On the Huskies being ranked
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 21, 2009 7:29 PM PDT
Email
PrintI'll be the first to admit that I thought Washington had as near to a zero chance of beating USC as there was. With all the talking heads predicting such a close game, I just didn't see it -- I really thought the Trojans were about the worst possible matchup for the Huskies: Power running game to blow away UW's defenders, ridiculous team speed on defense to limit UW's smallish but fast offensive players.
To some extent, I was right -- USC did have 250 yards on the ground and the Huskies had 230 yards total before that final drive.
But, I most certainly was wrong about Washington being able to stay close. I really thought a blowout was in the offing, but what I couldn't have possibly predicted was that Aaron Corp would be that bad, and that the Huskies would be able to force three turnovers without giving the ball away themselves. When a team is as one-dimensional as the Trojans were -- I think it has as much to do with USC clearly having no confidence in Corp as it did with anything UW was doing against the pass -- it's a lot easier to stop them (assuming you have the athletes to do so, which Washington clearly does).
As they say, that's why the play the game. Washington earned that win, and deserves almost all the accolades they're receiving right now.
Except one.
No way on earth should they be ranked right now.
Here's what that ranking is based on: A closer-than expected loss to LSU (which traveled 3,000 miles with an inexperienced squad, and only looked that close because of a late touchdown), a blowout win over Idaho (who doesn't blowout the Vandals? They're 0-9 and have been outscored 388-120 in the last five years against BCS competition), and a last-second upset over USC (without their starting quarterback and with three turnovers).
All at home.
That's not to minimize their accomplishment. I would kill to be in their spot right now. But I think calling them one of the 25 best teams in the country is gross over exaggeration at this point -- either that, or the teams floating around 25 are all so mediocre that Washington is as good a pick as any.
But even that doesn't hold water. For hilarity, check this out at pollspeak. No fewer than 10 -- 10! -- writers voted the Huskies in their top 15. Guess how many of them had the Huskies ranked in their top 25 after week three? The win over USC convinced this guy that the Huskies, not one of his top 25 teams the week before, are the 10th best team in the country. (I'm guessing he didn't see anything but the highlights and final score, since he was a little preoccupied with Florida/Tennessee, being contested at the same time.)
Insanity.
I understand the argument for putting them in the 20-25 range, but I'm just not ready to give them even that honor until they show me they can go on the road and beat someone. If they beat Stanford this weekend, I'll be convinced. But they've got to show me something away from a rocking Husky Stadium to feel like they're truly one of the top 25 teams in the country.
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The polls are always nutty
Don’t forget this game was uber hyped nationally. I wonder if a lot of media / coaches feel that some of USC’s power (so to speak) went to UW when the coaches abandoned ship. Also, UW kept it close against THE ALMIGHTY SEC! Although LSU is ranked Top 10 right now…
Now, we rational Coug fans know a lot of this is about hype. Probably if you polled the Pac 10 blogosphere we would all agree that UW being ranked is a bit of a stretch. I’m actually slightly more inclined to say that UCLA should be in the Top 25, considering they won AT Tennessee more impressively than Florida just did. That said, UW will have its chance to prove it belongs up there, and it’s too early in the season for me to really care about the polls.
Thanks to Pollspeak from seasons past, I’m long past the point of being surprised or outraged about individual voters. I guess it matters more in football than other sports because the polls help determine the bowl games, but it’s not like a few random crazies voting UW top 15 really matter in the end.
I'm with you
But 10? TEN!?!?! That’s more than a few random crazies.
I just don’t understand how a team that didn’t even get ONE top 25 vote the previous week could be a top 15 team the next week. That just defies logic.
But, like you said, nothing surprises anyone who has watched these polls in the past.
USC
as usual – the national sports media overrated usc.
maybe willarose means that they saw beating USC as a bigger deal than it is
Back to the original point, going through the voters one by one reveals that not all of them are totally out there. Steve Conroy from the Boston Herald has a pretty sensible poll. If you just look at it like “UW lost a close game to a top 10 team, beat a top 10 team, and blew out a team they were supposed to beat,” then it’s not too unreasonable. Though obviously if you look more closely it’s a reach to say top 15.
But then there are people like Bob Asmussen that somehow decide UW is one spot better than USC but Ohio State is eight places higher than UW. HMMMMMMMMM
by johnnycougar on Sep 22, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't find it much of a stretch at all
A lot of the teams ahead of them haven’t done anything and are just riding preseason hype. Wouldn’t we as Cougs be outraged if we just knocked of a top 3 team to improve to 2-1 and not crack the polls? Top 15 is a bit high, but some voters love strength of schedule and there’s not too many teams out there that have gone 1-1 verses top 15 teams.
Three games at home
That’s all I’ve got to say. That’s not to discredit what they’ve done, but … show me something on the road.
Besides
This early in the season, it’s almost ALL preseason hype anyway. It’s the reason why I don’t think they should release a poll until about the fourth or fifth week of the season.
I agree with that - I hate preseason polls
…but if UW beats Stanford on the road this week, do you rank them then?
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
Condotta's drinking the purple Kool-Aid
Had the Huskies at 24th.
I still don’t understand how you could also rank them ahead of a decent Oregon team, whose only loss is to a top ten team (Boise St.), beat a decent Utah team and a decent Purdue team. That’s two credible FBS wins compared to Washington’s one.
Couldn't agree more
Again, not to take anything away from their accomplishments, but 10!?!? Johnnycougar stole my thunder, too, because I was thinking UCLA when I looked at his ballot. I’d be more likely to put UCLA in the top 25 after 3 wins, one of which was all the way across the country in Rocky Top holy-crap-out-loudness. This guy doesn’t rank them at ALL, but has the Huskies at 10?
by TiltingRight on Sep 21, 2009 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions
You see - that's crimson colored glasses right there.
The reason UW is ranked is because of the results (LSU is far superior to BSU) AND the stats. The UW has the 20th ranked QB in the nation on passing efficiency (which is correlated with W’s in college football), they are a top 5 team in third down conversions which is amazing given that they’ve played two of the top defenses in the nation, they have a positive turnover ratio, and they have demonstrated balance in their national rankings in both run/pass offense and run/pass defense.
These are the keys that pollsters look at beyond the names on the schedule.
BTW, Oregon does not stand up very well when you look at some of these key stats. And, if you’ve watched them play the games (and if you are a serious football fan) you would have to conclude that they look like one of the worst teams in the conference.
If WSU played Oregon at Martin tomorrow, I’m not sure that I wouldn’t pick WSU to cover.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
I more or less agree with you, Gekko -- especially with regards to Oregon
But I wish you all would stop hanging your hats on that LSU game. Yes, the Huskies looked far better than most thought they would, but if not for a very late TD, that’s a two-TD loss — which I’m sure is a fact lost on most East Coast writers, since they were asleep when that game ended.
Also, you’ve got three turnovers in three games. Do you really think a team that turned the ball over 27 times last year has improved that much at hanging onto the ball? Coaching can’t do all of that. There’s inevitably going to be some regression there. I don’t think you’ll get to 27, since some of that had to do with QB play last year, but there’s going to be some regression.
Oh, and if you think pollsters actually analyze those kinds of stats … well, you haven’t spent very much time around sports writers.
but Nuss...
they only lost to LSU by a touchdown (and a two-point conversion). People on the east coast just wake up and see the score, they don’t care to know that LSU controlled the game for the majority of the second half and the only reason it was within 8 was because they handed UW a touchdown at the end of the game.
If anything, UW being ranked 24th goes to show you that UW-homers are partially correct in saying that they still are a nationally respected program. Not sure how a championship from 20 years ago keeps you fresh in everybody’s mind, but I guess it does. Wonder if SMU beat us if they would have been ranked?
by LeaveItToWeaver on Sep 21, 2009 10:59 PM PDT reply actions
haha!
Nusser can read me like a Michael Crichton novel.
by LeaveItToWeaver on Sep 22, 2009 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, check that...
this is Nusser we are talking about – John Feinstein novel.
by LeaveItToWeaver on Sep 22, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Some other teams who have yet to play a road game:
Florida, Penn State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Michigan
Alabama and Virginia Tech have both played all home games and a neutral field game.
I see your point Nuss but it’s hard to hold it against them when nearly 1/3 of ranked teams are in the same boat.
No doubt anyone who put them inside the top 20 should probably have their poll revoked, but I don’t really see any teams more deserving of a spot in the 21-25 range.
http://www.spartyandfriends.com/
by thecassino on Sep 22, 2009 9:16 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
This gets back to my earlier point on early season rankings
We just shouldn’t have them. Because you’re right. But since we do, all we have to go off of right now is perception. We “know” Florida and Penn State are good, and we “think” Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are good. I’m not sure why people think Michigan is all that, other than the fact that they’re Michigan, after watching Notre Dame nearly lose to Michigan State at home, but whatever.
The point is, all we really have to go off of is perception. And my perception — as was most people’s — heading into the season was that while the Huskies would be improved from that 0-12 debacle, they certainly had a long way to go to be a top 25 team. To have that perception changed so drastically based off of a game that wasn’t as close as the final score made it look, a game that was rightfully lopsided, and an upset over a team without its starting quarterback … all at home, which I think is huge … it just seems a little irresponsible to me.
by Jeff Nusser on Sep 22, 2009 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions
Well if UW loses to Stanford...
There is probably a pretty good chance that the voters will simply right UW off as a mistake, and no longer rank them in the top 25.
Stanford is favored to win in that game by the odds makers.
I’m not sure why people think Michigan is all that, other than the fact that they’re Michigan
I think you hit the nail on the head with that one, the reason Washington gets a top 25 ranking is simply because they are UW, with all the tradition that goes with it. Think about Florida, Penn State and Oklahoma not very long ago, (kinda like UW, or Nebraska, or FSU today) traditional powers that went through a few years of slump. These sports writers WANT u-dub to be a great program again. Alas as much as I (a die hard duck fan) and I’m sure everyone on this blog don’t like it, it appears the Huskies are back for now at least.
I for one would LOVE to see the Furd make the Dawgs lay a great big Turd, in Palo Alto.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
