The actual AP poll

I'm certain that i share Bubbler's angst. Wisconsin keeps winning, but there seems to be a huge talent gap between the Badgers and Michigan and Ohio State.

On a 2am tangential thoguht...I'm also uncertain why Badger quarterback alums keep hanging around the NFL

 

Will that qualify Navy when they pull off the same feat?

<ducking>

 

This is where the Big Ten unbalanced schedule fucks over the lower teams. Wisconsin doesn't get a chance to show what they could do against Ohio State. Wisconsin gave Michigan a good game in Ann Arbor, but it was early and forgotten -- the Badgers haven't lost since.

I agree that Wisconsin isn't as good as Michigan or Ohio State, but they're sure as hell equal or better than Louisville, Texas or Notre Dame -- one or two-loss teams currently ahead of them in the poll, and arguably equal to Rutgers, West Virginia or even LSU or USC -- though I couldn't justify voting them ahead of Rutgers.

I'd have Michigan, Ohio State, Rutgers, Arkansas and Florida ahead of Wisconsin. That's it, though I'd listen to arguments that would place USC or LSU ahead of them, but I wouldn't be convinced.

 

I'm not sure Wisconsin is THAT good after seeing them play Penn State. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the Badgers have beaten anyone currently ranked in the top 25.

 

I think you're right, but their only loss was at Michigan.

That isn't a team that's set up to "look" impressive (unless they're playing Minnesota, they jaw-boned them) -- they just win.

 

I'm guessing that UCLA win against the Bruins was an intra-squad affair.....

 

That's the team (of the three I mentioned) Louisville should be trailing. There's no reason why Texas or West Virginia should be ranked ahead of Louisville. No reason whatsoever.

 

The 12 yards stat is misleading. Stocco had 5 rushes for -34 yards because he got sacked so much. Hill got 54 yards: not great because Michigan never let him get momentum, but not awful. When the score after the third quarter is Michigan 17, Wisconsin 10, I'm not sure how you can call that dominated. The Wisconsin defense did a very good job against Michigan's offense until it finally got worn down -- and this was when Manningham and the Meechigan offense was at its very best. Michigan was the better team that day, but it was closer than the score indicates.

Also, Stocco was in the midst of an awful stretch. He played as poorly against San Diego State and Michigan as I have ever seen him play. And the wideouts (Beckum, Swan, Hubbard) were all still learning. If Wescahnsen and Meechigun met this week on a neutral field, I would still take the Wolverines to win, but it would be a very good and close game.

 

He was playing Rutgers?

 

Wow, did you watch the game? Michigan certainly did not "dominate" as your own point of it being 17-10 attests. And look at how other running backs fared vs. Michigan prior to P.J. Hill - not so good.

Michigan did pull away in the fourth, but Wisconsin was "in it" much of the way. That being said, the Wolverines are obviously the better team this year and would probably win in Madison, no matter what many Badger fans think.