Because They Were Better Last Year
Earlier this week the IRT asked Stewrat Mandel of Sports Illustrated to explain something to us:
Example 5: Stewrat(IRT preferred spelling) Mandel at SI jumped on the Bash Charlie Weis Bandwagon last week after ND pulled out a close one against UCLA. It was actually a pretty good piece. Well, where’s the Auburn and Texas piece this week? The fact that these two teams moved up in the polls after winning in similar fashion to ND’s UCLA win, proves everything Charlie Weis said about the polls as valid. So has Mandel written anything explaining this to Charlie?
Turns out Mandel wrote something about it today answering this question in his weekly mailbag:
Last week, the media, including you, blasted Charlie Weis for wondering why Notre Dame is low in the polls, but will someone tell me the difference between Notre Dame and Texas? Both were blown out at home by the No. 1 and 2 teams, both needed huge comeback wins over not-so-great teams and both have only beaten one team currently ranked in the top 25. Yet the general wisdom is that Texas is the top one-loss team looking in and Notre Dame is mediocre. What gives?
As for the Texas question, I could give you any number of analytical/numerical explanations why I don’t find it valid, but I want to focus on another, often overlooked element of the poll system. As you know, these things are completely subjective, and the reality is, a lot of it is based purely on perception. Texas is the defending national champion. The perception of the ‘Horns, justifiably, is that they are still one of the elite teams in the country. Notre Dame, on the other hand, hasn’t sniffed a national title in 13 years, and therefore the perception of the Irish is that, while certainly much improved under Weis, they’ve yet to reach that same elite status (as was confirmed to many of us by the Michigan game). Is that fair? Not necessarily. Is it possible we’re completely wrong about one or both? Absolutely. But if I had to bet my life savings on one of these two teams in a game against another top-10 team, I would choose the ‘Horns, at least until the Irish do something to prove they’re the safer bet. Like beat USC.
“I could give you any number of analytical/numerical explanations why I don’t find it valid.” I’m calling bullshit on this. If he could prove this analytically, he should have. The problem for Mandel is that there is no numerical evidence. He falls back on the crappiest reason of all to rank Texas 7 spots ahead of Notre Dame: Texas was better last year.
November 6th, 2006 at 7:58 am
Stew”rat” Mandel, answer is a total BS, just Like Everyone gave Troy Smith the Heisman trophy when Ohio State Beat Notre Dame last year. Texas was better last year and won the National Championship. These are the same guys, who were buys giving USC “oral” all of last year saying that they were the most prolific offense ever in the history of college football. Meanwhile, when push “Bush” came to shove Texas and Vince Young proved to be the best team on the field. I will agree that Texas is better then Notre Dame, had the two teams played head to head this year, I’d place my money on Texas right now. However, if they would’ve played Notre Dame in week two or three, Notre Dame would win.