Mumme Poll, Week 8

Rank Team Votes (Top pick)
1 Auburn 89 (37)
2 Oregon 88 (48)
3 Missouri 86 (1)
4 Michigan State 86 (0)
5 Boise State 83 (3)
6 TCU 83 (1)
7 Alabama 80 (0)
8 Wisconsin 73 (0)
9 Utah 53 (0)
10 Oklahoma 43 (0)
11 Stanford 37 (0)
12 Ohio State 34 (0)
13 LSU 26 (0)
14 Nebraska 21 (0)
15 Arizona 8 (0)
16 Florida State 4 (0)
17 Virginia Tech 1 (0)
17 Oklahoma State 1 (0)
17 Arkansas 1 (0)
17 Mississippi State 1 (0)
17 Baylor 1 (0)
17 South Carolina 1 (0)


  • Looks like we’ve got a stubborn anti-Oregon voter out there again this week.
  • We like Missouri a lot more than the coaches do (they have the Tigers at #8.)


Filed under Mumme Poll

14 responses to “Mumme Poll, Week 8

  1. Macallanlover

    I must not understand the process, Auburn gets 37 votes for Number 1, Oregon gets 48 (almost a third more), and one voter who is intentionally trying to distort the process achieves his goal? I get that a small minority of people will always try to screw with up a good thing, it happens way too often in this society, but aren’t the Top Pick weightings enough to handle this?


    • The top pick isn’t a weighting. It’s purely a tiebreaker. If there’s no tie at #1, it’s irrelevant to the rankings.

      All the voters for each team are listed. I presume some enterprising soul will run down the one voter in question and find out what his/her reasoning is.


  2. Regarding the anti-Oregon voter, I actually checked that guy’s ballot. Apparently he’s got like his own computer ranking system or something? Anyways, at least he had an explanation for it even if it is a bit tenuous.

    But for me personally, I don’t see how you can’t have Oregon at least in the top 3-5. They are just decimating people…I don’t see how a college defense really slows them down? And God forbid an Auburn vs. Oregon BCS NCG match up? It would be like 77-62!


    • Macallanlover

      OK, I went through every ballot that was in black print, meaning they didn’t choose Oregon #1. Each of those had Oregon in their Top 10, so who is the one voter who didn’t rank them in their Top 10 because of their system? I did see one voter who said they barely made his list because of some system he had.

      Senator, thanks for the explanation. While I have Oregon at my #1, I am not predicting them to end up there. This example, where one person not picking the team getting more votes for #1 than all others combined to even be in their Top 10, is one weakness in the system. Not that it matters at this point in the season, but it undermines the credibility based on all other votes cast. He/she trumped your tie-breaker.


  3. Bill Gates

    My computer works with no bias! First, I weight each conference in order of how much I like them. Then I negate on the field performance in favor of a “style” points system I copied from figure-skating. Finally, I let a random number generator assign a value to each team.

    See, no bias! Oh, crap…blue screen again. Is that my computer choosing Boise St. first???


  4. Sanford222View

    There are actually two ballots missing Oregon that I found. One is the guy with the computer ranking system that at least gives an explanation. He says he is surprised they are not in his computer’s Top 10 and they come in at 18th.

    The other guy says he doesn’t think Oregon would beat any of the teams in his Top 10. I flagged his ballot.

    I found these by looking at all the ballots voting for Auburn and then looking at all the red ballots (which meant they had Auburn #1) to see who did not rank Oregon at all and found two such ballots. I have no clue why there is only a one vote difference in the listed totals for the two teams.


    • Sanford222View

      Here are the two ballots that left Oregon off:

      profzoom (computer poll guy)


      • Macallanlover

        Thanks for the effort, and info. I didn’t flag them because they both seemed sincere in their rationale and it wasn’t obvious to me they have an agenda. Their teams weren’t silly, just different from mine. Who knows? They could be Tech fans and just not understand American football. If oncomouse doesn’t put Oregon on if they beat USC this week, and beat Zona, which I think they will have a struggle with, I will definitely join you. As for profzoom, he needs to re-weight his transitive properties!


  5. dethwing

    I’m one of the people that left Oregon last week, but I have them this week. [Macallanlover is probably talking about me. I post in my ballot exactly how the ranking is computed].

    I think It’s mostly the schedule. But they’ve got plenty of games coming up against better teams [Far more than Boise, who I left off at 11 this week], so they’ve got LOTS of room to grow.

    Incidentally, I also have a ranking that uses basically the same methodology, but uses scores as well. It has Oregon 1, Boise 2.


  6. dethwing

    Incidentally, if there are 2 voters without Oregon, then that means there is 1 voter without Auburn. I take it you tracked this person down as well? Oh wait, no you didn’t. Because it’s crazy to leave off Oregon, but not Auburn.

    It’s bulldawgy who has Auburn at 11 in his computer poll. He’s as right in his opinion as profzoom is in his.


    • Macallanlover

      I realized that was true when Sanford222View said two voters did not have Oregon. I didn’t track it down but agree they have that right as an opinion but not to distort for some agenda of promoting another team.

      Don’t be so snarky in your presumption dethwing, we know a little about CFB in this part of the country, but have some fools just like other geographies/conferences. I don’t see leaving Auburn off of any Top 10 personally, but they have struggled more than Oregon has (3-4 games) in remaining undefeated, albeit against better competition.

      FWIW, I don’t think they make it through the regular season unscathed when all is said and done. But I don’t complete my poll with where I forecast the end of the year, just off what has been accomplished on it to this point. The Barn may have used a few of their lives, but they have been damned impressive in winning at the end, and gutting a tough LSU front 7. Your methodology may end up being right, but it is a late bloomer for sure.


      • dethwing

        Sorry, didn’t mean to be snarky. (Unless Snarky means Sarcastic? In which case, yeah, I totally meant to be that). It seemed to me a witch hunt to find who left off Oregon, and nothing else mattered. I’m just saying it’s no more or less crazy then leaving off other unbeatens like Auburn [Or Missouri, or Michigan State, etc…]

        If the logical conclusion that an Auburn vote was missing truly didn’t occur to you [as opposed to just not caring], then I apologize.

        If we’re going to call out Oregon non-voters, then we have to do the same for every other team.

        Lastly, Re: My Methodology. I’m just one man who likes math and football. I’m not claiming my way is anymore right than anyone elses. It’s just another way of looking at things.


        • Macallanlover

          The missing Oregon vote was obvious from the number of votes Auburn received, I didn’t realize someone left Auburn off until Sanford did his research. I don’t honestly see how either could not be in the Top 10 at this point but I voted Oregon #1 so leaving them off is a bigger miss than Auburn, imo. It was not an “SEC” homer thing at all.

          I do believe Auburn has faced much better opposition than Oregon but have not been as dominating in their wins. I honestly don’t know who would win a game between the two of them. I think Auburn is more likely to lose a game, maybe two during the regular season so arguing which team is best may be moot.


  7. Sanford222View

    I didn’t know Auburn was left off any ballots. If anyone left them out of the Top 10 I would question that as well. There was no indication that Auburn had been left off any ballots but it is obvious Oregon had when they have one less total vote than Auburn who has the most. In years past the Mumme Poll indicated if a team didn’t receive a vote from all voters and I assumed that was the case for Auburn this week. There was no mention of them not being on all ballots. I didn’t look for ballots with out Auburn because I had no reason to believe they had been left off any ballots.

    I chose to search the Auburn votes to find what seemed to be the one missing Oregon vote only because it was most logical to use the team that received the most votes and who I thought was on all ballots to find the ballot that did not include the team that appears to have one less vote.