Ballot Type: Human
Submitted: Sept. 11, 2016, 8:47 p.m.
Overall Rationale: At this point, I'm still heavily reliant on expectations of where teams will be. This is partially what I saw, partially what I expect, and partially a hybrid of the two based on a mental range of expectations. UGA was a perfect example of a team I expected more from.
Rank | Team | Reason |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
No change (NC): At this point, they are still the best. They let their feet off the gas a bit, and it didn't affect them in the slightest. |
2 |
![]() |
NC: Tulsa was a sneaky possible trap, and they slammed that trap door shut. |
3 |
![]() |
NC: Keep it up, win out, and they are in the playoffs over 11-1 teams. |
4 |
![]() |
+1 (improved 1): Bye bye bye (bye bye). |
5 |
![]() |
+2: They don't have the cachet of Stanford yet, but are looking mighty good. |
6 |
![]() |
NC: A disturbingly weak tailgate vs Charleston Southern doesn't adversely affect them. |
7 |
![]() |
+2: Float, but with the consideration that they beat Iowa State. |
8 |
![]() |
NC: Another shellacking of a terrible team. I believe they are for-real, but I'm not ready to crown them B1G Champions just yet. |
9 |
![]() |
+3: Lamar Jackson is very good, but I feel like he's going to be Kenny Trill 2K16. |
10 |
![]() |
-6: They are off to a VERY slow start. Nobody believed me last week when I argued that they were underperforming expectations. They *should* rebound, but they are here until then. |
11 |
![]() |
+2: Alright, Akron isn't good, but the Badgers have offense again. |
12 |
![]() |
-1: Float - Unimpressive win over a transition-year VT, nothing special. |
13 |
![]() |
+3: I was high on them last week. I ranked the Huskers 16th, vs an /r/CFB ranking of 32nd. I'm just going to brag briefly about them getting a huge win over Wyoming, which, while not a world-beater, is no slouch. They can run over everybody. |
14 |
![]() |
+1: Bye/float. |
15 |
![]() |
+2: Prairie View sucks. |
16 |
![]() |
NR->16: Pitt wasn't even on my radar last week, out of my top 30. They showed real grit, and had flashes of brilliance. |
17 |
![]() |
+5: I want to brag again - I had them at 22 last week, 7 spots ahead of where /r/cfb put them. If you went by rankings, you had BYU as a 2-rank favorite, but I had Utah as a 3 rank favorite. It was the narrowest of margins, but I think I was ahead of the curve a touch. |
18 |
![]() |
NR->18: They have plenty of offense now, and Kentucky had no offense. Let's see if this rank sticks. |
19 |
![]() |
+2: UTEP is bad, but the Longhorns *might* be good. |
20 |
![]() |
NC: Nevada doesn't give a good bead on them - I think they are right to be favorites against MSU next week, but I can't rank them higher yet. |
21 |
![]() |
-7: Okay, one more brag...I wasn't impressed by their cohesion against UNC, and this week's miserable showing against Nicholls is proof that we need to be skeptical. I had them 6 spots behind the /r/cfb average, and I think this shows why. |
22 |
![]() |
-4: Not a judgement on their performance, more deserving teams became 2-0. |
23 |
![]() |
+1: UVA isn't good. |
24 |
![]() |
-5: See Oklahoma. |
25 |
![]() |
NR->25: I debated between them and Arkansas, but Arkansas didn't look good week 1. Besides, it's fun to get the Broncs in here! |
Teams Ranked:
Rank | Team | Unusualness |
---|---|---|
1 |
![]() |
0.00 |
2 |
![]() |
0.08 |
3 |
![]() |
0.04 |
4 |
![]() |
0.42 |
5 |
![]() |
0.71 |
6 |
![]() |
-0.31 |
7 |
![]() |
0.92 |
8 |
![]() |
0.00 |
9 |
![]() |
0.00 |
10 |
![]() |
0.00 |
11 |
![]() |
0.00 |
12 |
![]() |
0.02 |
13 |
![]() |
3.93 |
14 |
![]() |
0.00 |
15 |
![]() |
0.00 |
16 |
![]() |
2.43 |
17 |
![]() |
1.06 |
18 |
![]() |
0.32 |
19 |
![]() |
-0.88 |
20 |
![]() |
0.00 |
21 |
![]() |
0.00 |
22 |
![]() |
-0.25 |
23 |
![]() |
0.00 |
24 |
![]() |
0.00 |
25 |
![]() |
0.09 |
Omissions:
Team | Unusualness |
---|---|
![]() |
0.56 |
![]() |
0.39 |
![]() |
0.42 |
![]() |
0.30 |
Total Score: 13.13