My Week 10 Mumme Poll ballot

Screenshot_2019-09-30 (1) Senator Blutarsky ( MummePoll) Twitter Considering that four of the five teams on my last ballot didn’t play this past weekend (I could argue that Clemson didn’t really play either, while we’re at it), this week’s effort was a snap, taking less than five minutes to cobble together.

  • Alabama
  • Clemson
  • LSU
  • Ohio State
  • Penn State

Next week is when I suspect ballot selection starts getting tougher.  If a one-loss Alabama or LSU deserves to stay, what about some of the other one-loss teams, like Georgia, Oklahoma or Oregon?  For that matter, what if Minnesota upsets Penn State?

Your thoughts?


Filed under GTP Stuff

12 responses to “My Week 10 Mumme Poll ballot

  1. Timphd

    I have to admit I have bounced around with my ballot. Some weeks I put in all the teams I think should be ranked, other weeks I have only put in the top five or six. I think clarity is coming this weekend, so my ballot will be more consistent from here on.


    • Macallanlover

      And this is where I feel it should be tweaked next year, we should all be submitting the same number of teams. That may have started at a high number, say 10, 12, or 15 in the beginning, and gotten trimmed to say 6-10 this week, and then 4-6 by late this month, as an example. No ranking numerically or any extreme change, just consistent number of teams. (Having 25 spots seems so conformist for a radical approach.) 🙂

      Thanks Senator, for the “Don’t Care” option on whatever pro sport was in the question this week.


      • Only 3 out of 246 selected 25 teams, Mac. Average number per ballot: 8.2.

        Limiting a ballot is contrary to what approval voting is supposed to be.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Reverend Whitewall

        I kinda like how everyone can do what they want with it. The only reason to require a certain number of teams would be if you were hell bent on having a top 25 all year. For example, if everyone had to vote for 12 teams no matter what, you’re going to get enough votes for different teams to have a top 25. Whereas under the current format, as we get closer to the end of the year, there may not be 25 teams still receiving votes. But I don’t think the purpose of the poll is to make sure a certain number of teams actually get ranked.


  2. Mark

    My ballot was the same as yours.

    If Alabama or LSU loses to the other in a close, clean, hard-fought game, I’d probably keep the loser in my top five over any of the current one-loss teams. UGA is currently the highest ranked one-loss team, and in such a scenario, the LSU/Alabama loser would certainly have a much more palatable loss than Georgia does.


    • The Truth

      That’s the committee’s biggest problem to negotiate IMO: are your best wins better than your worst losses. Not really an issue for the Dawgs because they’re in if they beat either #1 or #2 Bama or LSU for the SEC. But that loss to Purdue really stung an Ohio St U. last year.


      • pjmcdonough

        If Alabama loses I would be content with ranking Georgia ahead, just based on Alabama’s SOS alone. While it’s a loss to a top 2 team, it’s still a loss…if LSU loses, I keep them ahead of Georgia because they’ve had a harder road along the way. While Georgia had a “inexplicable” loss, it can be explained by four turnovers, which could doom the best of teams, to be sure. Alabama was in a close game with Tennessee until Guarantano’s gaffe at the goal line and with Alabama only turning the ball over once to that point.


  3. Cojones

    Missed the ballot and was going to rank OSU, ‘Bama, Clemson , LSU and UGA in that order.


    • Cojones

      These are pretty much ranked along D lines that mesh with the heavy O drift in the rankings. OSU and Clemson’s Ds are good and the SEC teams have a little larger row to hoe due to the SEC scheduled competition. UGA’s D lifts them to the 5th spot. What’s more, I think the Committee will also factor in what has been overlooked by the pundits’ infatuation with O production.

      Looking for the weaknesses of these teams will drive conversation from here to season’s end. While getting away from ranking the teams according to who has the best QB, the remainder of each team gets full scrutiny when the Committee ranks this bunch.


  4. HahiraDawg

    Two weeks ago I had 12. This week only 11 when UF got their second loss.
    My guiding principle is retain the teams that have a genuine shot at the playoff.

    It has been easy so far, but I anticipate a dilemma facing me this week.
    I am concerned about what I’m going to do with a one loss Minnesota or Penn State. I don’t think whichever team loses seriously has a shot anymore, but to exclude them doesn’t seem appropriate either.

    First world decisions….


  5. My ballot is made up of teams right now who if they win out will be legitimate playoff contenders:

    Corn Dogs
    Dust Bowlers
    Nike U
    Ped State

    Not confident about Minnesota staying on my ballot for long beyond Saturday. Still keeping an eye on Utah because it looks like they are going to be 11-1 entering the P12CG. Also have an eye on Wake if they were to pull off the unthinkable and beat Clemson in 2 weeks.


    • Dawgoholic

      My goal has been to rank teams based on who would have a legitimate argument to be included in the top 4 if the season ended today. To date, I have not believed a one loss team has had a legitimate argument – but do believe undefeated teams Baylor and Minnesota should be included in the argument even though I would rank them behind some one loss teams in a power ranking.

      Will be tough to keep the Bama -LSU loser out though at this time next week. (As to UGA, they need to win out including SECC to be deserving of top 4 consideration unless there is absolute carnage.)