Interesting AP voter numbers

M

midatlantech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
6,801
I was just curious as to how many voters for the AP were in each conference. I added them up, counting all voters in GA, FL and SC for both conferences. I've always known that ND and the Big Ten's voters stayed together and if so, you can see why they get a lot of votes:

Big Ten 14
SEC 13
Big 12 12
ACC 9
PAC 10 7

When the AJC decided to pull its writers out of the polls, I thought that it would do nothing but hurt Tech a little and UGA a lot.

Considering that the FL/GA/SC states should count their votes as one half, the ACC would have about 7 versus the Big Ten's 14.

I can't help but notice that the PAC 10, which often struggles for votes, has such a low number too.
 
I find this very interesting, but not at all surprising. Where is a list of who votes in the AP poll?
 
GT Adamni said:
I find this very interesting, but not at all surprising. Where is a list of who votes in the AP poll?
Click to expand...
See floridajacket's post in the "For What It's Worth" post by romegajacket

(but here is a hint).
 
The AP poll has one writer per two Division I-A schools per state. Hence, one voter from Georgia but lots of voters from California and Ohio.
 
No wonder the Big Ten and Notre Dame are always ranked at the top. The Midwest is loaded with D1 schools but only Ohio State, Mich and ND are any good. Meanwhile the NE is loaded with schools but not 1A and the SE has big universities only.
 
The older I get and the more college football seasons I see come and go the more I realize that pre-season and early top 25 polls (when most power teams are playing weaker opponents) are just unnecessary and probably counter-productive to crowning a national champion.

As a fan, I do like the prospect of seeing GT ranked in a pre-season poll, it certainly get's me excited to know that there are higher-than-normal expectations for a particular season. But, I think it would be wise to have the first poll come out either after the first weekend in October or perhaps after the last weekend in September.

Think back to 1990 and how GT had to climb the polls and vault over pre-set top 10, top 20 teams to eventually become national champs.
 
It's all about the money. It always is.

Money comes from TV. TV money comes from advertising. Advertising depends on ratings.

Where do people live? The Big Ten states plus the Pac 10 states have WAY more population than the SEC and the ACC states-especially before ACC expansion.

So, the media needs to hype the Big Ten and Pac 10 as being good, whether they are or not. The money depends on it.

This is why BC was a good addition by the ACC. Pitt would have been a better addition than Va Tech. VPI&SU does NOTHING to help the ACC.
 
The real answer to expansion was Penn State and I still believe that if proposals and courting had occurred that it could have happened.

Now, I'd be in favor of another expansion:

NORTH:
BC
UCONN
Syracuse
Pitt
PSU/WVU
MD
UVA
VPI

SOUTH:
UNC
DUKE
WAKE
NCS
CLEM
GT
FSU
MIAMI

With 12 games, you play everyone in your division plus 1 or 2 more rotating games.

We'd really lock up TV, etc. and we'd start developing better local rivalries.

Schools like VPI would have great rivalries with WVU/UVA/VPI, MD with PSU/UVA/WV/PITT and schools like BC would have a better connection in the northeast. And basketball would be equal and exciting in both divisions. Uconn and Syracuse may not quite be Duke/UNC but they're close.
 
Your expansion listing is interesting, but Coach K would never sign it into ACC law. :smirk:
 
Well if we're talking pipedreams, This is how *I* wanted expansion to happen:

12 teams, but Syracuse instead of VT, per the original plan.

Two 6 team divisions, but north/south, not how it's done now.

ACC-South:
Tech
Clemson
FSU
Duke
UNC
NCS

ACC-North
MIAMI
BC
Syracuse
Maryland
UVA
Wake Forest


Miami has to fly everywhere they go anyway, so it shouldn't be a big deal for them to be in the North conference. And Miami itself is full of Yankees anyway, and the bulk of Miami's fans are up in New York. It'd be perfect. Plus, all the big rivalries would be kept in-division except for Miami/FSU, so there's no real need to have a 'permanent cross-division opponent' like we've got now.

The way we have it now is pretty stupid, IMO.
 
Leave it to Beejer

Beej,
That's pretty much how I really wanted the divisions once the 12 teams were selected. I agree that the honchos (BRAINE) really blew it after they went for the split Miami-FSU divisions. I understand it and yet it's dumb (maybe that's why I understand it!).

Yes, I agree that if you're going to split then Miami should have been with BC, VPI, and since it's a natural to put UVA and VPI together... Only Wake would be a bit out of position, and yet, they're the closest to VPI I think.

To even out the divisions a bit they could have put NCS in the north and left Wake in the south.

I'd rather we play FSU every year then Miami and VPI combined! We need some of the crowds that FSU provides but those same crowds can't get to other schools for them. And Miami fans aren't coming here any more than they go to Charlotte or Boston or D.C.

It still burns my butt, and it's all Braines' fault.
 
It is pretty clear to me that pre-season rankings are completely speculative and they have an enormous impect on the rankings the rest of the season because voters are hesitant to leap frog anybody. They shouldn't have polls until at least week 4.
 
It still burns my butt, and it's all Braines' fault.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Braine could very well have advocated exactly what we're talking about, and got outvoted or whatever. There's really no way we can know who's 'fault' the current alignment is.
 
refrigeratormover said:
I thought out there they dealt with "other" Poles.
Click to expand...

JD,

We must remain politically correct in these days of .................. :)

:laugher:
 
romegajacket said:
JD,

We must remain politically correct in these days of .................. :)

:laugher:
Click to expand...

What is political correctness in these days of politicians not understanding the difference between a drinking problem and a poll problem?

That was definitely for "Off Topic". Apologies.
 
pocket_watch said:
What is political correctness in these days of politicians not understanding the difference between a drinking problem and a poll problem?

That was definitely for "Off Topic". Apologies.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure of the point of your post here, but my point was only to reply to JD and poke a little light fun at him.

If anyone was offended this time around, no appologies, to hell with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top