1 Alabama (61), SEC 14-1 LW: 2 points: 1,525
2 Clemson, ACC 14-1 LW: 1 points: 1,464
3 Stanford, Pac-12 12-2 LW: 5 points: 1,360
4 Ohio State, Big Ten 12-1 LW: 7 points: 1,342
5 Oklahoma, Big 12 11-2 LW: 4 points: 1,270
6 Michigan State, Big Ten 12-2 LW: 3 points: 1,227
7 TCU, Big 12 11-2 LW: 11 points: 1,098
8 Houston, The American 13-1 LW: 14 points: 1,050
9 Iowa, Big Ten 12-2 LW: 6 points: 981
10 Mississippi, SEC 10-3 LW: 16 points: 975
11 Notre Dame, Independent 10-3 LW: 8 points: 953
12 Michigan, Big Ten 10-3 LW: 17 points: 911
13 Baylor, Big 12 10-3 LW: 18 points: 820
14 Fla State, ACC 10-3 LW: 9 points: 630
15 North Carolina, ACC 11-3 LW: 10 points: 563
16 LSU, SEC 9-3 LW: 22 points: 546
17 Utah, Pac-12 10-3 LW: 20 points: 499
18 Navy, The American 11-2 LW: 21 points: 465
19 Oregon, Pac-12 9-4 LW: 15 points: 391
20 Oklahoma State, Big 12 10-3 LW: 13 points: 372
21 Wisconsin, Big Ten 10-3 LW: 23 points: 332
22 Tennessee, SEC 9-4 LW: 29 points: 260
23 Northwestern Big Ten, 10-3 LW: 12 Votes: 203
24 Western Kentucky, Conference USA 12-2 LW: 25 Votes: 128
25 Florida, SEC 10-4 LW:19 Votes: 126
Dropped from rankings: Temple 24
Others receiving votes: Georgia 109, Washington State 51, Mississippi State 47, San Diego State 44, Arkansas 28, Toledo 28, USC 10, Appalachian State 7, Boise State 4, Duke 3, Temple 2, BYU 1

Congrats to Alabama, UH, TCU, Baylor, Stanford, Northwestern and Western Kentucky.

(01-12-2016 09:47 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  1 Alabama (61), SEC 14-1 LW: 2 points: 1,525
2 Clemson, ACC 14-1 LW: 1 points: 1,464
3 Stanford, Pac-12 12-2 LW: 5 points: 1,360
4 Ohio State, Big Ten 12-1 LW: 7 points: 1,342
5 Oklahoma, Big 12 11-2 LW: 4 points: 1,270
6 Michigan State, Big Ten 12-2 LW: 3 points: 1,227
7 TCU, Big 12 11-2 LW: 11 points: 1,098
8 Houston, The American 13-1 LW: 14 points: 1,050
9 Iowa, Big Ten 12-2 LW: 6 points: 981
10 Mississippi, SEC 10-3 LW: 16 points: 975
11 Notre Dame, Independent 10-3 LW: 8 points: 953
12 Michigan, Big Ten 10-3 LW: 17 points: 911
13 Baylor, Big 12 10-3 LW: 18 points: 820
14 Fla State, ACC 10-3 LW: 9 points: 630
15 North Carolina, ACC 11-3 LW: 10 points: 563
16 LSU, SEC 9-3 LW: 22 points: 546
17 Utah, Pac-12 10-3 LW: 20 points: 499
18 Navy, The American 11-2 LW: 21 points: 465
19 Oregon, Pac-12 9-4 LW: 15 points: 391
20 Oklahoma State, Big 12 10-3 LW: 13 points: 372
21 Wisconsin, Big Ten 10-3 LW: 23 points: 332
22 Tennessee, SEC 9-4 LW: 29 points: 260
23 Northwestern Big Ten, 10-3 LW: 12 Votes: 203
24 Western Kentucky, Conference USA 12-2 LW: 25 Votes: 128
25 Florida, SEC 10-4 LW:19 Votes: 126
Dropped from rankings: Temple 24
Others receiving votes: Georgia 109, Washington State 51, Mississippi State 47, San Diego State 44, Arkansas 28, Toledo 28, USC 10, Appalachian State 7, Boise State 4, Duke 3, Temple 2, BYU 1

Congrats to Alabama, UH, TCU, Baylor, Stanford, Northwestern and Western Kentucky.

Look at all those strong MWC teams

Congrats to UH and Tom Hermann. They accomplished their goal in short order. No excuses.

and congrats to WKU. That should be Riice more years than not.

(01-12-2016 10:06 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  Look at all those strong MWC teams

I'm a big MWC fan but they are having an admittedly down year in both football and MBB (likely a one-bid league this year). With that being said, the league still ranks #10 this morning in Pomeroy vs. CUSA at #21 (!).

And yes ... congratulations to UH.

Stanford, Navy, Northwestern, Notre Dame - by god those academic standards must be killing them.... oh wait.

(01-12-2016 12:00 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Stanford, Navy, Northwestern, Notre Dame - by god those academic standards must be killing them.... oh wait.

Cue litany of excuses in..5...4..3..2..1...

(01-12-2016 01:03 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 12:00 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Stanford, Navy, Northwestern, Notre Dame - by god those academic standards must be killing them.... oh wait.

Cue litany of excuses in..5...4..3..2..1...

Academics are one of our many constraints but the difference between us and that list is the $$$ that is spend on athletics. NW and ND and Stanford get more $$$ from their conference than our university spends on the entire athletic department.

(01-12-2016 02:17 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 01:03 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 12:00 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Stanford, Navy, Northwestern, Notre Dame - by god those academic standards must be killing them.... oh wait.

Cue litany of excuses in..5...4..3..2..1...

Academics are one of our many constraints but the difference between us and that list is the $$$ that is spend on athletics. NW and ND and Stanford get more $$$ from their conference than our university spends on the entire athletic department.

Yes, but their competition level is also an echelon higher. They're winning at the P5 level, we're losing at the G5 level.

(01-12-2016 02:22 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:17 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 01:03 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 12:00 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Stanford, Navy, Northwestern, Notre Dame - by god those academic standards must be killing them.... oh wait.

Cue litany of excuses in..5...4..3..2..1...

Academics are one of our many constraints but the difference between us and that list is the $$$ that is spend on athletics. NW and ND and Stanford get more $$$ from their conference than our university spends on the entire athletic department.

Yes, but their competition level is also an echelon higher. They're winning at the P5 level, we're losing at the G5 level.

A) going to bowls means we aren't losing. (Didn't we just have our most wins ever over 2 and 3 seasons). The issue with losing is we lose to teams we would like beat.
B) Remember the schools in the P5 get half their wins necessary for a bowl by playing "an echelon down"

The level of financial commitment between us and the schools listed means they are only our peers on the academic side of the university.

(01-12-2016 02:31 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:22 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:17 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 01:03 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 12:00 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Stanford, Navy, Northwestern, Notre Dame - by god those academic standards must be killing them.... oh wait.

Cue litany of excuses in..5...4..3..2..1...

Academics are one of our many constraints but the difference between us and that list is the $$$ that is spend on athletics. NW and ND and Stanford get more $$$ from their conference than our university spends on the entire athletic department.

Yes, but their competition level is also an echelon higher. They're winning at the P5 level, we're losing at the G5 level.

A) going to bowls means we aren't losing. (Didn't we just have our most wins ever over 2 and 3 seasons). The issue with losing is we lose to teams we would like beat.

Man, you sure can parse the definition of "losing." That's a linguistic feat! I see 5-7 and think "losing record," but I guess that's too straightforward.

Quote:B) Remember the schools in the P5 get half their wins necessary for a bowl by playing "an echelon down"

The level of financial commitment between us and the schools listed means they are only our peers on the academic side of the university.

Exactly. They're P5, we're G5. We're in a creampuff conference. No excuse suffices for not having a winning record, IMO.

(01-12-2016 02:43 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:31 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:22 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:17 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 01:03 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Cue litany of excuses in..5...4..3..2..1...

Academics are one of our many constraints but the difference between us and that list is the $$$ that is spend on athletics. NW and ND and Stanford get more $$$ from their conference than our university spends on the entire athletic department.

Yes, but their competition level is also an echelon higher. They're winning at the P5 level, we're losing at the G5 level.

A) going to bowls means we aren't losing. (Didn't we just have our most wins ever over 2 and 3 seasons). The issue with losing is we lose to teams we would like beat.

Man, you sure can parse the definition of "losing." That's a linguistic feat! I see 5-7 and think "losing record," but I guess that's too straightforward.

Quote:B) Remember the schools in the P5 get half their wins necessary for a bowl by playing "an echelon down"

The level of financial commitment between us and the schools listed means they are only our peers on the academic side of the university.

Exactly. They're P5, we're G5. We're in a creampuff conference. No excuse suffices for not having a winning record, IMO.

Yes, this year sucked. 5-7 is losing. "Losing at the G5 level" isn't what we've been doing the last 4 years though. So maybe you think we are OK after all!

The G5 are our peers now. We aren't in the SWC "playing down". Get over it. It's not an excuse. Now if we want to make the commitment of a P5 program that happens to play all G5 teams then I agree we should be 9-3 or better every year.

(01-12-2016 02:43 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Exactly. They're P5, we're G5. We're in a creampuff conference. No excuse suffices for not having a winning record, IMO.

+1!

(01-12-2016 02:48 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:43 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:31 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:22 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 02:17 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  Academics are one of our many constraints but the difference between us and that list is the $$$ that is spend on athletics. NW and ND and Stanford get more $$$ from their conference than our university spends on the entire athletic department.

Yes, but their competition level is also an echelon higher. They're winning at the P5 level, we're losing at the G5 level.

A) going to bowls means we aren't losing. (Didn't we just have our most wins ever over 2 and 3 seasons). The issue with losing is we lose to teams we would like beat.

Man, you sure can parse the definition of "losing." That's a linguistic feat! I see 5-7 and think "losing record," but I guess that's too straightforward.

Quote:B) Remember the schools in the P5 get half their wins necessary for a bowl by playing "an echelon down"

The level of financial commitment between us and the schools listed means they are only our peers on the academic side of the university.

Exactly. They're P5, we're G5. We're in a creampuff conference. No excuse suffices for not having a winning record, IMO.

Yes, this year sucked. 5-7 is losing. "Losing at the G5 level" isn't what we've been doing the last 4 years though. So maybe you think we are OK after all!

The G5 are our peers now. We aren't in the SWC "playing down". Get over it. It's not an excuse. Now if we want to make the commitment of a P5 program that happens to play all G5 teams then I agree we should be 9-3 or better every year.

I believe we can and should be winning at the level we are at, and that 5-7 is inexcusable. What part if that don't you understand?

If someone had told you 10 years ago that the 2015 season would end with 3 former SWC teams in the top 13, how many of you would've guessed TCU, Houston, and Baylor? Speaking of that last sentence, how does everyone here feel about the Oxford comma? I think my opinion is self-evident.

C-USA

West

54. Louisiana Tech (9-4)
57. Southern Miss. (9-5)
100. RICE (5-7)
103. U.T.E.P. (5-7)
109. U.T.S.A. (3-9)
125. North Texas (1-11)

East

21. Western Kentucky (12-2)
52. Marshall (10-3)
71. Middle Tenn. (7-6)
98. Florida Int'l (5-7)
101. Old Dominion (5-7)
105. Florida Atlantic (3-9)
123. Charlotte (2-10)

Others:

2. Stanford (12-2)
11. Baylor (10-3)
66. Texas (5-7)
114. Army (2-10)


My final top 30:

1. Alabama (14-1)
2. Stanford (12-2)
3. Ohio State (12-1)
4. Clemson (14-1)
5. Oklahoma (11-2)
------------------------------
6. Michigan State (12-2)
7. Michigan (10-3)
8. Iowa (12-2)
9. Mississippi (10-3)
10. T.C.U. (11-2)
------------------------------
11. Baylor (10-3)
12. Notre Dame (10-3)
13. North Carolina (11-3)
14. L.S.U. (9-3)
15. Florida State (10-3)
------------------------------
16. Utah (10-3)
17. Houston (13-1)
18. Tennessee (9-4)
19. Oklahoma State (10-3)
20. Wisconsin (10-3)
------------------------------
21. Western Kentucky (12-2)
22. Oregon (9-4)
23. Mississippi State (9-4)
24. Northwestern (10-3)
25. Georgia (10-3)
------------------------------
26. Florida (10-4)
27. Navy (11-2)
28. U.S.C. (8-6)
29. Arkansas (8-5)
30. California (8-5)
------------------------------

Final Conference Rankings (including my rating quotient at the end)

1. Southeastern (54-12) [34.6756]
2. Pacific 12 (35-12) [25.0805]
3. B1G (48-18) [19.4153]
4. Big 12 (26-11) [18.7511]
5. ACC (41-25) [11.0996]

6. AAC (32-25) [-5.4808]
7. Independents (21-17) [-7.3563]

8. MAC (23-35) [-26.8710]
9. MWC (22-33) [-27.9260]
10. C-USA (23-34) [-34.6926]
11. Sun Belt (16-33) [-42.8120]