• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Where will Wake be ranked in CFP poll next week?

Where will Wake be ranked in the AP next week?

  • Total voters
    87
  • Poll closed .
rspDeac said:
Made this chart at the end of the basketball season:

HT9iB8W.jpg


But because I don't want to just bring things down with a sad basketball chart in a football thread, I put together this QB comp for Jamie to our top 3 yardage leaders all time (which also happens to be our most recent group. I wanted to do top 5 but Sports-Reference didn't have game logs for the older players, for those wondering #4 - Brian Kuklick, #5 - Mike Elkins). Can only do team wins because the player game logs don't attribute the win to any particular QB and I just didn't feel like going to go back through to see which games people started and modify the data. So every game they played in counted even if they only attempted 1 pass, but so far Jamie is putting up some great numbers in his earliest games and will be interesting to see where he can get in hopefully the next 20 or so games of his Wake career.

r4LkOle.jpg
Click to expand...


Good job rsp.
Interesting how close that Skinner, Price and Wolford track in yardage and tds.
Jamie’s trajectory is something else. Would be great if he can keep it going thru next season. Yes, until he’s finished with our major bowl game at the end of next season.
 
Because it seems like a few appreciated the stats and I had this data readily available here is the same group of QBs but with their rushing stats. Realize this isn't applicable to the thread title, but I kind of made my bed for this go round, won't inundate this thread with non-relevant charts moving forward.

VFi7zsc.jpg
 
One thing that is helping Jamie's rushing stats is that most of his runs are "by choice." That is, either the initial play call and/or the read of the defense produces the QB run. Some of the other guys were running for their lives because the protection from the O-line wasn't as good. When the offense does what it wants to do, including run the QB, instead of doing what the defense forces it to do- QB scramble to try and avoid a sack, success is more likely.
 
UCF is going to drop from #18 in the AP and #19 in the Coaches with this loss to Cincy. Improves our chances of sliding up into the teens.
 
PhDeac said:
UCF is going to drop from #18 in the AP and #19 in the Coaches with this loss to Cincy. Improves our chances of sliding up into the teens.
Click to expand...
Yep, and the students rushing the field reminded me of the 2006 era at WF.
 
DeacAssured said:
Yep, and the students rushing the field reminded me of the 2006 era at WF.
Click to expand...

UCF is the 90s FSU of the AAC aside from O'Leary's last season (2015) and Frost's first (2016). In 2013, 2014, 2017, and 2018, they only had one loss until tonight. That's a huge win for Cincy and a huge blow to UCF. They could drop out of the Top 25 although Cincy's only loss was 42-0 to OSU.
 
Should move up to 19 or 20 with UCF (18), Oklahoma State (21), and Washington (15) picking up their second losses. Also could jump Iowa (14). SMU might jump us on some ballots.
 
BiffTannen said:
Should move up to 19 or 20 with UCF (18), Oklahoma State (21), and Washington (15) picking up their second losses. Also could jump Iowa (14). SMU might jump us on some ballots.
Click to expand...

I could see Baylor stealing some votes from us. 5-0 (2-0 in Big 12) and looked impressive in Manhattan yesterday.

SMU, Memphis, and Minnesota shouldn't be ahead of us in any polls, but there will be some idiot voters who put them ahead of Wake.

Don't think we'll jump Iowa - they kept it close on the road against a top-20 team.
 
We’ll get to grade the mental toughness of the Deacs this week.
 
Wake & SMU are the "feel-good" Top 25 stories this year. I wonder if that factors into voting sometimes, with sportswriters either promoting or downgrading them a little more than the play on the field deserves.
 
My hunch is the Deacs don’t really engender “feel good” for the voters. WF never put together lasting consistency after 06-08 and left everything on autopilot for the players with the usual results of such. WF is most likely to engender skepticism until we prove consistency in spite of improved player facilities and a much improved player development program and coaching. “Just the facts ma’am.”

imo, Nor will the stadium be packed until the facts build belief.
 
DeacAssured said:
My hunch is the Deacs don’t really engender “feel good” for the voters. WF never put together lasting consistency after 06-08
Click to expand...

A small school lacking consistency that cracks the Top-25 is usually the precise ingredient for feel-good narratives to emerge.
 
netflixnchildres said:
Because needing triple OT to beat Tulsa is impressive?
Click to expand...

canadiandeac said:
yeah SMU should drop out after struggling against a bad Tulsa team
Click to expand...

Should the voters be more impressed with our victory over BC which has lost to KU and Louisville or Utah State which got blown out while scoring six points against a questionable LSU defense yesterday ?

Point is, you can play that game all day. There was a number of voters who had SMU ahead of Wake last week.
 
BiffTannen said:
Should the voters be more impressed with our victory over BC which has lost to KU and Louisville or Utah State which got blown out while scoring six points against a questionable LSU defense yesterday ?

Point is, you can play that game all day. There was a number of voters who had SMU ahead of Wake last week.
Click to expand...

Just because some random journalists had SMU ahead of Wake, doesn't mean they were right or know anything. And yes, beating BC at BC is more impressive than needing triple OT to beat Tulsa at your home field. BC should have won that Louisville game too, refs blew the safety call and they played without Brown at QB.
 
Wake should be ranked because we’re a 5-0 P5 team. But I’m not going to quibble too much with where voters have us. There’s a good argument that we are legit and a good argument that struggled with weak opponents in USU, BC, and UNC. I expect votes will range between 15-24 and we will land at 18 and 19 in the polls.
 
netflixnchildres said:
Just because some random journalists had SMU ahead of Wake, doesn't mean they were right or know anything. And yes, beating BC at BC is more impressive than needing triple OT to beat Tulsa at your home field. BC should have won that Louisville game too, refs blew the safety call and they played without Brown at QB.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was right or wrong, just predicted it would be occurring. AP voting is subject and I don't expect voters to put much stock in a shoulda-won by BC against another ACC cellar dweller when weighing their vote between SMU and Wake.
 
The job Clawson has done with the program is phenomenal. While I'm really happy about being ranked, I don't even know where I would rank us at this point. Our schedule hasn't been very difficult, and we beat two borderline bowl-eligible teams by one score, and a good but not great Utah State team by a small miracle. I think we should be ranked at 5-0, but it's tough to tell whether we're really a top 20 team. Or, maybe we're just really good at winning close games and our players are mentally and physically tougher than the competition and step up at the most important times.

Either way, it would be great to look like a top 20 team and beat the shit out of Louisville this Saturday.
 
Several Top 25 lost. So, we should keep our slot.

Our signature win against Utah State isn't looking as good today after LSU dismembered them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top