Edit: Here is the actual, initial BCS rankings..

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Cincinnati
6. Iowa
7. USC
8. TCU
9. LSU
10. Miami (Fla.)

Some resources:
BCS Guru Website
PollSpeak.Com
Complete BCS Standings.

..and 'Bama jumps Florida in the AP poll.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

But doesn't make up much ground in the Coaches'..

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/usatpoll.htm

Probably the worst of all the AP Voters..

Scott Wolf of the LA Daily News has Nebraska at #12 and Idaho ahead of Penn State..

Well, they also beat OSU who was #8 at the time, but yeah.

beating OSU or any other Big 10 team is never too surprising to see

Sure.. but if you put the same players with the same results and same stats, same margins of victory and so on in Arizona jerseys, without the reputation, they'd be #15 at best in the polls. It's silly.

There must be a mistake.. I didn't see Georgia in either poll?

I would rank Mizzou, OSU, PSU, MSU, and Indiana all pretty high in the polls.

lol who mentioned UGA? Who doesn't know we suck this year?

lol at ruffling Big 10 feathers.

Heh.. don't really bother me. I think it's pretty clear that the Big Ten is the 3rd best conference and neither the Big 12 or the SEC are as good as they were last year.

UGA is pretty awful though.

1. Florida
2. Alabama
3. Texas
4. Boise State
5. Cincinnati

5th not 8th for Cinn, interesting.

Absolutely floored by that. Still digging around to find the BCS standings with #'s.

Okay.. here they are.. Gonna need Adobe.

Complete BCS Standings - Week 1

Florida - 0.9886
Alabama - 0.9526
Texas - 0.8911
Boise State - 0.8083
Cincinnati - 0.7870
Iowa - 0.7869
USC - 0.7695
TCU - 0.7139
LSU - 0.7083
Miami - 0.6273

Really falls off after #9, so it looks like, if nothing absolutely insane happens, you have approximately 9 teams that could play for the BCS NC.

As a fan..

-Iowa will pass Cinci if they both keep winning, which makes me very, very happy.
-Iowa will not be passed by USC if they both keep winning, which makes me very, very happy.
-Iowa will probably pass Boise State if they both keep winning.
-Iowa will probably not leapfrog a 1-loss 'Bama or UF team, unless they get beat rather soundly; 21-0, 28-0 type score.
-Iowa could get to the NC game by winning out, Texas losing in the Big 12 Championship game(or before, maybe..), and UF/'Bama getting beat soundly. I do wonder what would/will happen if the SEC Championship game is 'Bama/UF and it's a very close game.. Rematch in the NC? Booooring.


I know none of you care about that, but I do.

if bama and florida go undefeated and meet in the SEC champ, well, then thats the real natty champ game........clearly the best two teams in the country right now......but things can change, as we all know

I agree a lot more about Bama than about Florida.

Yup.

I promise the BCS game won't rematch the SEC championship. Promise.

yup. Florida's offense has not been really impressive at all. I wasn't surprised by Arkansas racking up some points on them either. Arkansas has a pretty damn good offense.

Bama, is pretty damn good all around. I think Ingram may be the best RB in the country, he is just nasty and never goes down at first contact.

He is very Shonn Greene-esque.

I agree about our offense. The playcalling is atrocious. We run the same stupid RB draw up the middle 100 times/ game and it gains nothing. Tebow was holding the ball way too long againsst Arkansas which is why he had 6 sacks and the fumble. They need to get the passing game in order. As for the defense, we had one play where we blew coverage for the long td, other then that they played pretty pretty well.

This week's polls..

Not much change in the Coaches Poll.. Penn State's up to #10, Notre Dame and Ole Miss back in the Top 25..

Florida retakes #1 in the AP, but not by a whole hell of a lot..

BCS doesn't come out until later and there likely won't be much change.. Iowa might slide ahead of Cinci based on SOS, but that's about it. And we'll have your weekly awful AP voter update.

And your Awful AP Voter of the Week is...

Jon Wilner from the San Jose Mercury News.

Has Ohio State at #23, Penn State at #22, Notre Dame at #20, South Carolina at #16, Miami at #13(!!!), Virginia Tech at #11, Iowa at #10 while Oregon sits at #9.

..and his top five is just brain dead.

1. Alabama
2. USC
3. Florida
4. Texas
5. Georgia Tech

...What?!

About the only spot I agree with him is having Arizona a bit higher than the rest of the Pollsters. Wildcats have a good ball club.

And Iowa's up to #4 in the new BCS poll, with a tenuous grip over USC who moved up to #5.. Cinci fell all the way to #8, nice schedule.

Iowa should definitely be happy that State won this week and has a 5-2 record. That's isn't hurting their strength of schedule at all.

Iowa State's 5-3, actually, and they should probably be 7-1. 5-3's a good result for Rhodes' first year. I think he's going to be a very, very good coach for them. Wouldn't be surprised if they win the Big 12 North within 3 years.

Also, I do root for Iowa State when they're not playing Iowa, regardless of BCS implications.

As I type this, I've got the last play of the Iowa game on my DVR.. Good times.

AP Poll: I can't fathom how Houston is in the Top 15. Arizona's still not getting any respect which blows my mind. Not real impressed with Oregon leapfrogging Iowa in the AP. Oregon's win was impressive in that it was by a wide margin but USC is not very good this year.

Coaches: BYU at #25 despite getting absolutely blown out twice--at home. Houston at #15, again..terrible. Pitt at #14 despite beating no one worth a fuck and losing to NC State..they're ready for their annual collapse though, with Notre Dame WVU and Cinci coming up. Otherwise not a lot of issues this week, which is a surprise. Ohio State being ahead of USC is a little silly.


Harris and BCS aren't out yet. We'll see.

Style points matter.Be interesting to see if Oregon running through the Pac-10 boosts Boise State at all.

These comments are showing your bias. USC was in the top 5, you can't just dismiss a huge blowout loss, as, "Oh, they suck.". That's pretty stupid, imo. If Iowa would have blown out USC this week, you would be pissing and moaning if they hadn't leapfrogged Oregon if the positions were reversed.

USC obviously doesn't suck. They might not be elite, but they'll still probably end the season ranked. I think Oregon's position is well deserved. Iowa is a very weak unbeaten.

They were a blocked extra point from losing to a Division 2 school.
They barely beat unranked Michigan.
They had a miracle last second 2 point win against unranked Michigan State.
They were losing 24-14, IN THE FOURTH QUARTER to INDIANA AT HOME.

Do I think Iowa sucks? No. But I do think that if any one loss team should be ahead of them, it's Oregon, the week after destroying a top 5 team.

Your comments show that you really don't pay much attention to the college football threads around here. I've said for weeks that USC is overrated and was ranked way above their head and didn't deserve to be in the top 8 or so period.

I said I was not real impressed, not completely aghast at the fact. I said it was an impressive win, but it's not as if USC had been destroying people and then just came out and got clubbed by Oregon. USC's been marginal all year and they were finally emphatically exposed as such. Also, I don't care all too much about the AP poll. It has no bearing on the BCS and some of the voters are absolutely brain dead.

And I'm not really inclined to piss and moan about anything. If I wanted to gripe, I'd gripe that Iowa has had a much tougher schedule than Boise State, Cinci and TCU and still lags behind them in the polls.

If they keep winning. They have Arizona(who's pretty salty) and Oregon State left.

wow you really think Arizona is the nuts don't you? wonder why?

No, I think they're a good team though. They're one junk play against Washington from being undefeated in the conference.

oh........ok

No.. Really.

USC is definitely overrated. Their only big win is against a Big 10 team. Always a sign of being overrated.

Seriously, though, after watching games last weekend (and I did catch almost the entire USC/Oregon game and most of the Iowa game)......if I had to set a line for Oregon v. Iowa on a neutral site I would have the Ducks favored by 10.5 or so. I am glad the AP voters use their eyes and dont just rank by records always. Since they lost to Boise in the opener, Oregon has pretty much demolished everyone they have played.

Boise's schedule is a joke but they do have a marquee win which Iowa really doesnt. Iowa does belong ahead of TCU. Cincy looks good to me. I think they and Iowa would have a great game.

Bottom line, if Iowa keeps winning things will probably take care of themselves (unless Texas and an SEC team stay undefeated....you dont think Iowa should leapfrog FL, Bama or UT do you?). But from what I saw against Indiana, Iowa will drop a game soon enough.

DDiDM is going to have a brain aneurysm when he reads that you don't think the win vs. Penn State was marquee. The Big 10 just sucks and almost no victory against a Big 10 team should be considered marquee. I seriously doubt that Iowa beats OSU at home.

Eh part of the problem is that this is a down year for college football. Even the best teams have serious flaws.

Which is why a playoff would be fantastic.

ALL of this

I agree with pretty much everything except for Iowa losing a game soon enough.. obviously. And no, I don't think Iowa should be ahead of an unbeaten Florida, Alabama or Texas. A one-loss UF, 'Bama or Horns team..then yes.




If the Big 10 sucks, then I'd really like to hear your oppinion on the Big East, ACC or Big 12.

Also, just shut the fuck up. I never once said Iowa was the best team in the country ever ever ever in the history of the world since Christ walked the earth.. nor have I once said the Big 10 is an elite conference this year.

I know you're an Iowa State fan and you have a massive little brother complex towards all things Iowa, but really, shut the fuck up and attempt to read critically.

This was funny to me. I never said that you did. I'm just calling it as I see it. It has nothing to do with Iowa State. Everyone knows that Iowa State sucks.... but the Big 10 would get wasted in a playoff against most of the other conferences.

I don't have a personal issue with you OR Iowa.

Iowa winning at Penn State isn't a big win? They still have to play Ohio St. still though

Campaign Season Has Begun
If it's November, it's time for teams near the top of the BCS standings to begin pumping out propaganda, defending their position and disparaging the competition. First school to fire: Iowa (33), which issued an e-mail blast Monday intended to disperse "the correct facts on Iowa football."

The "correct facts" compare Iowa to only Cincinnati, Boise State, TCU and Oregon -- no comparisons to Florida, Texas and Alabama. Which means the Hawkeyes are at best mounting a case to be No. 4.

According to the e-mail, Iowa leads those other BCS contenders in victories over opponents with winning records, in winning percentage of beaten opponents, number of victories over teams in the BCS Top 25 and the winning percentage of upcoming opponents. Among other things.

Some other areas where Iowa leads the competition:

Most nail-biting victories over teams not in the top 120 of the Sagarin ELO_Chess rankings: 2 (over Northern Iowa and Arkansas State by a combined four points).

Most games won with the bailout help of multiple favorable replay reviews against a below-average opponent: 1.

The Hawkeyes have had a great season. But they've had enough late escapes against uninspiring opponents to earn some skepticism. Seven teams (the six remaining FBS undefeateds and Oregon) deserve to be ranked ahead of them, no matter what the campaign propaganda says.

-Pat Forde

Not really sure of the point of your post. I could post a Stewart Mandel column where he says that Iowa should be in the National title talk..but, feel free to post anything else you find that might validate a point of your's that absolutely no one has disagreed with.

I typically like Pat Forde a lot, but I don't know how a couple close wins against inferior opponents negates all the other things in his piece.. mainly the third paragraph.

Iowa's players and coaches have never suggested that they deserve a spot in the national title game, just a bit of credit for what they've accomplished versus the resumes of the other teams ranked ahead of the currently.

And say what you want about the Big Ten, it's still a tougher conference than the Big East, Mountain West and WAC. Iowa may not deserve the NCG talk, but they do deserve to be ranked ahead of Boise State, TCU and Cinci if by no other reason than it's strength of schedule.

It's all pretty irrelevant though. If two of the top three lose, then all this conjecture might be relevant..and that'd be assuming Iowa wins out. Until then.. who cares? I'm enjoying the ride.

I agree with most of this.

Honestly, I don't care about strength of schedule. I'm ok with people watching the games and deciding who they think is the best. Now, you can certainly say, "wow, Boise looks really good, but their opponent kind of sucks, so maybe they're not as good as they look," because that's your opinion. But I don't think you necessarily need to discount them.

I'm not sure I'm explaining this well.

I guess what I'm saying is, I'm ok with somebody arguing that they think team A is better than team B because they've beaten better opponents, but I would also be ok with somebody arguing that they think team B is better than team A because they've looked more impressive even while playing inferior opponents.

Since there is no playoff system, we've already decided that the national champion is subjective, so why pretend there's any objectivity to it.

It would be great if more college football fans could embrace this attitude. When the votes of COACHES are a big element in deciding your national champion, you just have to accept things like strength of schedule might matter, style points might matter, blowouts might impress, etc.

I think I know what you're saying and I think I agree, yet disagree to some extent.

Objectivity matters to a certain extent but it's a double edged sword. We toss out the objectivity when it comes to style points and beating a team badly, but we keep the objectivity in when it comes to conference strength...?

Does that make sense? I'm not sure I'm expressing my point clearly, either.

Why is it that we give a lot of credit to Boise for beating a bad schedule thoroughly but we don't give Iowa (or Penn State, for that matter) credit for beating a decent-to-tough schedule outright? But I suppose if I was a Boise fan I'd say, "Well, all we did was beat the teams in front of us.." but, so has Iowa. And Iowa plays tougher teams. So does Cinci, for that matter.

I don't know if any of that makes sense, but I've had a few cocktails tonight. Stoli Raz, FTW.



I agree.

There's a lot about the polls that I hate. Like, when Team #4 loses to Team #2 by 3 points and Team#4 falls 5 spots... what sense does that make? *Shouldn't* Team #4 lose to Team #2?

That's not to say it's happened this year, but it has happened in the past and I don't get it.

I think if a team like Boise beats nobody but bad teams, then it's a good argument. But when they've got a win against a team like Oregon under their belts it's harder to say that they don't belong.

My perspective is, if we're going to decide who plays for the national championship rather than having a playoff, I want people to decide who they think the two best teams are. I think the teams they beat can certainly influence your decision, but I just don't think it should compel your decision. It's pretty much a minor, possibly insignificant, distinction.

As to your other point, I also hate that very much. And it sort of plays into what I'm saying. I remember a long time ago there was a matchup of #1 vs #2 and it was a great game and #2 just barely lost. But they dropped in the polls to #5 or something because there were a few other teams that were undefeated and you can't have a one-loss team above an undefeated team. I don't buy into that. If you think the #1 team really is the best team in the country, then what happened in that game to make you think the #2 team isn't still the #2 team?

Now, I think it's a fair argument to say that a team that hasn't lost deserves to be ahead of the one-loss team, but that's when we start trying to be objective when I think we should just go all the way with being subjective.