Anti-Miami contingent makes presence known

Miami fans are oft knocked for being so quick to claim there's an anti-Hurricane contingent out there. Canes are thought to not only be bandwagon, but thin-skinned and quick to shout "conspiracy".

Most notably it's due to the negative press UM receives - continuing to pay for thirty year old sins and a passe 'thuggish' image - while both UF and FSU seem to fly under the radar as the arrests pile up.

The Canes always seem to be front page news for the wrong reasons - Robert Marve's off-season transfer, a Randy Shannon imposed suspension when a player misses study hall, etc. Anything to give the Cane haters some fuel that Miami will always hang on to that Thug U moniker.

The BCS standings were released this past weekend and while it's only mid-October, you could simply drop the "C" right now and just call it the BS standings as the Canes slid in No. 10. Miami is 5-1 after playing arguably the hardest stretch in college football this season, yet still trails some less impressive one-loss teams and some loss-free paper champions.

Does anybody really believe that Miami deserves to be behind Boise State, Cincinnati, Iowa, TCU or LSU? Seriously?

Florida and Alabama? Sure. It's the SEC, it's two powerhouse programs and they're both undefeated. Give them the top two spots... for now. Same for Texas, sitting 6-0 and having been a Big XII staple the past few years, a BCS winner last season, a Heisman contender at quarterback and one failed interception away from making last year's title game. If we're going to implement and put weight into preseason polls, the the current top three deserves to remain where they are as undefeateds.

From there, it gets shady.

Boise State? Please. Wins over Oregon, Miami (OH), Fresno State, Bowling Green and UC Davis before struggling against lowly Tulsa? Show me which computers are favoring this faux program and I'll show you an all time error message.

Cincinnati? A nice win over South Florida, but the rest of the schedule reads Rutgers, Southeast Missouri State, Oregon State, Fresno State and Miami (OH).

Iowa took down Penn State, but other than that a rather lackluster schedule with wins over Iowa State, Arizona, Arkansas State, Michigan, Wisconsin and a season-opening nailbiter against 'mighty' Northern Iowa. The Hawkeyes inexplicably jumped from No. 11 to No. 7 in the AP poll (No. 6 in the initial BCS poll) after a ten-point win over nobody Wisconsin.

TCU beat Virginia, Texas State, Clemson, Southern Methodist, Air Force and Colorado State to hold down the No. 8 slot in the BCS, while 5-1 LSU sits at No. 9.

The Canes are clinging to the No. 8 spot in the current AP poll, which is most frustrating - and which also proves the media bias, for those who simply feel it's a myth.

If there's no anti-Miami contingent, how do you explain some of the media members voting the Canes so low? Twenty-seven AP voters have UM ranked No. 9 or lower.

Tom Mulhern (Wisconsin State Journal) has Miami ranked No. 14. Ahead of the Canes, he inexplicably lists Georgia Tech, Oregon, Oklahoma State and Penn State.

Three voters ranked Miami No. 12, two at No. 11, twelve at No. 10 and nine at No. 9.

Ironically enough, some well-known college football enthusiasts seem to think highly of the Canes. ESPN's Chris Fowler and Kirk Herbstreit both have the Canes sitting pretty at No. 5. Two non-household names have Miami ranked No. 4 (Teddy Feinberg) and No. 3 (Jon Wilner).

Tom Hart of CBS College Sports has UM ranked No. 6 while ABC's Craig James feels a No. 7 ranking is fair.

While thirty-two AP voters ranked Miami No. 8 or higher, the average goes down when twenty-seven biased fools rank the Canes so low. If AP voters are ranking the Canes low, what does that say for the biased coaches who might not give Miami a fair shake? Combine out-there computer rankings, crunch all these numbers in an oft-wrong computer and the No. 10 BCS rank is explained.

At what point will AP voters be held accountable? When does someone step in and make the Tom Mulherns of the world justify their bogus No. 14 ranking? Each and every year teams are screwed by those in the media with a bias or axe to grind.

How did a one-loss Florida State best a one-loss Miami team in the final regular season BCS standing in 2000? The Canes knock off the top-ranked Noles and No. 2 Virginia Tech, yet FSU heads to the title game?

How does Oklahoma back into the championship game in 2003 after losing the Big XII title game? How do you justify a conference running up getting a shot at a title a month after getting throttled 35-7 by a then-three loss, thirteenth-ranked Kansas State team?

Why did computers prefer a one-loss Florida team in 2006 instead of a one-loss Michigan squad?

Why did a one-loss Oklahoma team trek to Miami last year to face Florida instead of a one-loss Texas team who beat them earlier in the year?

Media bias. AP voters with preconceived notions and an agenda are to blame as every vote counts. Ranking a team too low in the AP is bogus, especially when the AP represents one of two post-season trophies. Where's the validity?

The Bowl Championship Series is here to stay (for now), so at least attempt to fix a fixable glitch; hold AP voters accountable. Set a standard.

For Miami, the mantra remains the same; one at a time. Keep winning. Ignore the polls. Let is all come out in the wash.

Regarding Tom Mulhern, someone revoke that yahoo's credentials immediately.


(Note: Want to gilve Mulhern a piece of your mind? Feel free... tmulhern@madison.com)