good" story.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/cory_mccartney/11/08/Newton.Voldemort.Watch/index.html

The attendance of 43,000 is about 10,000 better than an average Stanford-Arizona game from the recent past.  Clearly, Stanford\'s success has had a noticeable impact on attendance.  Just not enough to fill the stadium for a critical game.

1998 - 30,169
2000 - 31,165
2002 - 33,800
2006 - 39,317
2008 - 30,689 (this was a Homecoming game too)