In the meantime, though, I caught up with the latest Top 25 rankings. The biggest change was Georgia's drop to No. 3 after "only" beating South Carolina 14-7. This is starting to get ridiculous- the Gamecocks are a bitter rival and were playing at home, so it's pretty obvious they're going to play the Bulldogs tough to the end. This is the second time Georgia's fallen in the rankings despite winning. It makes absolutely no sense to me, and I don't care how badly Oklahoma beat Washington. They really didn't do much more to leapfrog Georgia!
But, I'm getting ahead of myself.
The real reason why I'm posting the rankings is because Ball State earned votes in both polls: One in the AP and two in the Coaches' Poll. Granted, coach Brady Hoke could've put one of those votes in, but it brings up another interesting observation.
Ball State is 3-0 after beating Northeastern, Navy and Akron pretty handily. And outside of next week's game at Indiana, the Cardinals really don't play any teams that are much better than those guys until CMU. I suppose one could make a case for the game at Toledo in a few weeks, but BSU is still a favorite in that matchup and it doesn't get Western until after that. You heard it here first: Ball State will enter its Nov. 19 game at CMU with a 9-1 record or better and a Top 25 ranking in either or both polls.
The tradeoff for the Cardinals is that they don't get the same amount of money as a team like Central because they really didn't schedule any tough opponents. This is their non-conference schedule: Northeastern (of the FCS), Navy (at home), at Indiana and Western Kentucky (which becomes a full-blown FBS school next year). Compare that to CMU, who also gets Indiana, but faces Georgia and Purdue, too, for almost an extra $1 million in their athletic department.
Should Central have taken a similar path in scheduling easier non-conference foes and having a better chance at a two-loss season or better? Tough to say. A couple of coworkers and I discussed it on the way home from Ohio last night. CMU makes more money playing a Georgia than an Indiana, but obviously has a lower chance of winning and a higher chance of getting blown out and losing all Top 25 consideration. Sure, people weren't expecting much else out of Central against Georgia, but you really cannot look at it as, "Well, it's not so bad because people expected you to lose." People expect CMU to lose to both Purdue and Indiana, too, anyway!
I think the way CMU scheduled its non-conference foes is a good balance between healthy competition for the Chippewas and making sure the athletic department earns money. But I don't think they should keep scheduling teams like Georgia. What would've been better is a decent team outside of a BCS conference - for example, Fresno State. What would've been perfect is a Pittsburgh, a Syracuse or even a Rutgers out of the Big East. The payout probably isn't as high, but at least a 3-1 non-conference record or better is a possibility rather than a near-impossibility in Georgia.
After all, it's Butch Jones that wants a Top 25 team, right? That's not going to happen with a Top 5 team on your schedule. In the MAC, you need room to lose one or two good, close games, and CMU really doesn't have it if it wants a ranking.
Feel free to comment on what you think. I do thank those of you that do leave comments, I hope you continue to do so! My biggest goal is to make this a nice, open forum where a few people can discuss issues involving CMU and the MAC. Fire away!
No comments:
Post a Comment