# vote vote week 8 top 25 rankings



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

vote for your top 25, voting ends 11pm CDT Monday night


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

1. Kansas
2. Texas
3. Duke
4. Syracuse
5. West Virginia
6. Purdue
7. Kansas St.
8. Kentucky
9. Georgetown
10. BYU
11. Wisconsin
12. Villanova
13. New Mexico
14. California
15. Pittsburgh
16. Temple
17. Tennessee
18. Mississippi
19. Wake Forest
20. UConn
21. Georgia Tech
22. Michigan St.
23. Mississippi St.
24. Clemson
25. Missouri


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Duke-Clemson tonight. What you think, cool? Big affect on your rankings?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> Duke-Clemson tonight. What you think, cool? Big affect on your rankings?


Only if Duke loses. Can't imagine that would happen. I guess if Clemson gets annihilated I would take them out.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

so what now?

that clemson press didn't quite work the way it did last meeting


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

I moved Clemson down five spots - can't punish them too much since they weren't supposed to win. Duke has one heck of a team this year...they certainly look like a national championship contender to me.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

1. Kansas
2. Kentucky
3. Texas
4. Purdue
5. Duke
6. Syracuse
7. Kansas State
8. West Virginia
9. Villanova
10. Georgetown
11. UNC
12. Michigan State
13. BYU
13. Wisconsin
14. Mississippi
15. Tennessee
16. New Mexico 
17. UAB
18. Mississippi State
19. Florida State
20. Wake Forest
21. Temple
22. Clemson
23. California
24. USC
25. Pittsburgh

USC looking good right now with all their guys finally back to form


----------



## Willo (Nov 21, 2003)

Too bad they won't be playing this postseason.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Willo said:


> Too bad they won't be playing this postseason.


If you're talking about USC I disagree. The Pac 10 has to get two bids, and Arizona St. has just done a good job of taking themselves out, and Washington is looking like they want to go in that route as well after a home loss to Oregon. Despite a sluggish start, USC has won seven straight and started 2-0 in conference while beating tournament teams Tennessee and St. Mary's in that stretch. To say they definitely won't be dancing I think is overlooking the situation.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

coolpohle said:


> If you're talking about USC I disagree. The Pac 10 has to get two bids, and Arizona St. has just done a good job of taking themselves out, and Washington is looking like they want to go in that route as well after a home loss to Oregon. Despite a sluggish start, USC has won seven straight and started 2-0 in conference while beating tournament teams Tennessee and St. Mary's in that stretch. To say they definitely won't be dancing I think is overlooking the situation.


I think he's referring to the fact that they just yesterday imposed postseason bans on themselves for the whole Mayo deal.

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncb/news/story?id=4792634


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

1. Texas
2. Kansas
3. Duke
4. Purdue
5. Kentucky
6. Syracuse
7. West Virginia
8. Villanova
9. Georgetown
10. BYU
11. Kansas St.
12. Wisconsin
13. New Mexico
14. California
15. Pittsburgh
16. Temple
17. Tennessee
18. Mississippi
19. Wake Forest
20. UConn
21. Georgia Tech
22. Michigan St.
23. Mississippi St.
24. Clemson
25. Missouri

I really have no clue after the first 11 or 12, so i just copied your's, cool. I wanted to at least participate.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

cool, what's up with having Purdue below WVU when they just creamed them this week? I know it was a home game for the Boilermakers, but it was quite convincing! And Syracuse doesn't drop below Purdue either or a home loss to Pitt?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> I think he's referring to the fact that they just yesterday imposed postseason bans on themselves for the whole Mayo deal.
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/ncb/news/story?id=4792634


Okay, that's my bad. My apologies, willo. Thanks for the heads up TM.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> cool, what's up with having Purdue below WVU when they just creamed them this week? I know it was a home game for the Boilermakers, but it was quite convincing! And Syracuse doesn't drop below Purdue either or a home loss to Pitt?


I try and look at teams through the whole season, and to not over-react based on the most recent game. If that game is @ West Virginia, Purdue probably doesn't win.


----------



## BlueBaron (May 11, 2003)

1. Kentucky
2. Kansas
3. Purdue
4. Duke
5. Texas
6. Villanova
7. Georgetown
8. Kansas St.
9. BYU
10. Syracuse
11. West Virginia
12. Wisconsin
13. New Mexico
14. California
15. Pittsburgh
16. Ole Miss
17. Tennessee
18. Georgia Tech
19. Wake Forest
20. UConn
21. Temple
22. Michigan St.
23. Mississippi St.
24. Clemson
25. Missouri


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> I really have no clue after the first 11 or 12, so i just copied your's, cool. I wanted to at least participate.


Any list without UNC in the top 25 is fine with me.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

coolpohle said:


> I try and look at teams through the whole season, and to not over-react based on the most recent game. If that game is @ West Virginia, Purdue probably doesn't win.


I thought that's what all weekly polls were - an overreaction to a previous 7 day period. :laugh:

and i hadn't noticed that about UNC. i'm good with that too


----------



## Rainmaker203 (Nov 28, 2003)

1. Kansas
2. Texas
3. Kentucky
4. Purdue
5. Duke
6. Villanova
7. Syracuse
8. West Virginia
9. North Carolina
10. Michigan State
11. Kansas State
12. Georgetown
13. Wisconsin
14. New Mexico
15. Gonzaga
16. Ole Miss
17. Connecticut
18. Tennessee
19. Brigham Young
20. Temple
21. Texas A&M
22. Butler
23. Washington
24. Clemson
25. Northern Iowa


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

TM said:


> I thought that's what all weekly polls were - an overreaction to a previous 7 day period. :laugh:


lol, yeah the ESPN and coaches poll are exactly that...that's the good thing about doing your own poll. You can rank teams however you want.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Rain - why so high on Gonzaga? How can you rank them in the top 15 and not rank Wake Forest - a team they lost to at home.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

BlueBaron said:


> 1. Kentucky


You're such a homer, Bluebaron.


----------



## Willo (Nov 21, 2003)

1. Kansas
2. Texas
3. Purdue
4. Kentucky
5. Duke
6. West Virginia
7. Syracuse
8. Kansas State
9. Villanova
10. UNC
11. Georgetown
12. Temple
13. BYU
14. New Mexico
15. Wisconsin
16. UConn
17. Pittsburgh
18. Michigan State
19. Mississippi
20. Cornell
21. Tennessee
22. Gonzaga
23. Wake Forest
24. Butler
25. William & Mary


----------



## BlueBaron (May 11, 2003)

coolpohle said:


> You're such a homer, Bluebaron.


Well, you know I couldn't come with any reason not to have UK at #1. Kansas hasn't impressed me at all and Texas came a frog's hair to getting beat by Corpus Christie. So yes, UK is my #1.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Rain - why so high on Gonzaga? How can you rank them in the top 15 and not rank Wake Forest - a team they lost to at home.


AP and ESPN have us ranked at 18 and 19 respectively. Why do you find it so far fetched that a poster on a website has the Zags ranked a few spots higher. Aren't these polls subjective?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

zagsfan20 said:


> AP and ESPN have us ranked at 18 and 19 respectively. Why do you find it so far fetched that a poster on a website has the Zags ranked a few spots higher. Aren't these polls subjective?


I know what they're ranked in the AP and ESPN. If you have them at 18 - okay I suppose - no reason can you have them any higher. It also makes no sense to have them ranked 15th and leave Wake Forest who beat them on the Zags court unranked. Certainly they're subjective but it seems to me like he overlooked that. Granted, you never rank teams, so you have no reason to complain.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

And that's why UNC is not a top 25 team, yet alone a top 10 like many have them. And that's a College of Charleston team Clemson beat by 39.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

At this point probably not a top 25 team but C of C isn't as bad as you make them out to be, then again this damn sketchy teams will play against UNC like their lives depend on it and play other teams like the chumps they truly are. I mean really are teams like Cornell, William & Mary really better than UNC? Absolutely not.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> I know what they're ranked in the AP and ESPN. If you have them at 18 - okay I suppose - no reason can you have them any higher. It also makes no sense to have them ranked 15th and leave Wake Forest who beat them on the Zags court unranked. Certainly they're subjective but it seems to me like he overlooked that. Granted, you never rank teams, so you have no reason to complain.


That Wake Forest game was an anomaly. A lot of things that could have gone wrong happened, which I have already stated in a past thread. Wake is still a tournament team and I'd say we already have a better resume than all the other teams in the nation with the 3 losses. 

Then again, I suppose you can look at our perimeter D and automatically forfeit us from the any kind of rankings and heck even the NCAA tournament for that matter.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

HB said:


> At this point probably not a top 25 team but C of C isn't as bad as you make them out to be, then again this damn sketchy teams will play against UNC like their lives depend on it and play other teams like the chumps they truly are. I mean really are teams like Cornell, William & Mary really better than UNC? Absolutely not.


Get used to it. When you have a team deep with burger boys at every position, you are going to be the hunted.


----------



## Willo (Nov 21, 2003)

HB said:


> At this point probably not a top 25 team but C of C isn't as bad as you make them out to be, then again this damn sketchy teams will play against UNC like their lives depend on it and play other teams like the chumps they truly are. I mean really are teams like Cornell, William & Mary really better than UNC? Absolutely not.


C of C is awful. They are not only not among the top 25 teams in the country, but they aren't in the top 100 teams in the country.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

They played like their lives depended on it, I watched the game.


----------



## Willo (Nov 21, 2003)

It was their Super Bowl.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

HB said:


> At this point probably not a top 25 team but C of C isn't as bad as you make them out to be, then again this damn sketchy teams will play against UNC like their lives depend on it and play other teams like the chumps they truly are. I mean really are teams like Cornell, William & Mary really better than UNC? Absolutely not.


C of C is 8-6, one top 200 win, with a double digit loss to (gulp) Hawaii. They aren't good.

I don't have Cornell or William & Mary ranked, so I can't comment there.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

zagsfan20 said:


> That Wake Forest game was an anomaly. A lot of things that could have gone wrong happened, which I have already stated in a past thread. Wake is still a tournament team and I'd say we already have a better resume than all the other teams in the nation with the 3 losses.
> 
> Then again, I suppose you can look at our perimeter D and automatically forfeit us from the any kind of rankings and heck even the NCAA tournament for that matter.


Temple, Texas A&M, UConn, ect...all teams with better resumes and three losses. 

The Wake loss isn't a bad one, but being at home - if they're a top 15 team like you think, they don't lose that game. A 35 point drubbing by Duke tops it off.


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

1 Kansas
2 Texas
3 Purdue
4 Duke
5 Villanova
6 Syracuse
7 Kentucky
8 WVU
9 K-state
10 New Mexico
11 UNC
12 Michigan State
13 Georgetown
14 UCONN
15 Ole Miss
16 Tennessee
17 Washington
18 Pitt
19 Clemson
20 Texas Tech
21 Wisconsin
22 BYU
23 Georgia Tech
24 Texas A&M 
25 Florida State


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

BlueBaron said:


> Well, you know I couldn't come with any reason not to have UK at #1. Kansas hasn't impressed me at all and Texas came a frog's hair to getting beat by Corpus Christie. So yes, UK is my #1.



kansas made a look too easy vs a top 25 team


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

HB said:


> At this point probably not a top 25 team but C of C isn't as bad as you make them out to be, then again this damn sketchy teams will play against UNC like their lives depend on it and play other teams like the chumps they truly are. I mean really are teams like Cornell, William & Mary really better than UNC? Absolutely not.


ku plays cornell wed


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Temple, Texas A&M, UConn, ect...all teams with better resumes and three losses.
> 
> The Wake loss isn't a bad one, but being at home - if they're a top 15 team like you think, they don't lose that game. A 35 point drubbing by Duke tops it off.


UCONN lost to the same Cincinnati team that we beat. Our Wisconsin win is just as good as any win that Texas A&M has. But I agree they have a comparable resume, but I still give wins against Wisconsin, Maryland, Cincinnati, Illinois and Washington St. over A&M's two decent wins against Minnesota and Clemson. Temple beat Nova, but their other wins are against pretty average competition. They beat a yet to be exposed Seton Hall team and a pretty decent Penn St. team.

Wisconsin, Maryland, Cincinnati, Illinois and Washington St (maybe not, Pac 10 will determine that one). Are all better wins than those teams have. Heck are losses against Mich. St on the road and that drubbing by Duke were two games that we weren't supposed to win with a young team.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

zagsfan20 said:


> UCONN lost to the same Cincinnati team that we beat. Our Wisconsin win is just as good as any win that Texas A&M has. But I agree they have a comparable resume, but I still give wins against Wisconsin, Maryland, Cincinnati, Illinois and Washington St. over A&M's two decent wins against Minnesota and Clemson. Temple beat Nova, but their other wins are against pretty average competition. They beat a yet to be exposed Seton Hall team and a pretty decent Penn St. team.
> 
> Wisconsin, Maryland, Cincinnati, Illinois and Washington St (maybe not, Pac 10 will determine that one). Are all better wins than those teams have. Heck are losses against Mich. St on the road and that drubbing by Duke were two games that we weren't supposed to win with a young team.


Maryland, Cincinnati, Illinois, and Washington St. are not tournament teams. That leaves Wisconsin (consensus #20 or so) as their only tournament quality victory. No, you weren't supposed to beat Duke - you also weren't supposed to lose by 35. You also were supposed to beat Wake on your home court.

You say UConn lost to the same Cincinnati team you beat. Well, UConn lost to them by two on the road, while you beat Cincinnati in OT on a neutral court. That's a pretty weak argument. And if you want to take it a step further, UConn kept it within single digits against Duke.

Texas A&M has two tournament quality wins versus Gonzaga's one.

Let's re-visit this in a week and a half. You said that the Zags won't lose any more regular season games. They have two difficult games in their next two (@ Portland, @ St. Mary's). I'd bet a large sum they lose at least one of those games.


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

TM said:


> 1. Texas
> 2. Kansas
> 3. Duke
> 4. Purdue
> ...


thanks TM that making my job easier to tally


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Maryland, Cincinnati, Illinois, and Washington St. are not tournament teams. That leaves Wisconsin (consensus #20 or so) as their only tournament quality victory. No, you weren't supposed to beat Duke - you also weren't supposed to lose by 35. You also were supposed to beat Wake on your home court.
> 
> You say UConn lost to the same Cincinnati team you beat. Well, UConn lost to them by two on the road, while you beat Cincinnati in OT on a neutral court. That's a pretty weak argument. And if you want to take it a step further, UConn kept it within single digits against Duke.
> 
> ...


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

They haven't won them both yet. 

You say I'm full of crap. At least I post something unrelated to Gonzaga. 

And just as a side note - St. Mary's was a 4.5 point favorite over your Zags for tonight's game. Looks like Vegas seems to agree with me.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> They haven't won them both yet.


I just wanted to make you aware of this game.

I love that hard foul that Sacre just put on Samhan's big oafy ***.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Elias Harris:
Best footwork for a big in the nation.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Of course I'm aware of this game. I'm also aware that top 25 teams don't get nearly doubled up by an opponent or beat Portland by only three.


----------



## Willo (Nov 21, 2003)

coolpohle said:


> Of course I'm aware of this game. I'm also aware that top 25 teams don't get nearly doubled up by an opponent or beat Portland by only three.


Uhm, they beat Minnesota.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Of course I'm aware of this game. I'm also aware that top 25 teams don't get nearly doubled up by an opponent or beat Portland by only three.


How many top 25 teams have the balls to go to the Chiles Center and play Portland? Gonzaga has to play Portland at the Chiles Center. Let your superior knowledge shine through though.

I remember that N. Carolina team the year they won the title with Marvin Williams got beat by Santa Clara. **** happens, especially with 18-22 year olds.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Willo said:


> Uhm, they beat Minnesota.


They've also lost by 20 to (gulp) Idaho.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

zagsfan20 said:


> How many top 25 teams have the balls to go to the Chiles Center and play Portland? Gonzaga has to play Portland at the Chiles Center. Let your superior knowledge shine through though.
> 
> I remember that N. Carolina team the year they won the title with Marvin Williams got beat by Santa Clara. **** happens, especially with 18-22 year olds.


Ummm...they're in the same conference as Portland...so they have to play them on the road. You made that one too easy!

Did UNC lose by 35?


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

coolpohle said:


> Ummm...they're in the same conference as Portland...so they have to play them on the road. You made that one too easy!
> 
> Did UNC lose by 35?


That's why I said I said Gonzaga *has* to play Portland. Like as in they have to, there's no choice. Come on, quit being so dense.

No top 25 caliber team is going to schedule Portland on their OOC schedule. 

UNC didn't lose by 35, but Santa Clara didn't even make the tournament. In fact I think they ended up 4th in the WCC that year.

I have a weird feeling your losing money on the Zags latetly.


----------



## zagsfan20 (Dec 24, 2004)

Meanwhile, this game is turning into a blowout. I'm sure thats another notch on the resume belt.


----------



## Willo (Nov 21, 2003)

zagsfan20 said:


> Meanwhile, this game is turning into a blowout. I'm sure thats another notch on the resume belt.


Never be too quick to call one like that. More so when you're on the road.

And cool, doesn't that just show that Portland is a hot and cold team that can beat you or give you a good game on any given night?


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

zagsfan20 said:


> I have a weird feeling your losing money on the Zags latetly.


I actually debated taking the points last night but decided to pass. I'll give them credit - they won a pair of road games in which case I thought they would lose one. I'm still not sold on them, but they do have a variety of weapons.


----------



## coolpohle (Dec 28, 2006)

Willo said:


> Never be too quick to call one like that. More so when you're on the road.
> 
> And cool, doesn't that just show that Portland is a hot and cold team that can beat you or give you a good game on any given night?


A lot of teams can beat you on a given night. Especially ones with good offenses and crappy defenses.


----------

