BlogPoll Calling: Week Six Ballot Submitted

…I’ve always been very honest about the fact that personal bias plays a big part in who I throw in at the bottom, just like two weeks ago I had TAMU in instead of Auburn (or any of the other unbeatens that were left out) because, given a choice between undefeated teams that I didn’t really think had done anything so far, I go with the one that employs Joe Kines.

I put in Auburn last week for the same reason I put in Mizzou and Wisconsin; they hadn’t done anything overly impressive yet, but they were undefeated. Maybe having the Beavers in my ballot is a bad decision (it was based purely on beating a Stanford team that I was impressed with), but I’d more likely have left Mizzou in (only loss to a very good Nebraska team) than Auburn. I’d rather give them a vote than give an Auburn team one that a) had one of the least impressive 5-0 runs to start the season and b) performed exactly like everyone expected them to once they hit a team with a competent QB/offense and a defense with a little bit of a pulse (and yes, Tennessee’s D has a pulse, but Crompton was exceedingly Crompton-esque in that game and had he performed like he did against UGA, that would have been Auburn’s first loss).

As for UAB and CMU, yeah, personal bias sympathy votes (though I’ll put CMU’s win over Michigan State against Auburn’s win over UT any day), but even if you take those two out, you can still make a solid argument for ranking Wisconsin (only loss to Ohio State), and Notre Dame (only loss to a decent Michigan team) in their places ahead of Auburn. Or if you want to stick with the Mid-Majors, Tulsa, Utah, BYU, Houston (who definitely wet themselves at UTEP but still have TWO quality wins over Big 12 opponents), and Idaho are all one loss teams as well.

If you want me to admit that personal bias plays too big of a role in some of my selections, then no problem. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, and every week from here to the end of the season because it does. But you can’t say I’m not being rational about Auburn unless you mean “you’re rationale doesn’t jibe with mine.”

There are teams who have resumes that definitively command a top-25 ranking, no excuses. However, there are many other teams out there whose case is much more shaky, and they can legitimately be left out. It’s clear to me that Auburn does not have a resume currently indicative of a team that definitively commands a top-25 ranking, period.

Now, I am not saying — nor have I ever said — that Auburn should not be ranked, nor have I ever said that I personally would not rank them. Keep in mind I do not have a Blogpoll vote, so I’m not on the record one way or the other. However, what I am saying is that Auburn has not done enough to date to where an Auburn fan could have a legitimate complaint if someone does not have them in their top 25. Auburn is a bubble team that could legitimately go one way or the other, end of story.

And you can cry crimson homerism all you want, but it’s not going to fly. If it were just crimson homerism then you guys would be ranked everywhere else, which you are not. Then how do you explain everyone else leaving you out, considering that 98% of voters couldn’t give two shits about Auburn one way or the other. Pretty much the only way you can do it is if you say that the 98% of the voters are stupid and incompetent, and that the few ’Bama voters are just biased homers incapable of correctly evaluating Auburn.

It’s a weak argument either way you go about it. Again, Auburn is a bubble team that could go either way, and a “fair” ranking probably has them somewhere around 22nd to 27th.

And I’ll also add as a final point that if you think you can definitely make such sound, concrete judgments about the differences between teams that closely grouped, then frankly you need to stop shooting the shit with me and Todd and head off for Vegas. If you can do that, I can guarantee you that you will be retired and on a beach in Tahiti by Christmas.