Blog Entry

The Poll Attacks

Posted on: January 11, 2010 8:01 pm
Edited on: January 11, 2010 8:12 pm
 

Purdue slipped from fourth to sixth in the latest rankings.

But don't worry, Boilermaker fans, I've got your back.

(Seriously, I've got your back on this.)

Let's Poll Attack!

AP poll: I learned my lesson about constantly picking on one voter when I focused three weeks of Poll Attacks on Roger Clarkson's decision to rank Pitt. As you know, Pitt has since proved to be awesome. Which made me look stupid (even though I was right at the time I was filing the Poll Attacks , but I digress). Anyway, I subsequently decided to spread the Poll Attacks around, be an equal opportunity basher of AP voters. And I'm telling you that because I know this is going to look like I'm targeting Gary Horowitz from Oregon again, but that really wasn't my intent.

Honest to God, all I did was look at the AP poll.

I saw somebody ranked Florida.

And I said, "Who the %$&# ranked Florida?"

Naturally, I looked.

And when I saw it was Gary Horowitz, I just shook my head.

Yes, the same guy who ranked Oregon last week ranked Florida this week, and this one might actually make less sense. Florida is 11-4 with two good wins (Michigan State on a neutral and Florida State at home), one reasonable loss (Syracuse on a neutral), one somewhat reasonable loss (at Vanderbilt), and two terrible losses (Richmond on a neutral and South Alabama at home). Beyond that, the Gators needed a 75-foot shot to beat N.C. State, and the loss to Vanderbilt just happened. So I'm not sure how that body of work is worthy of a Top 25 vote.

Is Florida terrible?

Absolutely not.

But there are plenty of teams not on Horowitz's ballot that should be considered before Florida.

Like Vanderbilt, for starters.

That said, I won't be surprised if Florida beats Kentucky Tuesday night.

Please, make note of that.

But that's Tuesday night, and this is Monday.

And it's difficult to justify ranking Florida on this Monday with that body of work.

(UPDATE: The worst part of this, I just noticed, is that Horowitz didn't rank Florida last week. So when the Gators were 11-3, he had them unranked. But when they dropped to 11-4 with a loss at Vanderbilt, he decided to rank them 24th. Again, Florida entered his ballot after a loss at Vanderbilt, and nothing else. Yes, that really happened. Yes, this is why I do the Poll Attacks .)

Coaches poll: I might never know how I got so crossed with Purdue fans, and I'm not sure they're ever going to understand me any more than I understand them on the subject of whether Purdue has the roster necessary to win a national title. At this point, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree because, honestly, I'm just tired.

But before I take a nap please allow me to -- ready for this? -- defend Purdue.

(Come back to me, Boilermaker fans!)

No way should Purdue have dropped from fourth to sixth in the Coaches poll for losing at Wisconsin.

Almost everybody loses at Wisconsin.

So why should the Boilermakers be punished for not winning at a place nearly everybody loses, particularly when you look at their entire body of work? To date, Purdue has wins over No. 9 West Virginia, No. 10 Tennessee, Wake Forest (receiving votes) and Minnesota (receiving votes). You know how many wins over Top 10 teams Villanova has? Zero. You know how many wins over Top 10 teams Syracuse has? Zero. And Villanova's one loss (at Temple) is clearly worse than Purdue's one loss (at Wisconsin), just like Syracuse's one lloss (at home to Pittsburgh) is clearly worse than Purdue's one loss (at Wisconsin).

And yet Villanova and Syracuse are ranked ahead of Purdue.

Makes no sense.

In all seriousness, you could make the case that, based on body of work, Purdue should actually be ranked ahead of Kansas, too. But I'm not about to start that debate. Like I said, I'm tired.
Comments

Since: Jan 12, 2010
Posted on: January 12, 2010 12:25 am
 

The Poll Attacks

Every year I hope for some team or somebody to disprove the three NBA players theory for a national championship, but trying to use the Spartan's Mateen Cleaves as an example doesn't work. I agree Cleaves was a bust as an NBA player, but there were three other players on that team who are playing in the NBA right now, they just weren't all obvious NBA talent during the national championship run. First there was Charlie Bell who went to Europe for a couple of years before being "discovered", Jason Richardson who was a freshman coming off the bench in 2000 and of course Morris Peterson.




Since: Dec 1, 2009
Posted on: January 11, 2010 11:44 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

Sorry Gary, I feel like you have been a bit of a scapegoat for the media in general about their lack of respect or even coverage on Purdue.  Agree on disagreeing is best for both sides when it comes to Purdue.  Funny thing is that say Purdue ends up winning a NC and that boosts draft stock enough that all three purdue juniors go pro and get drafted by the middle of the second round.  You would in that case be right.  And wrong.  And that is my only point.  Your reasoning can be undone.



Since: Dec 21, 2006
Posted on: January 11, 2010 11:20 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

I love the Poll Attacks.  Easily your best feature of the week.  And thanks for defending Purdue on the ranking thing.  (Even if it is early and not worth expending that much energy on.)  I almost feel like you read some of the sane fans posts.  Keep up the good work.  When's a Hummel, Kramer, or Keaton Granmt feature coming?  Especially the latter 2 being Purdue Seniors.  It'd be a cool story as you could chronicle the background of a 2 and 3 star player comign to a 9-win team and now being on a top 4 team.  I'm sure that would be goodd enough to kiss and make up with all the huffy (me included) Purdue fans.



Since: Feb 4, 2008
Posted on: January 11, 2010 11:04 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

Let me defend Parrish for a moment (yeah a Purdue fan defending Parrish...probably what he planned...).  Purdue has a better resume than the two teams that jumped them.  A better loss than both those teams and better wins than both those teams.  That deserves attacking.  If you are jumping one loss teams over one loss teams you better have a good reason and recency of losses isn't always a decent reason becasue cuse and nova would have trouble at UW too.



Since: Mar 18, 2009
Posted on: January 11, 2010 11:00 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

I don't understand how Mississippi State can beat a ranked Ole Miss on the road, have a better record than the Rebels, against a similar schedule and yet Ole Miss is still ranked and the Bulldogs only get some votes!!



Since: Jan 22, 2008
Posted on: January 11, 2010 10:20 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

I don't know how you can argue either for or against a team dropping two whole spots in the poll after losing the week prior.

If #1 plays #2 at this stage in the season and #2 eeks out a victory, it's not unheard of for #1 to drop to #3 the following week.  That's not even worth arguing about (i.e. attacking) at this stage in the season.  Yes, Wisconsin is a very tough place to get a road win (just as Duke), but didn't Kansas drop 2 spots after going on the road and losing to a Top 20 team this weekend?

Purdue is still #6 with the meat of conference play coming up.  Not even an argument. 


Jamammy3000
Since: May 11, 2009
Posted on: January 11, 2010 10:11 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Oct 12, 2006
Posted on: January 11, 2010 9:08 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

Gary, it's not that we Purdue fans are so hellbent on disagreeing with you for your most recent article that has us riled, it's how you went about proving it.  While I understand your argument, it's how you try to use any of this past weeks games as evidence I find contemptible.  You try to twist results to prove your argument.

Personally, I don't think you're necessarily wrong.  As a Purdue fan, I recognize we may not have the same pure NBA talent as some other teams, and it may hamper us when it matters most come March.  But to throw up some inane stat about 40 out of the last 41 teams to have won an NCAA championship had 3 NBA players, so that means it must be so in the future is just idiotic.  Throwing out a stat like that takes nothing else into consideration.

It doesn't consider that this year, one of the teams that "qualifies", UK has 3 clear NBA talents but they are all freshman.  It doesn't consider that this year parity is such, it might be a year that a defensive minded, team oriented team (like Purdue) might suprise people.  It doesn't take into account how rare it is for a team like Purdue to have it's top 3 players (Moore, Hummell, & Johnson) have all started and played together for 3 straight years together. 

Last, it doesn't take into account the laziness of lumping all players either NBA or non-NBA.  Heck, the 2003 Orangemen, the 1 team that didn't have 3 NBA players, but one of the key players, Jerry McNamara was a much better college player than 90% of most future NBA players.  Perhaps Chris Kramer or E'tuan Moore fit that mold, but if you listen to your argument, you're either NBA or non-NBA. 

Also, some of the teams that have won the NCAA title have had players that turn out to be lousy NBA players that were given more of a shot solely because of their college team's success.  Not to denigrate the following players, but Mateen Cleeves, Juan Dixon and Sean May have been largely NBA busts for one reason or another.  Had they played for a mid major team like TCU or Charlotte that was perhaps a bubble team, it's likely they might not even have been drafted.  I'm not sure if any of Purdue's players are considered "NBA" quality according to experts.  However, I guarantee if they win the NCAA title this year, NBA teams will be 100 times more likely to give players like Hummell & Moore a better shot.

What's most offensive about your article however was the timing.  It was put up almost immediately after the Wisconsin loss, and had an "I told you so" feel about it.  They were 14-0, ranked #4 in the country, and you hadn't posted an article about them thus far, and then came out with this beauty this past weekend.

Had you just stated your original premise, that you doesn't feel Purdue will hold up with the top 3 at the end of the year based solely on your perception of their talent, I don't think you would have illicited any of the ire from Purdue's fan base.  Sadly, I might have to agree with you, I'm worried UK will be next to unbeatable by March.  It's the way you tried to contort facts to support your argument & the timing of his article that makes us question your motives.



Since: Oct 2, 2006
Posted on: January 11, 2010 8:18 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

Dont hate the names respeckt the games.Smile



Since: Sep 4, 2006
Posted on: January 11, 2010 8:06 pm
 

The Poll Attacks

"Yes, the ranked Florida this week, and this one might actually make less sense. "

See this was my point last week about homers. Sure it's stupid but at least that kind of stupidity makes sense. Ranking a team you have no connection with makes less sense than ranking an undeserving team you're at least a fan of. Homers are better in comparisson to flat out idiots. At least Homers have a reason for their stupidity.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com