App getting some AP25 votes

[S.Lewis15]

I don't understand how a major source such as ESPN can get the final score to a game wrong in a published article.
*31-13

[appchicago]

Ask any Michigan fan...when you come in ranked preseason #5 with a team full of senior NFL talent and you lose 4 games, that by their standards was an awful season. Need more proof? They also fired Lloyd Carr after that year.

Those Michigan fans think it was an awful season because they lost to us. At home. In front of an excited crowd jazzed for what should have been a banner season. And then had the gall to drop the following game at home to Oregon in an era just before the Ducks were hitting that hot streak they were on for the last 6 or 7 seasons.

What a lot of people forget is that the team went on to win their next 8 straight games, including blowing out Notre Dame, edging a 10th-ranked Penn State (before their whole collapse), and entering the top 25 after beating a ranked Purdue team. They had two late losses to Wisconsin and Ohio State, but still finished the season second in the Big Ten and, yes, beat a #9 Florida team led by Tim Tebow (the year he won the Heisman) and coached by Urban Meyer, Dan Mullen, and Charlie Strong.

In fact, since 2007, Michigan has had only one season that was better than that one. Even this season, which still has many Michigan fans excited, even after the heartbreaker against MSU, UM is 5-2, 2-1 in conference. After 7 games in 2007, they were 5-2, 3-0 in conference.

And the only reason I say all that is because I've heard time and time again that our win against Michigan somehow requires an asterisk because they had such a bad season. By any objective measure, that's just not true.

[EastHallApp]

Ask any Michigan fan...when you come in ranked preseason #5 with a team full of senior NFL talent and you lose 4 games, that by their standards was an awful season. Need more proof? They also fired Lloyd Carr after that year.

Those Michigan fans think it was an awful season because they lost to us. At home. In front of an excited crowd jazzed for what should have been a banner season. And then had the gall to drop the following game at home to Oregon in an era just before the Ducks were hitting that hot streak they were on for the last 6 or 7 seasons.

What a lot of people forget is that the team went on to win their next 8 straight games, including blowing out Notre Dame, edging a 10th-ranked Penn State (before their whole collapse), and entering the top 25 after beating a ranked Purdue team. They had two late losses to Wisconsin and Ohio State, but still finished the season second in the Big Ten and, yes, beat a #9 Florida team led by Tim Tebow (the year he won the Heisman) and coached by Urban Meyer, Dan Mullen, and Charlie Strong.

In fact, since 2007, Michigan has had only one season that was better than that one. Even this season, which still has many Michigan fans excited, even after the heartbreaker against MSU, UM is 5-2, 2-1 in conference. After 7 games in 2007, they were 5-2, 3-0 in conference.

And the only reason I say all that is because I've heard time and time again that our win against Michigan somehow requires an asterisk because they had such a bad season. By any objective measure, that's just not true.

Never let facts get in the way of a good talking point.

[EastHallApp]

I've always hated this (what I'm officially calling) Retroactive Win Impressiveness Recalibration. Going back and artificially adjusting how good a win was or how bad a loss was based on how a team has played since you played them is crap.

If you believe in it then you have to believe Michigan going on to have an awful 2007 season cheapens our beloved upset of a damn talented #5 Wolverine team.

Clemson being a playoff contender now vs being #12 then doesn't change the fact that they flat out made us look silly. Maybe it refocused our guys and made us a better team going forward but it certainly doesn't negate that 2nd quarter.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

You adjust your conclusions as you gain more data. That's true in any field.

As others have pointed out, Michigan didn't have an "awful season." They finished in the top 25 and likely would have been top 15 if they hadn't lost to us.

But if you want to look at, say, Toledo beating Arkansas, should we still pretend like that was a top 20 win because that's where Arkansas was ranked at the time? Even though it's now obvious that they were never that good?

Now, where I do agree with you is that we (fans and, increasingly, people within the program) need to stop pushing the idea that we were somehow almost competitive in games where teams run up a massive halftime lead and then coast in the second half. That's pretty much how blowouts usually go.

Clemson outclassed us, just as Michigan did last year. Tip your cap to them and move on.

[bigdaddyg]

Bottom line is that if we lose another game, to anybody, we will not see a ranking even with a bowl win and an 11-2 final record. Just keep winning and see what the voters think about us. It is fun no matter how you slice it up.

[hotrod2001]

To crack the top 20 we'd have to perform well this year and next, unfortunately for us, our first game next year is against a resurgent Tennessee team, if we lose that we probably get knocked back to obscurity, even if we manage to take out ODU, NCCU and Akron the following games. On the other hand if we beat the Vols, and manage to win out this year, I can't see how the AP ignores us.

Either way, we're at least getting attention on the grander scale.

[bigdaddyg]

Funny that nobody mentioned that (and I had to be reminded when I read the article on GOASU) in the 2007 season we finished up almost in the same spot in the rankings- getting about the same number of votes. That was the year they changed to rule to allow FCS schools in the rankings. Apparently even then the lone loss to Wofford (how the hell did that even happen) didn't cost us in the end. I contend that that team was awesome. Just think how good we could have been with 20 more scholarships on the roster.

[hotrod2001]

If I recall, those "votes" we got from the Michigan Win was more of a statement and was given only by a sports reporter who works for the Winston Salem Journal.

[NewApp]

If we win the next two games I don't see any reason we wouldn't be ranked.

How about that no one ahead of us loses?

We need some of the ones ahead of us to play each other.

[bigdaddyg]

If I recall, those "votes" we got from the Michigan Win was more of a statement and was given only by a sports reporter who works for the Winston Salem Journal.

I had the same thought and you are correct but look up the final college football rankings for 2007 and check out the "others receiving votes" section. There we are. I had completely forgotten. SOOOO long ago.

[bigdaddyg]

If we win the next two games I don't see any reason we wouldn't be ranked.

How about that no one ahead of us loses?

We need some of the ones ahead of us to play each other.

Duke V UNC- Duke loses they will just flip flop with Heels. Miss St, UCLA and Pitt should all win (that won't help). Temple v Notre Dame (will be interesting to see how good the Owls really are), Toledo (tough conference game), Ole Miss (Auburn), Houston (Vandy). There could be some shakeup with the bottom 8 in the top 25. We obviously need to win and probably decisively.

[Yosef84]

Funny that nobody mentioned that (and I had to be reminded when I read the article on GOASU) in the 2007 season we finished up almost in the same spot in the rankings- getting about the same number of votes. That was the year they changed to rule to allow FCS schools in the rankings. Apparently even then the lone loss to Wofford (how the hell did that even happen) didn't cost us in the end. I contend that that team was awesome. Just think how good we could have been with 20 more scholarships on the roster.

In 2007 we lost to both Wofford AND Georgia Southern (ending out home win streak at 30 I believe). After the Michigan game, Armanti was banged up and sat out a couple. He started against Wofford but we re-injured in the 2nd quarter. That's how we lost to Wofford. The Georgia Southern game as his first game back and he wasn't 100%. GS also featured a freak Payton Award winner of their own that year (Jayson Foster).

[Apps Forever!]

The whole key is win baby win! Keep winning and things only get better. Lose one game and we go back into the shadows.

[EastHallApp]

If we win the next two games I don't see any reason we wouldn't be ranked.

How about that no one ahead of us loses?

We need some of the ones ahead of us to play each other.

This week alone:

UNC @ #23 Pitt (both ahead of us)
Florida @ Georgia (UGA 3 spots ahead of us)
Notre Dame @ #21 Temple (Doubt we pass Temple if they lose, but it probably drops them enough that we pass them if they lose again).

And there will be upsets, if not this week, then in following weeks. There always are. Apps just have to make sure we aren't one of them.

[MtnDevil95]

I know some people will think I am crazy but #22 Duke is in danger this weekend against Miami. After the Clemson drubbing, if Miami wins in Durham on Saturday, Duke will plummet 15 spots or more.

I don't think that both a Miami win and another App State rolling will get us into the Top 25, but I expect the number of votes to rise significantly, setting up the Ark State games as a possible entrance into the poll. Especially if Duke follows a loss to Miami with a sound beating of the CHeaters, dropping both teams out in the process.

[EastHallApp]

I know some people will think I am crazy but #22 Duke is in danger this weekend against Miami. After the Clemson drubbing, if Miami wins in Durham on Saturday, Duke will plummet 15 spots or more.

I don't think that both a Miami win and another App State rolling will get us into the Top 25, but I expect the number of votes to rise significantly, setting up the Ark State games as a possible entrance into the poll. Especially if Duke follows a loss to Miami with a sound beating of the CHeaters, dropping both teams out in the process.

I don't think it's crazy. Miami may lie down and quit again - or they may want to bounce back and show some pride, and play with nothing to lose now that Golden is gone. There are a handful of games like that where an upset doesn't really look likely, but it's not unthinkable either.

Bottom line is Duke/Pitt/UNC all play a round robin in the next three weeks, and at least two of them will be taking a loss. Plus Pitt has Notre Dame in that stretch too. And they're all within striking distance for App to pass them when they lose.

[ashugh]

SB Nation has us ranked 20th in their college football advanced statistical profiles. They're 100% computer generated and they give you all the data inputs. It has some crazy stuff though. West Virginia at 3-3 ahead of some REALLY good undefeated teams. Take it with a grain of salt, but it's more recognition.

[bertolinidives]

I don't know nuthin' from nuthin', but... I agree that we are extremely lucky to even be considered top 25 considering our horrible strength of schedule and the records of opposing teams. I'm not saying we absolutely should not be there, only that we have no concrete justification based on who we have played. The only true measuring we have to consider is the Clemson game who is a definite Top 10 team and likely a Top 5 team. BTW, they have the same problem as it relates to the Top 10, based on their relatively weak P5 schedule. But, Clemson is currently ranked #5 by folks a lot smarter than me.

But, consider this; Death Valley is intimidating. The most intimidating of any ACC stadium along with FSU. Hell, it's crazy just to walk in the place! I cannot imagine being on the field and playing. Our team had to have been a bit overwhelmed and Taylor's head had to of been swimming. On to my point; Vegas had the spread at -17 Clemson. That is pretty damn respectable to begin with. Take away the 2 uncharacteristic interceptions that translate to 2 Clemson scores and what are you left with? A 17 point difference in the score... in their house. Not too shabby.

[bigdaddyg]

I've always hated this (what I'm officially calling) Retroactive Win Impressiveness Recalibration. Going back and artificially adjusting how good a win was or how bad a loss was based on how a team has played since you played them is crap.

If you believe in it then you have to believe Michigan going on to have an awful 2007 season cheapens our beloved upset of a damn talented #5 Wolverine team.

Clemson being a playoff contender now vs being #12 then doesn't change the fact that they flat out made us look silly. Maybe it refocused our guys and made us a better team going forward but it certainly doesn't negate that 2nd quarter.

twitter.com/DieselOnRadio

You adjust your conclusions as you gain more data. That's true in any field.

As others have pointed out, Michigan didn't have an "awful season." They finished in the top 25 and likely would have been top 15 if they hadn't lost to us.

But if you want to look at, say, Toledo beating Arkansas, should we still pretend like that was a top 20 win because that's where Arkansas was ranked at the time? Even though it's now obvious that they were never that good?

Now, where I do agree with you is that we (fans and, increasingly, people within the program) need to stop pushing the idea that we were somehow almost competitive in games where teams run up a massive halftime lead and then coast in the second half. That's pretty much how blowouts usually go.

Clemson outclassed us, just as Michigan did last year. Tip your cap to them and move on.

I have always contended that preseason rankings mean nothing,especially with college kids. You absolutely don't know how teams (outside of say, Ohio State, Alabama and Baylor this year) are going to do or how good they truly are until at least the halfway point in the season. Even then they may or may not be a true contender. I believed that this year's Clemson team was the real deal and was great when we played them and would be great by year end with a legit shot to win it all. When we opened with Michigan they were considered a legit contender for the NC regardless of their rank at the time based on the projected roster they had coming into the season. That roster was loaded with talent- we just outplayed them and beat them. This Clemson team is the same. They have just won every game and have gained a higher ranking. They could just have easily been ranked 5,4 or 3 to begin the season. Who the heck knows who the 12th best team is when everyone is 0-0? By the end of that 2007 season Michigan was still good, was ranked, had beaten some good teams and won their bowl game. It was still a huge win by our team. If we had beaten Clemson and they were now 2-5 the win would have been big for our school but in the grand scheme of things the win would not be as impressive as it was at the time. Basically you just have to let the season play out and let things level out. The same goes for strength of schedule. It changes as the season goes along. That being said, I hope we go 11-1 and Clemson wins the NC.

[Gonzo]

Preseason rankings are notoriously poor when it comes to predictive value. They're not meaningless, however. A preseason Top 25 App State team might see a HUGE spike in season and single ticket game sales and create media buzz we've never seen before.