UCLA being in the top 20 of both polls makes no sense.
And how did the AP voters shun Minnesota?
Here come the Poll Attacks .
AP poll: More than half of the AP voters -- i.e., too many to name -- didn't include Minnesota on their ballots.
That means more than half of the AP voters missed badly on Minnesota.
Seriously, what's the deal?
The Golden Gophers are 17-3 overall with wins against No. 7 Louisville, Wisconsin and Ohio State. Furthermore, none of their losses (to Michigan State, Purdue and at Northwestern) are bad considering all three of the schools that beat Minnesota are ranked in the top 40 at CollegeRPI.com.
Is that body of work not better than No. 21 Villanova's body of work? The Wildcats have one top 50 win (Minnesota has three) and four total losses (Minnesota has three). Is that body of work not better than No. 22 Saint Mary's body of work? The Gaels have no top 50 wins (Minnesota has three) and a loss to a school well outside the top 50 (No. 99 UTEP). Is that body of work not better than No. 23 Washington's body of work? The Huskies have two top 50 wins (Minnesota has three) and four total losses (Minnesota has three), including one to a school well outside the top 50 (No. 125 Portland).
I'd argue Minnesota should be ranked ahead of each of those schools.
Which is why I ranked Minnesota ahead of each of those schools.
Anyway, like I said, there are too many AP voters who didn't rank Minnesota to list them all. But because you guys like it when I single-out voters (or at least you tell me you like it), what I did was click on the very first voter on the alphabetical list who didn't vote for Minnesota and examined his ballot.
His name is Andrew Aragon.
He works at the Deseret Morning News in Utah.
He has Washington, Saint Mary's and Villanova (the three schools I referenced above) ranked 16th, 18th and 20th.
He has UCLA ranked 19th.
And now I'll explain why that's crazy, too.
Coaches poll: The 16th-ranked team in the Coaches poll is UCLA, and I understand why, I guess. It's because UCLA has some talented players (Darren Collison, Jrue Holiday, etc.) and Ben Howland has proved worthy of the benefit of the doubt. But at some point voters should care about results more than anything else, and there's no way to rank UCLA 16th (or even 25th, honestly) if you're paying attention to results.
Don't believe me?
Just look at UCLA's body of work ...
-- UCLA --
Overall record: 15-4
Record against the Top 25 at CollegeRPI.com: 0-1
Record against the Top 50 at CollegeRPI.com: 1-4
Record against the Top 100 at CollegeRPI.com: 4-4
Now I ask: Does that look like the body of work of a team that should be ranked 16th?
Or 19th?
Or 25th?
I mean, more than half of the season is over and UCLA's best win is against Miami-Ohio! So while I agree that the Bruins have potential and could be a team to watch in March, they've done nothing in November, December or January to deserve the ranking they got on this Monday. Put another way, the coaches goofed this up. But to their credit they have Minnesota ranked 24th. So if nothing else, they're doing better than the AP voters, at least this week.
Subscribe to this blog
