ASU #4, Oregon #5, USC #12 in BCS

The new BCS standings are out. No surprise that Ohio State is #1, Boston College #2 (just in time to fall victim to the #2 Curse against Virginia Tech on Thursday), and LSU #3. But check out who's next: Arizona State, idle last week, managed to climb all the way from eighth to fourth!

ASU's rise is partially due to attrition, with losses by #2 South Florida, #6 South Carolina and #7 Kentucky over the weekend, but the Sun Devils' impressive victory over the University of Bye was enough to leapfrog former #5 Oklahoma, which barely escaped with a win over lowly Iowa State. And you know who else leapfrogged Oklahoma? The Sooners' BFFs in the Pacific Northwest, the Oregon Ducks! How the formerly #10-ranked quack attack got all the way up to #5 by beating 2-5 Washington, I'm not sure, but I'm guessing a Pac-10 replay crew was involved somehow.

In all seriousness, it's a big-time statistical logjam from #4 through #6; the decimal digits separating ASU, Oregon and Oklahoma really aren't all that significant. Next on the list are #7 West Virginia, #8 Virginia Tech, #9 Kansas, and #10 South Florida.

USC, which visits #5 Oregon next Saturday, is #12. Hey, it's a 5-12 game! It's like March Madness! And we know a scrappy 12-seed wins every year! Woo! Go Trojans! Will O.J. Mayo be suiting up?

Interestingly, the Trojans feature the biggest difference between the polls (which have them #7 and #8) and the computers (which have them #21). I think #21 might be a little harsh, but I certainly think the computers are closer to reality here, recognizing, as they do, that the Trojans have accomplished absolutely nothing of significance on the field so far this season. Let's see 'em beat Oregon and Cal and ASU, and then we can talk about a high ranking, m'kay?

Meanwhile, the football squad from the University of Michigan -- you may recall them as the opening-weekend patsy scheduled by Div. I-AA powerhouse Appalachian State as a tune-up game for the Mountaineers -- has climbed all the way to #20, which just goes to show that even the little guys can succeed if they believe in themselves. Nice going, Michigan. Kitten power!

Oh, and UConn is #23. UConn!!! They're sandwiched between Auburn and Alabama. UCONN!!! In FOOTBALL!!!

Comments

[JD]

the Sun Devils' impressive victory over the University of Bye was enough to leapfrog former #5 Oklahoma, which barely escaped with a win over lowly Iowa State.

Iowa State's record against the University of Bye isn't very impressive either.

[Brendan]

Notre Dame is a 7-point home underdog to the University of Bye next Saturday.

(Joke shamelessly stolen from somebody on ND Nation or Blue-Gray Sky, I forget which.)

[Andrew]

Ummm, if USC has not accomplished anything on the field, neither has ASU, since both schools' schedules are backloaded. So does that mean ASU should really be ranked more like 20th than 4th? You and Scott Wolf must have gone to the same school for football team ranking methodologies.

[Brendan]

ASU didn't lose to Stanford.

Big. Fucking. Difference.

You're undefeated, you get some benefit of the doubt. You lose to Stanford, you... don't.

[Brendan]

P.S. By the way, Arizona State and USC are ranked #7 and #8 by the polls. One of the polls has the Sun Devils ahead of the Trojans. The other has the Trojans ahead of the Sun Devils.

This is completely inexplicable, considering neither team has beaten anybody, USC has played far less impressively in several of its wins over nobodies, and again, ASU has not lost to F***ING STANFORD.

The fact that Arizona State and Kansas are ranked below multiple one-loss teams indicates that the pollsters ARE, in fact, penalizing those teams for "not playing anybody." Meanwhile, USC is the third-highest-ranked one-loss team in the country, even though the Trojans haven't played anybody AND they have the worst loss of the bunch.

Next argument, please.

[Becky]

Come on, Andrew. Where's your Pac-10 love for the Sun Devils, my darling alma mater?

[BK]

If ASU gets through their last four with a 3-1 record I'll be thrilled (Cal, Oregon, UCLA, USC).

[BK]

The above comment should read, "their next four," as they do have UofA last.

[Patrick Cooper]

I still don't understand how Michigan can be ranked after losing to a I-AA school.

[Sandy Underpants]

I knew SC had a pathetically weak schedule when this season started, but it must be the softest schedule they've had this decade. Idaho, Notre Dame, and Nebraska are 6-18 combined and then the conference schedule. Looks like it was put together at the right time as Cal, Oregon and ASU typically fall apart in the 2nd half of the season. USC's schedule is looking almost as unimpressive as Ohio St.

[Brendan]

Patrick, far be it for me to defend Michigan, but Appalachian State isn't that much worse a team than Stanford. Jeff Sagarin has the Cardinal at #58, the Mountaineers at #71. So, if it's outrageous that Michigan is ranked after losing at home to App. State, it's at least as outrageous that USC is ranked in the Top Ten after losing at home to Stanford.

[Brendan]

P.S. According to Sagarin's "ELO-CHESS" rankings, which are the ones actually used by the BCS, it's even closer: Stanford is #68 and Appy State is #72.

Don't get too distracted by the labels (I-A, I-AA, FBS, FCS). The labels make the loss more embarrassing for Michigan, and rightfully so, but objectively, a good I-AA team is better than a lot of bad I-A teams. Idaho, for instance, is ranked #167 by Sagarin -- behind fifty I-AA tams.

[Brendan]

P.S. Notre Dame is ranked #87 by Sagarin, well below both Appy State and Stanford. And Utah is #54. Is there any two-loss team in the country with two worse losses than UCLA? I think not. And yet the Bruins are #26 in the AP poll, #27 in the Harris Poll, and #31 in the coaches poll.

This is a crazy season. Michigan and UCLA have climbed back into, or almost into, the rankings, because there aren't a lot of alternatives.

[Brent]

I agree that it is outrageous that both Michigan is even ranked at all and USC is ranked in the top ten.

[Sandy Underpants]

To start the excuse-making as the Trojans push for the BCS championship game-- USC lost by 1 point with 11 starters out with injury and their quarterback playing with a broken finger. Michigan was dominated by Appy St. at home, at full strength for almost the entire game until coming back from way down to ultimately end up losing. The next week Michigan lost by about 30 points at home to the Ducks. There's really no comparison between SC and UM.

[Patrick Cooper]

Brendan, I agree. I just don't really care too much about USC :-)

[Andrew]

Brendan and Becky, you're completely missing the point. I would probably rank ASU in the top five, because as you noted (and per my second guideline for ranking college football teams), ASU is undefeated and therefore should get the benefit of the doubt. But your knock on USC for why they should be closer to 21st was, USC has "accomplished absolutely nothing of significance on the field so far this season". The exact same thing is true of ASU! They haven't played anybody, as their schedule is way backloaded just like ours, and their OOC schedule was poop just like ours. If you want to point to MOV and your subjective opinion of what you've seen so far of ASU's performance compared to USC versus common opponents, fine, but that's not what you said above.

Bottom line: SOS to date aside, ASU should be ranked in the top five, and USC should be ranked in the top ten. If you want to punish USC for their loss to Stanford, that's legitimate, but to do so without considering exactly what caused that loss to Stanford (i.e., Booty injured his hand and threw four INTs in the second half, while half the offensive line was brand new because of injuries, and the young receivers kept dropping balls) is to completely call into question your sense of how to rank teams. Think of it this way: Had USC kicked a FG at the end of the first half instead of trying -- and failing -- for the TD, USC would still be undefeated and probably ranked #1 or #2. That's right, they'd have looked just as shitty, made all those boneheaded turnovers and drops, but beat Stanford and still be top-ranked. Yet a minor alteration of one slight variable of the game, and they plummet to #21 in your book? That simply does not make sense to go from #1 or #2 to being ranked behind the likes of South Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, UConn, and Wake Forest. Either USC is fundamentally still a scary good team, or they are a giant pretender, and you're going against an awfully large number of people who have functioning eyeballs if you think they are the latter.

[Sandy Underpants]

They are.... underdogs for the first time since.... well Oklahoma, this Saturday in Autism stadium. It's finally safe to bet on the Trojans again. Thank Stanford. This has to motivate the team.