Certainly not surprised by Schnellenberger's voting OU so low. He still can't understand why the Sooners dumped his inebriated tail years ago

Also, this assumes that the actual coaches (and not the SID or office intern) fill out the ballots

just curious ... what was the weight of Tressel's non-vote? With a .01 difference between UM and UF, could this have tipped things UM's way?

if so, does UM or the Big Ten have any recourse for presumed economic damage caused by Tressel's failure to honor a contractual agreement?For that matter, was it even a contractual agreement at all?

Thanks for the info.

Congrats to UF from a UM fan. I enjoyed watching both teams this year.

Here's a scenario: UF squeaks by OSU and UM trounces USC - split title? shades of USC 2 years ago

Most of the results do not surprise me. I think that to some extent, regional voting trends in the AP would be similar with voters in the mid-west voting for Michigan while those in the south going for Florida. The variety of votes are not surprising also. In my personal poll, though it obviously counts for absolutely nothing, my rankings tend to very. I have

Ohio State #1, Florida #2, LSU, #3, Louisville #4 and Michigan #5.

Wow. That is an amazing graphic. I can't believe ANYONE would think that Arkansas was the 20th best team, as Larry Blakeney did, or that anyone really thought Virgina Tech was the 7th best team, as Mike Leach did. This screams that we need a new way to pick the teams.

Amidst all of the ranting about the top of the polls, one example from lower in the poll shines above the others to show how ridiculous it is to let human votes influence team recognition for college football: Texas and Texas A&M play in the same conference and ended the year with the same overall record. They played each other in the final game of the season and A&M won 12-7. But somehow college coaches voted the Longhorns 5 places higher. As long as they can't even use actual games played to help determine their votes, they shouldn't be complaining about where the poll system determines they play their bowls.

There are a number of smaller subtleties as well. Consider Spurrier, he voted his former Def. Cord. Bob Stoops at #4. OU is very good and not unreasonable, it is just not surprising that coaches reward/jam other teams for various reasons.

Why do only 63 coaches vote. Shouldn't every Division I coach have a vote? Obviously, they are going to vote for their own conference teams. That way they get the bigger share of the bowl money. It will also keep a team like Boise St. from ever playing for a national championship. Time to change the system folks.

Not surprised Mike Bellotti didn't rank the Beaver's in the top 25...he's still upset that we beat his 7-5 "National Program".

its great how they post the results so it gives us a chance to realize how much of an idiot schnellenberger is. who gets to vote on the coaches poll by the way, is it seniority or rotating? i have no problem with coaches voting higher for their own conference. after all, they played the team and they know those teams as opposed to just watching highlights of the other conferences games.

Indiana's Terry Hoeppner put Wisconsin at #9 despite their #5 ranking. Coach Hoeppner was one of the feel-good stories of the season, but what the heck? Apparently he wasn't impressed when the Badgers defeated his Hoosiers 52-17 in Bloomington, rolling up 539 yards in the process?

These coaches cannot coach their teams and watch enough games to be qualified enough to make a list of the top 25 teams in the country.

Whoa, I'm sure the coaches are doing a better job now that this is public. Some of these selections show how poorly the coaches rank different teams. There is also a lot of regional politics. Again, another example of the players and coaches need to decide the true National Champion on the field. Can you image the story an eight or 16 team playoff would generate? Another interesting observation is Auburn beat both Florida and LSU and they are ranked really low.