That sound you just heard is another A&M defender missing a tackle. Also, huge congrats to Texas and Alabama for winning the bye week and each moving up four spots.

Computer poll, based on our resume and margin of victory:

1. Oregon (1) | 9 - 0 | LW: 1 ( - )
2. Ohio State (4.02) | 7 - 1 | LW: 3 (+1)
3. Miami (8.83) | 9 - 0 | LW: 4 (+1)
4. Indiana (10.99) | 9 - 0 | LW: 8 (+4)
5. BYU (12.91) | 8 - 0 | LW: 5 ( - )
6. Texas (12.95) | 7 - 1 | LW: 10 (+4)
7. Alabama (15.11) | 6 - 2 | LW: 11 (+4)
8. Notre Dame (16.25) | 7 - 1 | LW: 6 (-2)
9. Georgia (17.77) | 7 - 1 | LW: 13 (+4)
10. Penn State (18.4) | 7 - 1 | LW: 2 (-8)
11. SMU (18.41) | 8 - 1 | LW: 16 (+5)
12. Boise State (19.12) | 7 - 1 | LW: 14 (+2)
13. Iowa State (22.38) | 7 - 1 | LW: 7 (-6)
14. Pittsburgh (24.93) | 7 - 1 | LW: 9 (-5)
15. Tennessee (25.79) | 7 - 1 | LW: 18 (+3)
16. Washington State (27.21) | 7 - 1 | LW: 19 (+3)
17. Ole Miss (29.38) | 7 - 2 | LW: 22 (+5)
18. Texas A&M (29.47) | 7 - 2 | LW: 12 (-6)
19. LSU (32.17) | 6 - 2 | LW: 20 (+1)
20. Clemson (33.87) | 6 - 2 | LW: 17 (-3)
21. Army (34.32) | 8 - 0 | LW: 21 ( - )
22. Louisville (35.05) | 6 - 3 | LW: 28 (+6)
23. Kansas State (35.38) | 7 - 2 | LW: 15 (-8)
24. South Carolina (37.78) | 5 - 3 | LW: 35 (+11)
25. Colorado (38.3) | 6 - 2 | LW: 23 (-2)

I kinda like it

Your computer usually isn’t very kind to my Texas A&M Aggies…glad to see it’s softening up on them some.

If the Longhorns and the Aggies both make it to Thanksgiving with only one loss, the hype is going to be unreal.

Computer poll, resume ranking. Ohio State/Penn State gonna make things interesting this weekend. Also, Liberty fell 41 rankings with their loss to the Kennesaw Hoots, which is a huge change this late in the season.

1. Oregon (1) | 8 - 0 | LW: 1 ( - )
2. Penn State (5.35) | 7 - 0 | LW: 2 ( - )
3. Ohio State (7.77) | 6 - 1 | LW: 6 (+3)
4. Miami (9.96) | 8 - 0 | LW: 5 (+1)
5. BYU (11.47) | 8 - 0 | LW: 4 (-1)
6. Notre Dame (11.7) | 7 - 1 | LW: 9 (+3)
7. Iowa State (11.82) | 7 - 0 | LW: 8 (+1)
8. Indiana (13.1) | 8 - 0 | LW: 3 (-5)
9. Pittsburgh (13.56) | 7 - 0 | LW: 13 (+4)
10. Texas (13.65) | 7 - 1 | LW: 7 (-3)
11. Alabama (14.88) | 6 - 2 | LW: 11 ( - )
12. Texas A&M (16.56) | 7 - 1 | LW: 16 (+4)
13. Georgia (18.77) | 6 - 1 | LW: 10 (-3)
14. Boise State (20.02) | 6 - 1 | LW: 19 (+5)
15. Kansas State (20.68) | 7 - 1 | LW: 12 (-3)
16. SMU (22.52) | 7 - 1 | LW: 18 (+2)
17. Clemson (22.97) | 6 - 1 | LW: 14 (-3)
18. Tennessee (25.57) | 6 - 1 | LW: 20 (+2)
19. Washington State (28.2) | 7 - 1 | LW: 21 (+2)
20. LSU (30.75) | 6 - 2 | LW: 17 (-3)
21. Army (31.71) | 7 - 0 | LW: 22 (+1)
22. Ole Miss (35.05) | 6 - 2 | LW: 27 (+5)
23. Colorado (35.77) | 6 - 2 | LW: 32 (+9)
24. Navy (37.05) | 6 - 1 | LW: 15 (-9)
25. Illinois (37.16) | 6 - 2 | LW: 23 (-2)

Computer poll. It’s stickier than I thought it would be: Georgia and Tennessee didn’t rise too far, and Texas and Alabama didn’t fall too far after their big games this week. Alabama still being ranked 11 with two losses has my bama bias crying foul, but my poll doesn’t factor in name/conference recognition so that rank is coming purely from their resume (I have them as having played the 2nd hardest strength of schedule thus far).

1. Oregon (1) | 7 - 0 | LW: 2 (+1)
2. Penn State (4.76) | 6 - 0 | LW: 4 (+2)
3. Indiana (6.08) | 7 - 0 | LW: 8 (+5)
4. BYU (6.12) | 7 - 0 | LW: 3 (-1)
5. Miami (6.94) | 7 - 0 | LW: 9 (+4)
6. Ohio State (7.23) | 5 - 1 | LW: 7 (+1)
7. Texas (7.56) | 6 - 1 | LW: 1 (-6)
8. Iowa State (10) | 7 - 0 | LW: 6 (-2)
9. Notre Dame (10.78) | 6 - 1 | LW: 11 (+2)
10. Georgia (14.09) | 6 - 1 | LW: 19 (+9)
11. Alabama (14.59) | 5 - 2 | LW: 5 (-6)
12. Kansas State (15.17) | 6 - 1 | LW: 13 (+1)
13. Pittsburgh (16.44) | 6 - 0 | LW: 10 (-3)
14. Clemson (16.5) | 6 - 1 | LW: 22 (+8)
15. Navy (17.46) | 6 - 0 | LW: 17 (+2)
16. Texas A&M (18.3) | 6 - 1 | LW: 14 (-2)
17. LSU (19.87) | 6 - 1 | LW: 26 (+9)
18. SMU (20.23) | 6 - 1 | LW: 20 (+2)
19. Boise State (20.34) | 5 - 1 | LW: 16 (-3)
20. Tennessee (20.4) | 6 - 1 | LW: 27 (+7)
21. Washington State (20.97) | 6 - 1 | LW: 18 (-3)
22. Army (22.29) | 7 - 0 | LW: 15 (-7)
23. Illinois (23.47) | 6 - 1 | LW: 28 (+5)
24. Missouri (24.84) | 6 - 1 | LW: 21 (-3)
25. Syracuse (27.17) | 5 - 1 | LW: 24 (-1)

Hey everyone! Sorry for being silent the first half of this season…real life got in the way of football polling. But I’m back, and I’ve made some changes to my algorithm from last year. The overview/highlights:

• Fully computer poll, based primarily on the ranking of your opponents and secondarily how much your margin of victory/defeat was
• The full season is re-run each week with the current week’s rankings. So if you beat a top-10 team in Week 1, but later in the season that top-10 team isn’t ranked, then that win doesn’t benefit your current ranking as much as it originally did
• Poll is agnostic towards conference, pre-season rankings, weekly AP polls, etc. There aren’t any name recognition bumps here, it’s purely based on resume
• The number in parenthesis after the team’s name are the behind-the-scenes points that determines the ranking (on a scale from 1 to 134), so you can get an idea of how closely some teams are ranked to each other (an how much stronger Texas is than the next team)

1. Texas (1) | 6 - 0 | LW: 2 (+1)
2. Oregon (11.79) | 6 - 0 | LW: 3 (+1)
3. BYU (13.85) | 6 - 0 | LW: 6 (+3)
4. Ohio State (14.85) | 5 - 1 | LW: 1 (-3)
5. Indiana (15.21) | 6 - 0 | LW: 5 ( - )
6. Penn State (16.25) | 6 - 0 | LW: 4 (-2)
7. Iowa State (17.42) | 6 - 0 | LW: 9 (+2)
8. Miami (17.69) | 6 - 0 | LW: 8 ( - )
9. Alabama (18.09) | 5 - 1 | LW: 7 (-2)
10. Army (21.81) | 6 - 0 | LW: 11 (+1)
11. Notre Dame (23.17) | 5 - 1 | LW: 16 (+5)
12. Navy (23.17) | 5 - 0 | LW: 10 (-2)
13. Pittsburgh (23.88) | 6 - 0 | LW: 13 ( - )
14. Boise State (26.03) | 5 - 1 | LW: 17 (+3)
15. Texas A&M (27.32) | 5 - 1 | LW: 15 ( - )
16. Georgia (28.7) | 5 - 1 | LW: 12 (-4)
17. Kansas State (28.76) | 5 - 1 | LW: 18 (+1)
18. SMU (28.87) | 5 - 1 | LW: 19 (+1)
19. Clemson (30.12) | 5 - 1 | LW: 20 (+1)
20. James Madison (30.21) | 5 - 1 | LW: 33 (+13)
21. Washington State (31.03) | 5 - 1 | LW: 21 ( - )
22. Texas Tech (31.81) | 5 - 1 | LW: 24 (+2)
23. Missouri (32.18) | 5 - 1 | LW: 26 (+3)
24. Tennessee (33.28) | 5 - 1 | LW: 25 (+1)
25. Nebraska (34.16) | 5 - 1 | LW: 22 (-3)

But they didn’t say that though?

They pointed out those countries also have jails/prisons that detain people against their will. That isn’t the same as saying the systems are identical.

It’s my wife’s birthday this weekend so we’re going out with a bunch of friends. This is extra special because we scored a babysitter for our one-year-old, and we haven’t really been out together much since he’s been born. We’re gonna go hard.

That, and Helldivers II, if the servers will let me in.

…though sources say that even before Majors’ conviction, the studio was making moves to minimize the character after Quantumania underperformed, grossing $476 million

Jonathan Majors-related stuff aside, this sentence makes me shake my head.

Why does it seem like Hollywood always takes the wrong lesson from box office results? Quantumania isn’t well received, and instead of assuming it’s because of the bad script or bad story or rushed CGI, their impulse is to retool their entire franchise to minimize a character? Especially a character who people were generally into (at that time, at least…again, Majors stuff aside).

People disliked Quantamania not because of Kang, people disliked it because it wasn’t a good movie. Maybe if you tie good stories and good filmmaking to your multi-billion dollar franchise and stop plopping out half thought out turds, then people will go see your movie.

I wish they had left the head football coach’s name blank, that way they could just keep giving it to each new hire and the joke could continue.