Analyzing the AP Poll

I remember way back in the eighties when the "parachute pants" were such a cool thing to wear.  Later, they were often referred to as "M.C. Hammer pants" (or just "Hammer" pants), for those are the type of pants he wore in his music videos that flooded MTV for about a year, solid.  They were made of a light material (parachute-like) that fit in the butt and then loosened up in the thighs with a zipper that revealed additional material (commonly a different color than the outside pant color) and slowly tapered down to hug the ankles.

As a youth, my single mom could not afford new clothing for the four of us children, so most of the time, my brother and I had to scrounge up odd jobs or paper routes to earn money to buy "special" clothing for ourselves.  I had done so the summer before seventh grade and purchased the sweetest pair of parachute pants.  They were a royal blue and instead of zippers, I had snaps on the sides that exposed a black material.  I just knew the chicks would flock to me the first day of school, which ultimately turned out to be the only day of school I wore my Hammer pants.  Middle school-aged kids are very cruel to begin with, but when you are a newer kid in town (one year) and not very popular and in a small town where Wranglers and Levi's are the norm (for decades), it was inevitable to get the non-parachute-donned, popular boys to tease in all ways imaginable to humiliate me in front of those potentially swarming girls that now wouldn't even look in my direction.  At the time, it was an awesome idea and I thought I could predict how people would react to wearing such sweet attire, but I was quickly put into reality when the test finally came.  I'm sure that there were some parts of the country that these Hammer pants were more accepted by peers in middle school, but in the rustic cowboy town in Central Oregon, it was not meant to be.

My optimistic view of parachute pants and the reality check I experienced in the seventh grade remind me of the grossly inconsistent adjustments made from week to week by the AP poll voters.  I feel like they are voting for teams like how I felt when purchasing those royal blue beauties.  It seems like a good idea at the time, but the real test hasn't occurred yet and reality hasn't hit.

First of all, those voters have a stewardship over their pre-season votes and have to stick with them, or do they?  They are responsible to provide accurate accounts of all the FBS schools in the nation.  All the teams must be monitored closely and fairly represented in the weekly top 25 with respect to the teams' success (or failure).  So, as I glance through the first couple weeks of the AP top 25, I see some accurate representation of some schools and others where they may seem to be way off due to how things have unfolded thus far.  It's like a work in progress for the voters.  They need to make necessary adjustments each week and fess-up when they don't make the wisest decision one week and change it immediately for the following week.

An obvious example that we witnessed already this season, is the pre-season #10 team, Arkansas.  Of course this is a pre-season #10 team!  The Hogs are in the SEC!  'Nuff said, right?  Well, for me, that's not good enough.  They just lost their offensive guru and head coach in the off season.  Arkansas was starting a new season with a new coach that hasn't really glistened with success, but with the talent that flows to the SEC, anybody would be successful, right?  Well, that #10 team jumped two spots by beating that hard-nosed, bruising team from Jacksonville State (yes, sarcasm was intended) with a score of 49-24, who put up 322 yards on an SEC defense.  Yikes!  The good thing was that Tyler Wilson, arguably the best QB in the conference, needed to play only two and a half quarters and Arkansas still put up 564 yards.  Jacksonville State had garbage points and yards in the second half while the starters were resting and letting the second and third stringers get some reps.  The following week is when the tragedy happened.  Louisiana-Monroe came to town and put up a real fight.  They hung in long enough to be able to get a last minute score to force overtime with 21 unanswered points.  Arkansas made a field goal in overtime.  Then the shocking thing happened when the Warhawks QB seemed to have muffed up a play but found himself with a huge amount of green in front of him to sprint into the endzone.  Ouch!  This is when Coach Smith should have put in his bankruptcy papers.  He'll be lucky to have a job by season's end.  Now, Arkansas may have started off ranked too high with a new coach, but the voters were seeing stars or unicorns chasing rainbows or something to advance Arkansas more than one spot to fill in the Michigan loss after the Razorbacks' initial win.  However, the voters got it right when they tucked in their pride and took Arkansas completely out of the top 25.  That's got to be hard for the voters to put a team at #8 one week and the next, leave that same team unranked.  Like my mom never told me, doing the right thing is not always easy.  So, Arkansas was definitely a pair of those parachute pants that made it to the second day of school and now is a nice, classic pair of Wranglers like everyone else that doesn't find themselves in the top 25.  Now if only that second game of the season would have been Alabama and the Tide would have slapped them around a few hours and humiliated them, that would have been expected and the Hogs would have dropped a few spots, but not completely out of the top 25.  Unfortunately, it happened to be a much, much lesser team.  This will not look good when conference play begins unless Coach Smith can make a total one-eighty and utilize the talent he has on this squad.

There are many questions I have for the voters besides, "How can I get your job?"  Some of the placements of rankings each week draw my finger to the temple of my head and make me say, "Hmmm."  Let me mention a few of those now.  The obvious one, is why would anybody vote USC at number one?  A great team? Yes!  (My favorite.)  However, with the NCAA sanctions, USC lacks the depth to make it a whole season without injuries in key areas that could potentially find them struggling to win games - especially with the increasingly competitive conference of the Pac-12 and the nine conference games that the conference schedules every year (of course, Colorado is developing into the Duke and Vanderbilt of the Pac-12 - a.k.a. "bye week").  A top ten ranking would suffice, but #1 is really pushing it.  Same with my second favorite Pac-12 team, Oregon - ranked too high.  Hello!  They lost the starting QB and have to start either a sophomore or a freshman, and they lost arguably the best running back the Ducks have ever had with Heisman finalist, LaMichael James.  Again, near the top ten is feasible, but top five?  C'mon!  Let the teams who lose personnel and star players prove themselves a few times first.  Another team is Florida.  Why are they ranked at all?  This is the same team that had Urban Meyer at the helm two seasons ago as one of the best recruiters, ever.  The cupboards were left full of talent, with some stored in the pantry, as well.  You just need to be a decent coach to win 10 games with all that talent.  Well, Will Muschamp's 7-6 record was a huge disappointment, and he does NOT recruit better than Coach Meyer, so I have no idea how Coach Muschamp will improve from the 7-6 record in his first year as a head coach and who he paid off to find the Gators in the top 25.  I hope they prove me wrong, but this trend doesn't bode well for the Florida faithful.

After week two of the 2012 season, I learned a few things in regards to how things are perceived by the voters in the AP poll.  First thing I learned was, I'm not the only person in the world that regrettably purchased a pair of parachute pants in middle school.  I saw four top 20 teams lose to unranked teams and found themselves on the outside looking in.  I mentioned Arkansas falling like the net worth of its coach, but then there was the offensively anemic Wisconsin team with the best returning running back in the nation ranked at #13, who couldn't score against a questionable Oregon State team until less than two minutes left in THE GAME.  Now the media wants to make a big stink about the call on the on-side kick?  Really?  Do you think the Badgers suddenly had super momentum to score a "quick one" in just over a minute left from the 50-yard line?  Please!!  Maybe the Beavers really played defense or Wisconsin needs to get rid of the offensive line coach (oh, wait!  The latter did occur), or maybe it was actually a combination of both.  With the game against Nichols State being postponed, Oregon State essentially had more than one week to prepare for the Badgers.  Is it really that far fetched?  The third team that lost was the #16 Nebraska squad that played in the Rose bowl against UCLA.  The Huskers left LA as losers by six, even with the huge 92-yard run by Martinez.  The Red Shirts defense didn't corral Johnathan Franklin and let him go on a 217 yard day.  The Husker defense kept Franklin out of the endzone until the short pass in the fourth quarter.  The fourth team that left their high-profile offense home was the Oklahoma State Cowboys when they traveled to the deserts of Arizona.  The Wildcats tried their best to give the Pokes a taste of their own medicine when Oklahoma State put up 84 points the week prior on the lowly Savannah State.  The Cowboys went from shutting out one team the first week to getting 59 pasted on them the next.  As a Pac-12 fan, the second week of the 2012 season went like a dream - of the four unranked Pac-12 teams playing ranked, non-conference foes, three came out winners (the only loss was Washington losing - badly - to the #3 ranked LSU Tigers).  So, besides Washington not showing up and Colorado looking like a community college and Utah losing their starting QB and a rare game to Utah State, the conference was well represented with wins against mostly BCS conference opponents.  So, keeping up with the annual standards of the AP poll, an SEC school loses its way out of the top 25 (although, replaced by Tennessee) while Pac-12 teams have to win their way in with the additions of UCLA at #22 and Arizona at #24.  It's weird not to see the other team, Oregon State, who had the biggest upset of the three to not break into the top 25.

In conclusion, the AP poll is very inconsistent with how they vote the weekly top 25.  Each time I look at a new week of the poll, I feel like I'm a Wrangler-wearing cool kid watching a parachute pants-wearing kid walking onto the playground at middle school and saying to myself, "What was that kid thinking when he bought those?"  I'm sure at the time the vote seemed like it made sense and would be popular with the ladies, but ultimately that will be the last time the vote will be like that again.  As long as the correct adjustments are made throughout the season, everything should all work out in the end, right?

There's No Such Thing As East Coast Bias

Just a little over a week ago, my family and I returned from visiting Oahu, Hawaii, for about a week. It was amazing! It was all and more that I ever dreamed Hawaii would be. I'm not sure if it was the palm trees in the skyline that reminded me of my fond months in the Dominican Republic, or the tolerable weather that allowed us to do whatever we wanted, or the shallow waters in the coves and beaches that took you into the native fish inhabitants, or the warm ocean water that you could spend the whole day and night in, or the fine sand that felt like walking in flour on some beaches of the west part of the island, or the breathtaking panoramic views of sheer mountains with green vegetation lying so close to the infinite waters of blue, or the numerous visions of beautiful people - male and female, or the many stops to learn about history and different cultures.

I can't really pinpoint one thing that made our vacation so wonderful, but I feel sorry for all my future vacations because they will never measure up - unless it is a trip back to the islands in the Pacific without children. Only because I'm a guy and have a one-track mind, Hawaii - especially Oahu - had me thinking of one thing and wishing that my kids would be left behind. It's a little embarrassing and difficult to mention on a blog, but I have to admit, the environment in Honolulu gave me a bad desire. Well, it was just... I needed, uh... I had to see the Aloha stadium and buy me a University of Hawaii hat. Every Wednesday and Saturday (when there's not a home game), the Aloha stadium hosts a swap meet with hundreds of vendors selling all sorts of trinkets and clothes and jewelry. I was able to get a great deal on a lei and feel the vibes of football around the stadium. It was so great! I wasn't there just to do some bargain shopping on tourist items, but to be close to a college football stadium with a rich history of some great games. Later, I bought a U of H hat at the Navy Exchange Mall for under ten bucks. My trip was complete! Oh, I suppose the seafood dish at Duke's Canoe Club on Waikiki beach was nice, too.

So, with that Warriors hat on my head and fresh memories of the Samoan at the Polynesian Cultural Center that had me rolling from laughter during the entire presentation, I wondered to myself, "Why don't football teams from the East Coast come play Hawaii in Hawaii?" It seems that Hawaii plays some of the teams on the other side of the Mississippi River, but the Warriors have to do the traveling, usually. For the University of Hawaii to have an away game, they travel by plane for 4-6 hours just to get to the mainland - let alone, to get to their actual destination. What a huge disadvantage for them! There are so many schools in the east that really don't have to travel very far to play quality opponents.

Speaking of quality opponents, I've been looking at the preseason rankings by the AP and the Coaches' polls. It sure seems that voters believe that the only quality opponents are found in the east. I figured with the addition of two more teams in the newly formed Pacific 12 conference, that there may be an increase of one school placed in the preseason polls' top 25. History shows that there will be 3-4 teams from the Pac-10 that would be honored in the top 25 of the preseason; so logically, expecting 4-5 Pac-12 schools to be in it seemed reasonable. Boy was I wrong! In the AP poll, they were generous to put USC in the 25 spot to give the Pac-12 a whopping THREE teams in the top 25. Unfortunately, the Coaches' poll can't vote for USC until they have paid their debt to the sanctions gods, because the coaches seem to think that there are only two teams worthy to be in the top 25 from the Pac-12. Are you kidding me? I looked a little more in depth and found that the ACC, surprisingly, was treated the same with two teams from their 12-school conference made it in the top 25. The Big East made one team. Dang! The Mountain West Conference even got two! What the heck is wrong with the Pac-12, ACC, and Big East? Well, they sure are not the other three major conferences because the 12-teamed Big Ten conference has 4 and 5 teams in the top 25, while the 10-teamed Big XII has 4 and 5 schools in the top 25 (half the conference in the Coaches' poll). However, nobody can out-due the huge representation that the "top conference in the nation" has with 75% of it's 12 members in the top 25 preseason polls. Actually, that's not entirely true. They have 8 of the 12 schools in the top 23! With that many teams in the top 23 and only two of those teams playing competitive teams to open their season, while the unranked SEC schools start their seasons playing teams like; Elon, Western Kentucky, Montana, and BYU, there could potentially be 11 SEC schools in the top 25 polls after week one.

Now we can truly see what a horrible strength of schedule the Pac-12 has with only two ranked teams. What a bunch of cupcakes! The definition of powerhouse IS the SEC. Every week of conference games displays at least two ranked teams for each game - probably three in some instances - to demonstrate the grossly under-rated strength of schedule that each SEC school has. No wonder the non-conference slate has to include schools like Elon, Coastal Carolina, Samford, Southern Illinois, UT Martin, Missouri State, Northwestern State, Western Kentucky, North Texas, Georgia Southern, The Citadel, Furman, Buffalo, Montana, and Jacksonville State. Those are necessities when ALL your conference games are against ranked opponents. That puts a lot of wear and tear on your team week in and week out. No other conference experiences that. Surely, there could never be any talk about playing a nine conference game season like the Pac-12 does and what the Big Ten will start doing in 2013. That would be immediate overload for each SEC team and make it impossible for any team to come out unscathed and undefeated to play for the national title 19 seasons straight. No way! (OK! You may have sensed a little sarcasm in the last paragraph- actually I intended for the whole paragraph to be sarcastic!)

That's right! The major media and poll voters are drinking a lot of that SEC Kool-Aid to give a huge number of schools in the conference the "vote" of confidence that they will all have winning seasons to play in a bowl no matter what the teams are bringing in from the previous year. However, all I see in the polls is the lack of equal distribution and focus on other worthy and deserving teams that have actually shown signs of growth and improvement in the past years that keeps the spotlight shining bright in one area of the country that has definitely earned its recognition in the football world. Although the SEC has been the dominant conference for several years straight, the voters need to focus on their responsibilities as representatives of a national voting process, not just a southern or eastern American voting process. Do some homework BEFORE you vote! Don't just vote trendy and popular!

With the lack of equal distribution of the nation's teams, it is glaringly obvious that the strength of schedule will overwhelmingly be in favor of the SEC. Even if LSU and Georgia lose their openers against Oregon and Boise State, respectively, they won't drop far (if at all) in the polls because they play highly ranked teams while the other ranked SEC schools play easy games and get wins to "justify" the votes. Then you look at the ACC and Pac-12 conferences and will notice the strength of schedule will perceive to be very easy because nobody is ranked in those conferences. How absurd! How do you ignore the fact that Arizona State may have the best defense in its conference and not get enough votes to be in the top 25? I see that Sports Illustrated gets it by having ASU clear up at #17 in their college preview magazine. Unfortunately, I don't think SI gets any say in what the strength of schedule will be for the year.

I implore the voters to do homework before they make their votes! I say this because either the majority of the voters are ignorant about football or they didn't look into the teams' stats and facts very thoroughly before deciding that a team or two may be great. I have some serious question marks regarding several teams and why they would be good enough to be considered in the top 25. My initial question is,"Why is Arkansas ranked so high (or at all)?" Sure they had a great season last year only to fall to Ohio State in the Sugar bowl, but they lost three offensive linemen who protected the departed Ryan Mallett. How do you replace Ryan Mallett? Sure, Tyler Wilson will have all the same top four receivers from a year ago, but he has zero starting experience. Even in mop-up duty for Ryan, Wilson threw 3 interceptions with only 4 TD's. That ratio has to change dramatically for Wilson to be close to Mallett who went 8-5 in '09. Tyler needs to pray now that his three new starters on the line will come together quickly to protect him. All these things come to mind for me and don't tell me, "Yes! Arkansas is definitely number 14 in the nation." C'mon! Really? Only two starting linemen back and no Ryan Mallett? Now to make things worse, the SEC leading rusher, Knile Davis, was lost for the season to put a ton of pressure on Arkansas' other running backs to help block and catch and take the pressure off the first-time starting QB. Hmm. Is Arkansas a questionable call? I think so.

Another questionable call is voting Auburn anywhere in the top 25. This is the defending national champs, yes, but their team was depleted by graduation and the NFL draft. Auburn has recruited supremely well the last couple years; however, when any team returns two or three offensive players and three defensive players, the outlook is very grim. Auburn lost offensive star and Heisman trophy winner, Cam Newton, AND defensive star, Nick Fairly, who basically won the national title for the Tigers in January. You don't just plug in eight new starters on offense and defense, each, and expect to be a top 25 squad. I don't care if you just won the title or not. You will NOT repeat with those statistical challenges. Urban Meyer or Nick Saban can't do it, so Gene Chizik will not be able to do it, either. Auburn will be out of the top 25 after week two when Mississippi State destroys and humiliates them on their home field. (Mississippi State should be ranked higher!) So, why were there so many votes for Auburn? Homework for the voters?

Another questionable school that hails from the almighty conference of the SEC would be the Florida Gators. This is a team that went 8-5 last year under Urban Meyer. They struggled at running back and quarterback and the decent defense loses 7 of the top 9 tacklers from a year ago. Although Florida has recruited amazingly at defense, they still return only four starters from last year. This will force these young freshmen and sophomores to go through some serious growing pains to gain experience. The best scenario, the young guys will gel by the end of the season and be really good, but I see it more like next year for a full season working together to make a defensive impact in the SEC. This year? Nope! Plus, Urban Meyer, arguably the best young coach ever, has left the university and Florida replaced his head coaching resume for a stellar defensive coordinator of a different program, who doesn't have a head coaching resume. More growing pains? Yes! Will Muschamp's defense may fair better than the head coach this year. It's not easy to jump from D-coordinator to Head Coach (and that's merely mentioning those that were already in the system, not to mention a completely different conference entirely)! So, to statistically and logically consider Florida a top 25 team in the nation, is pure ignorance of the sport. If Urban Meyer was still at the helm, then it makes sense to have Florida at #22, but a brand new head coach? Dumb!

I must mention another questionable call on the highly touted top 25 list from the SEC. As much as I love Georgia and Mark Richt, they did not have a good season at all. Only because they won a home game against Idaho State were they able to participate in a bowl game and lost to Central Florida. Mark Richt was among the top five coaches mentioned with "hot seat" throughout the entire off season. However, the Bulldogs are not falling any farther! Last year was definitely the cellar of where Georgia will go. They go up from there. How far up is still to be determined. So, to put an unknown team, that went 6-7 last year, into the preseason top 25 for this year makes me wonder what the heck people are thinking. I would LOVE to see Coach Richt take his Bulldogs to the SEC championship game this year, but he is returning five offensive starters and seven defensive starters and replacing most of the departed starters with freshmen and sophomores and junior college (JUCO) transfers. How can a voter put that much confidence into that knowledge and place that team in the top 25? I don't get it! Speaking of sophomores for Georgia, Aaron Murray will be the bright spot on the offense by being the best QB in the conference this year. He will need a ton of help losing his top two targets (including AJ Green) and will rely on true freshman, Isaiah Crowell, to take over the rushing duties and the three new starters on the line will have to step up rapidly! What does this recipe smell like? It's not a preseason top 25 voting, but it is potential. Potential doesn't equal one of the best teams in the nation, though.

So, I mentioned four SEC teams that "earned" a place among the preseason top 25 that I feel the voters have done them a disservice by placing them somewhere they don't belong. Then again, who does? It's all relative and speculative and based on future expectations because we haven't seen anybody on the field against an opponent yet. However, if you have the responsibility to vote for the nation's best football teams, then you have the responsibility to do it right and research the topic at hand to most accurately represent the universities that actually have a chance at staying within the top 25 - not who is currently trendy and cool. There are too many teams from the SEC that are in the 2011 preseason top 25 AP and Coaches' polls. It is ridiculous!

I've mentioned four schools that shouldn't be in the preseason polls, so now I will call on a few teams that were maybe mentioned with a couple votes or less that I feel should get more national attention due to what they've done and what they are bringing back to start a new season. I've already mentioned one: Arizona State. They have gradually been building a stout defense around the nasty, Vontaze Burfict, who is now a junior that has a knack for the location of the ball. The quarterback has plenty of experience and standing at 6'8", he'll be able to see well over the four returning starting linemen. The receiving corps got a boost with Oregon transfer, Aaron Pflugrad. Arizona State lost by 1 point against both Wisconsin and USC last year. Dennis Erickson is not new to head coaching with some impressive wins during his time at Miami. This squad should be in the top half of the league this year.

Another team that is barely on the list of vote receivers, is Northwestern. This is NOT a trendy pick! They are not flashy and popular. They are just outright getting better! They return an amazing QB in Dan Persa who touted a ridiculous 73.5% completion last year and rushed for over 500 yards. The top tailback returns along with seven other starters from a year ago. The sacks leader, Vince Browne, returns at his defensive end spot. They went to a bowl each of the last three years and went 7-6 and are just getting started and will improve.

Tulsa is another team that should be considered with a very potent offense that ranked #5 in total offense last year. They went 10-3 and if the defense improves, they will easily get to 10 wins again this year. The QB-receiver combo of G.J. Kinne to Damaris Johnson will be something to watch. We'll get a taste of what they can do when they open up their season at Norman, OK, September 3rd. The Sooners will start the tough road of non-conference games for Tulsa.

You can't rule out June Jones and what he's done at SMU. They have improved dramatically winning at least 7 games in each of the last two years and return 10 offensive starters and eight defensive starters. SMU had their first 8-win season since the mid-'80's before the "Death Penalty" was enforced. Watch for them to take off!

The Orange from Syracuse have seemingly become significant out of the blue. The defense has become very stout over the course of last season and they return eight of their offensive starters. This could very well be a team that went 8-5 last year to a 10-win season this year. Last year's winning record was the first since 2001 for Syracuse.

As great as it would be to have your entire favorite conference in the preseason top 25 polls, it sure doesn't make any sense because it shuts out the rest of the nation when there's more parity in D-IA football now than there ever has been. I think that I have reasonably explained why at least four of the SEC teams should not be ranked in the top 25; although, the 2010 season ended with six SEC schools finishing in the top 25 spots in the AP poll (but still, eight? Before a game has been played yet?). I'm really and generally concerned about the voters of these polls and makes me wonder about the integrity of their responsibility to the college football fans out there that take the polls so literally. I'm sure it evens out (mostly) as the season progresses; however, it gives a clear advantage over a particular conference or area of the country when it comes to strength of schedule which is based on pure speculation when all teams have a 0-0 record. So, I'll just sit here quiet and contemplate those beaches of Oahu, feeling the energy from the Aloha stadium, while the season passes on and the SEC schools trickle out of the polls slowly while the Pac-12 and ACC teams have to actually earn their way slowly into the polls.

What Does the BCS Poll Really Mean?

I'm not any expert at love, by any means, and I never claim to think that I have any pertinent advice to give anyone who is searching for love; however, there are certain things about finding a potential significant other that clearly needs to be defined. Each person has their own rating system or way to determine if someone is "hot or not" to find that immediate attraction that everyone desires in a relationship. The rating system I use, or suggest others to use, is the 5-D test. It used to be 3-D, but I've gotten wiser with years. Heck, maybe some of you would have a 9-D or more. Let me explain the 5-D's: each "D" represents something that would interfere with your judgement of beauty and the more "D's" you have in your situation, the more confident I am that you should stop what you are doing before you get morning regrets (unless you are out to have a "no pride night" but that's an entirely different article). So, obviously, the first "D" represents Drunkeness. When alcohol is consumed, impairment of judgement is increased and inhabitions are lost. The second "D" represents Darkness. The dimmer the lighting, the less features you see clearly on someone's face, which may hide a thing or two. The third "D" is Distance. The further away someone is from you, you lose proportions and clarity of features in their face (and body). The fourth "D" is Driving. Someone in a car can always look better because you can't see everything they are wearing (including the not-so-obvious pear-shape they may be sporting), they may have a tinted sun roof to make them look tan, and sunglasses hides whether their eyes are worth gazing into or not. The fifth "D" represents Desperation. If you are desperate to go out and gotta have someone tonight, then you tend to "settle" on whoever gives you a second glance and shows a little interest (this may lead into the saying where she is a "2 at 10 and a 10 at 2" - meaning, at 10pm you see her as a 2 on a scale of 1-10, but Desperation comes into full effect when it is 2am and still girl-less and you find that 2 again, but looking like a 10 now). These 5 "D's" are the premiere "D's" to look out for. As you mold your own system, you may want to add others like; Dating (if you are currently dating someone, others suddenly find you attractive), or Distractions (if you are at a carnival or huge gathering of people around you, the distractions may confuse you and make you lose focus on your ideals of beauty), or Disabilities (hopefully these come much later in life for you, but this does not mean you need to "settle"), or Drugs (depending on the drug, this could seriously impair judgement for beauty - and everything else for that matters), or for those more focused on things like hair - Dryness (sometimes you gotta get the hair wet to see how nice it really is without all the gels, sprays, and mousses). So, remember, the more "D's" you have in your situation, you really need to think about what you really want because most likely you will not find anything meaningful in a relationship when it is in 5-D. You must eliminate as many of those "D's" as possible to assure yourself better odds at making a love connection worth while.

I realize that this is a weird way to start out a college football blog, but in thought of what the BCS poll is trying to say to the nation makes me think of what is defined by the BCS poll and what we're suppose to get out of it - like love, how do you judge it and how do you define it. Like love, the BCS has different meanings to different people; so I'll quit talking about that crap and get into some football rants. This is the light I see in the BCS eyes: Pac-10 conference is clearly the best conference from top to bottom in the country and the BCS Poll put out before the bowl games begin December 19, 2009, is there to prove it in black and white. Now you have to realize that I see polls as lovers of the SEC, ACC, and the Big XII because they have lots of great teams, they each have 12 schools, and they have a championship game each season. The polls love them so much that the voters are willing to place as many of the schools represented by each of those 3 conferences in the preseason top 25 as possible. For example, in the preseason AP poll this year there were 5 SEC schools in the top 25 - I'm a little disappointed because I usually will see 6 SEC teams there. Same with the Big XII - at least 5 for good measure. The Big East, Big Ten, and Pac-10, on the other hand, will find much fewer schools amongst those elite powerhouses of the SEC and Big XII conferences (some slight sarcasm).

Now, I'm not going to get on my Pac-10 high horse just yet because there are other conferences out there that can complain as much and have legitimate arguements. I would like to speak to those Big East lovers. I feel for you. Looking at the preseason AP poll of 2009, I don't see a single Big East team in the top 25! In fact, the highest ranked team was Pitt at 28. Does the media want to hate the Big East or what?! Now let's look at the pre-bowl BCS top 25 standings. I see an undefeated Cincinnati playing in a BCS bowl playing against arguably the #2 team in the nation, Florida Gators. I also see two more teams from the Big East. There are only 8 teams in the Big East. (Time to get out your calculators.) I calculate that as about 37% of the conference. That's pretty dang good, if you ask me - especially, considering the top 3 power conferences with 12 teams each. The ACC, Big XII, and the SEC each have 3 teams finding their way in the BCS top 25 at the end of the regular season. Just as many as the Big East, but (calculators please) only a mere 25% of their conferences. Does that say that the SEC is the strongest from top to bottom? I don't see it that way. Another conference that has 3 teams in the BCS top 25 on December 6th is the Mountain West Conference. Wow! Shocker, I know! Just because not everyone in the nation is versed with MWC statistics, there is one that I DO know - it is a conference made up of 9 teams. That's 3 less than the SEC. My calculator tells me that 33% of the MWC is in the BCS top 25. Last I checked, 33% is better than 25%, right? So, if a conference is going to go on and boldly claim its superiority to the nation, then why doesn't it show up in the polls that generally favor them to begin with? Does this mean that the MWC is equal to or better than the SEC? No, of course not. That's not what I'm saying at all. However, the MWC has at least 3 really good teams this year - the same amount as the SEC and Big XII who are representing this year's national title game in the BCS National Championship game in Pasadena - and yet, the MWC remains to be a conference without an automatic bid into a BCS bowl game. Essentially, to get the big bucks from the big bowls, the MWC teams need to go undefeated the whole year (which they've had a team do 3 of the last 6 years). Now, you know I have to do this; the Pac-10, obviously with 10 teams that make up the conference, have a whopping 5 teams ranked in the BCS top 25! Can you believe that!? Hopefully you're smart enough to know what percentage 5 of 10 is and I don't have to spell it out to you. I will anyway - 50% of the Pac-10 is in the top 25 of the BCS poll before going into the 2009 bowl season? Are you kidding me? This is the same conference that had only 3 teams in the AP preseason poll top 25 in August! Incredible! Are they all over rated or does the conference just have a lot of depth? Just to feed the fire a little, the two Pac-10 teams that played and lost close ones to SEC teams are not even bowl eligible; and the team that traveled to the east and beat an SEC team is merely 6-6 (which should not be bowl eligible in my eyes - .500 record does not mean a successful season that needs to be rewarded with post season play). All those SEC schools that played the Pac-10? They are all eligible for bowl games. How could the SEC use this same information as a bragging point? They can't because it would just mean that they do, in fact, play some of the weakest schedules in the country - especially their 4 non-conference match-ups. In fact, all but two teams (Vanderbilt and Mississippi State) are not bowl eligible. Does this say something about their scheduling? If you say you are the best, then it wouldn't be asking much to go out seeking the best of other parts of the country to play them, right?

Enough of that. I want to rant a little more about the bowls and their affiliations. I can't stand having the second best team from the Pac-10 conference playing on December 30th each year! Is that really an award? I think there are too many bowls these days, to begin with. I feel, also, that the best bowls that mean the most should be played on January 1st and after. Everything else before that is just an appetizer. Of the six major conferences, only one is treated as well as the C-USA and MAC conferences by allowing only one team to play in the month of January: that's the Pac-10. Lucky for them, they get an automatic BCS bowl bid, or else... who knows? The ACC gets two of their 3 BCS ranked teams in the new year, but the Pac-10 gets only 1 of their 5 BCS ranked teams playing in the first month of 2010. Wow! Now the SEC takes its 25% and plays that and then some into January to play in a bowl game. Actually, the tally is 7 teams from the SEC will play after the beginning of the year this season. Well, the Big Ten gets 5 teams into January! Now this is where the Big East gets its love back by having 4, or half their conference, into the lights of January bowls. Crazy! Where is the new Pac-10 commissioner on this? This is an outrage and must change immediately! Why do all the January bowls affiliate with the SEC? Why can't one or two of them go to the Pac-10? They've won a championship or two in the last decade, right? Who makes these decisions? So, the conference that puts in 50% of its teams into the top 25 BCS poll will reward only one team?! Where is the logic in that? Am I the only one who seriously thinks this is an issue with regretable terms of why the Pacific 10 conference is looked upon with eyes of inferiority? I think the Pac-10 needs to shed some of these "5-D's" so it can be seen for what it really is - the conference of champions.

Harris Poll Bias

When I was a young lad in high school, there were few words that really stood out as I studied English to increase my vocabulary; however, one of those words sticks with me still to this day - "superfluous", meaning: extra, not needed or necessary. There are some things in life that can be described by this word - yes, even in college football, which I would have thought to be impossible until I ponder on the following thoughts on the subject of polls. I thought the whole idea of a poll, starting after the college football season has began to pan out with most non-conference play in the past and some conference games under way, were to reduce any pre-season hype/expectations and other poll influences that are not involved in the BCS. Looking at this week's Harris Poll has achieved nothing more than an additional look of the AP and Coaches' polls. There are so few differences between the Harris Poll and the AP, Coaches', and even the Legends' polls that it makes me wonder if the AP and Coaches' polls are so influential and dictate the state and direction of college football rankings, that the voters for the Harris and Legends polls are too scared to vote completely different from the grand-daddies of polls.

Now, I love the idea of the Legends Poll and think that they would have a better grasp of who should be ranked or not; however, they have no say in the ultimate outcome of the development of all the BCS bowl games like the Harris Poll does. The Harris Poll has all this power over the schools' football programs and I feel like they are not taking it seriously enough to show the proper respect that some schools deserve and freely giving respect to certain squads that don't necessarily deserve the respect that they are getting right now. In the BCS, it is all about the "right now" in performance of all the teams across the nation. What's your record right now? Did you win right now, or did you lose? How tough is your schedule right now? How tight did you play your most difficult games so far, or did you struggle against the weakest opponents? The Harris Poll was set up, in my kindergarten understanding of the poll, to help even out who has demonstrated quality football and to reward the teams that have done so and point out those teams who may seem over-rated in the other polls that have not demonstrated a justifiable higher ranking.

There are a couple "red flags" that make me question the integrity and validity of the Harris Poll, and we are a mere five weeks into the season. The first one I see is a 2-2 team at #20. Does it really matter what team it is? I don't think so. If you are a .500 team, do you really feel like you should be ranked in the top 25? This is so absurd! There are teams that are in the six major conferences that are 5-0 and 4-0 that are ranked lower that the 2-2 team. Is this for real? Does this really demonstrate an un-biased look at the top teams in the nation? Anyone who knows what a statistic is when they see it, knows that a 2-2 team has NOT demonstrated themselves better than a 5-0 team. Obviously, the voters in the Harris Poll have yet to see a statistic, which is very frightening for those teams that had to go 5-0 to get a glimpse into the top 25's elite status because it is apparent that it's not what you've done on the field, but who you are and what you've done in the past and what is expected from you by your alumni. Now, if this particular 2-2 team went on to win the rest of their games to finish 11-2, then I can see a top 20 showcase, but this early on, I have to suspect some foul play going on. Either that, or the voters for this very powerful Harris Poll are just not paying attention to college football and the games that were played the week prior because it just doesn't make sense.

Another "red flag" of inadequacy of voters who supposedly are not biased, is the fact that Florida is #1 with the schedule they have played so far. Really?!? Two conference games, yes, but against unranked teams (one had just lost to a Pac-10 team the week before (gasp!)). The other two wins were against Troy (no, not the USC Trojans - just Troy Trojans) and the well-known (sarcasm) Charleston Southern! Is that so impressive to put a team at #1? I'm confused. Why wouldn't an Alabama team be #1 instead? They have actually played teams that are significant this year, and won those games. Even the undefeated Iowa squad has played a more difficult schedule than the Gators, but they find themselves at #11. Is it really so hard to look at things at an unbiased view to get it correct "right now"? Of course the rankings will change as the teams' records change with some ranked teams losing and some teams improving throughout the year. I can't stress the "right now" enough. My Harris Poll would look completely weird compared to the AP and Coaches' polls, especially knowing that I had all that power over the outcome of the fate of so many teams in the nation. I would take it totally serious and think things through and take everything into account before I followed the previous week's AP Poll standings. Until the Harris Poll voters get it right to correct the BCS just a little bit of the flawd system, then the Harris Poll will be nothing but superfluous!