Ok, can someone who is way smarter than me, explain why the Wisconsin Badgers, who BEAT MINNESOTA on Saturday, by a score of 38 to 34 is ranked number 23 in the national pollls (down from 14 a week ago). But MINNESOTA, who was UNRANKED last week is suddenly number 22 with a 5-2 record??? I mean, WTF?
We're currently number 1 in the Big Ten Conference - ahead of Penn State (8) in the rankings, but tied for performance at 6-1. Wisconsin beat Michigan soundly 2 weeks ago, and Michigan narrowly beat Penn State for the first time this season.
We should easily be outranking Michigan State and Ohio State for heaven's sake.
Next week......
UPDATE: OK, so they moved the Badgers to 19 and dropped Minnesota alltogether. It's a start...
UPDATE #2: This morning, the polls are now showing Wisconsin at 17 or 19, depending on which poll you read and Penn State taken down to 12 or 14. Guess I just need to wait till everyone gets their votes in on Sunday.
Call this just a wacky European take on things, but don't the rankings make as much sense as the BCS structure?
I mean, since the conferences are organised as they are for economic rather than athletic reasons, is it too unreasonable to hope that we'd ever see a situation where, at the end of the 'regular' season, we just take the 16 (or 32) teams from whatever division/conference with the best overall records, draw names out of a hat and have them play knockout til we arrive at a grand final/national championship game?
And let's not even touch promotion and relegation.
Well done to the Badgers, though. Lloyd Carr still smarting from the other week.
Hope you're well over there and the Russkis left you plenty of Stoli!
You'll get no argument from me on the whole cricket thing. Watching grass grow can be marginally more gripping.
I remember a column Tom Boswell wrote after going to his first cricket match. It said something like: "England took a 200-run lead into the final day of their game against Australia, and lost. Talk about a lousy bullpen."
Call this just a wacky European take on things, but don't the rankings make as much sense as the BCS structure?
I mean, since the conferences are organised as they are for economic rather than athletic reasons, is it too unreasonable to hope that we'd ever see a situation where, at the end of the 'regular' season, we just take the 16 (or 32) teams from whatever division/conference with the best overall records, draw names out of a hat and have them play knockout til we arrive at a grand final/national championship game?
And let's not even touch promotion and relegation.
Well done to the Badgers, though. Lloyd Carr still smarting from the other week.
Hope you're well over there and the Russkis left you plenty of Stoli!
x