Define "Rankings in the Top 25"

[Yeofoot]

There's definitely a method to how the current polls rank teams...how do we think people should rank teams. What criteria? Sometimes the better team loses, right? So does that mean you rank them lower? Is it a ranking of how good teams are? Is it a ranking of how good they are at winning? Is there a difference?


Some would agree USC was better than Texas, and also agree that Texas was better at winning.

Some would agree in '02 that Miami was better than Ohio State, and also agree that Ohio State was better at winning.

Some would agree that TCU was not as good as Alabama, and also agree that TCU was better at winning. Is that because TCU set themselves up to succeed? There's no argument that TCU was more successful this year.

What criteria do you think the media takes into account when voting? Would you use different criteria?

[Howdy]

The way I rank them is by a power rating.
I found this in a football magazine back in about 1982 and been working with it ever since.
I made several minor changes in it over the years.
I rate each team off.and def. add the two to get a power rating.
I use a spread sheet to predict a winner,and after each game day is over I make some small adjustment to there off. and def. ratings.
Then I sort it down by the highest power rating and there are my picks for how they rate.

[Yeofoot]

Thanks Howdy, I always wondered what they meant by when I would read it in magazines.

[colorado_loves_football]

Yeofoot brings up some very interesting points, in his argument.
How should a ranking be scrutinized with respect to TCU?
Was TCU as good, say as W. Virginia?
Well, based on season results, they are identical. 11-1, is 11-1, regardless of how you 'slice' it. But should W. Virginia get the 'edge' due to their bowl win? I'm not sure, that's fair to TCU, personally.
W.Virginia won Big East outright, went undefeated, but then again, so did TCU, and there are many who contend they are comparable, talent-wise (Big East and MWC), although this year, I believe Big East had better teams, in general.
Even so, how do you penalize TCU for who they play? And even if you do, how do you justify it, with Utah winning, convincingly over Ga. Tech?
The only fair way to size up a team is by their record. 11-1 is better than 10-2, or whatever Alabama's final record was. So, unless a team has previously lost head-to-head to another, they deserve the benefit of the doubt, in a legitimate ranking.
TCU in Congrove Computer Poll was #6. Probably a lot closer to where they belong than where they ended up (#9, #11) in AP, CNN.
So, why is this relevant to a 'hypothetical' CFP ranking of teams?
Well, I've already learned that some would put TCU #25, in a pre-season 'objective' ranking of teams (Eric, .fanatic). TCU deserved to be ranked top 15, minimal, by anyone's standard.
TCU beat OU, ranked #7 at the time, in Norman OK, 17-10. OU, later beat OU (Oregon, not their 'B' team) in Holiday bowl, 17-14. A team that had only lost to USC, OU (Oklahoma) beat.
Just like Knute Rockne said 'a win, is a win, is a win.'
SMU beat TCU, that's relevant, too. But SMU also beat Houston, UTEP, and nearly beat Marshall, otherwise they are likely playing Kansas in a bowl, over Houston. This matters for the following reason. TCU beat Iowa St, a team that wins Big XII N. Division, but for a loss to Kansas. So, if Iowa State sucks, then so does Kansas. And so does Nebraska, if a 2 OT loss in Lincoln is any indication of talent level.
But I doubt I"ve convinced anyone through my postings, that's obvious, really when the best Eric & .fanatic can do is #25. That's insulting, not only to my intelligence but to yours, as well.

[Howdy]

As I read all of these reply
I do not belive these will help decide anything.
Someone will think the other person rating is wrong because it does not agree with there version as how it should be.

[colorado_loves_football]

I want to reply without posting a 'new' post so I am going to use a previous posting to do that.
First of all, I don't think this poll is going to be objective, there's too much evidence to the contrary. Secondly, for it to work, there has (or should) be some concensus, with respect to teams, as far as their credibility. We can each have a biased 'opinion' but when it comes to voting we have to be impartial, otherwise the ballot will be 'slanted'.
Yes, it's a viable concern of mine, regardless of what anyone says.
I don't hold TCU on a pedestal. I just don't discriminate against them, a big (and notable) difference.
Similarly, I give W. Virginia credit for what they've done, and Tulsa.
And any other team you want to mention.
I still disagree this isn't for 'fun' or else it's no longer a viable poll, throw objectivity out the window.
It should be taken seriously otherwise there's no point in doing it.
One reason why I opted not to participate as a 'voter' I don't want to be viewed as someone who is in 'contrast' to what's viewed as 'correct'.
But at least I had the foresight to see my view as not being 'centered' in impartiality.
So, weigh that into consideration before chastizing me for not having any conscience, I do.

[Yeofoot]

Chris, I appreciate your zeal for TCU, but a team like TCU should be far from the litmus test of whether you know what you're talking about. Oh, this is going to set you off, but I'll give it to you very bluntly:

College football fans see TCU as a team that's the best of the rest. The top 4 teams in the SWC went on to become a part of the Big 12. That's the way most of us see it. And no one thinks that TCU would've beat OU in a bowl game. It was an upset, the better team lost. Baylor was #4 and they struggle every year. If TCU got taken, they would be the one's getting beat by everyone, and Baylor would be RUNNING THE SHOW in the MWC. You can debate all you want, the fact I'm stating, is that is how most people feel about TCU.

Most people don't know anything about them, if it weren't for you, I wouldn't even know they were 11-1.

And going with your OU logic, Houston was the only team that beat TCU, it didn't help your case that a team Texas hung 52 points on in the first half beat the snot out of Houston in the bowl. How your opponents do in bowl games reflects heavily on you. Texas' opponents did great in the bowls, which made the Longhorns look good. Talking about a tough schedule, the only two teams that beat Ohio State won their BCS bowl, and OSU won theirs. Losing to a team that got the snot beat out of them by Kansas made TCU look really bad. You know how that would look going into it, let go of the rage against people that feel the way you knew they would feel if the cards fell that way.

[Spence]

Everyone might not agree with my ballot, but I will do my best to explain the reasoning behind my vote. I will do my best to be fair. As far as a pre-season poll goes, I couldn't say where I will put any teams because I don't know about every teams personnel losses yet. After only losing 1 game last year, TCU will definitly get a close look. All teams will get a look that were competitive last year.

Everyone will never be in complete agreement. That is why you have more then one voter. Being fair and honest about your vote is all you can do.

One suggestion, when ask for who you want in your group, pick at least one person with a different viewpoint then you have. Listen to your group members as they a part of the voting process and as the poll grows might one day be a voter. (example: If CLF wasn't a voter, I would have wanted him in my group)

Usually most people agree about the top 5 (although, maybe not the order) Top 10 gets a little harder, top 15 harder yet, and so on. No matter how much research and thought you put into this someone is going to disagree with you. You can't let that bother you. It isn't a popularity contest. If you vote according to what you think is right, after debating within the group, you will have done the best you can. That is what it is all about.

[Yeofoot]

I totally agree with you on putting different view points in your group, Spence. I requested Rich as one of mine.

The question I was trying to ask, didn't come across right:

Do we vote for whom is the #1 team in the country that week as #1, or do we vote for whom we think will win the National Championship #1?


Correct use of whom? I never got when to use who or whom.

Side suggestion, no repurcussions for "bad voting" in the beginning, because anything can happen in the beginning. Theoretically the eventual National Champion could lose the first two games of the season, and still win it all, not likely, but it could happen.

[Spence]

Do we vote for whom is the #1 team in the country that week as #1, or do we vote for whom we think will win the National Championship #1?

I am going to vote for who I think is #1 at that point in time and then take it from there. Do what you feel is right, i more then likely will be.

[colorado_loves_football]

Yeofoot, I am going to try to give sufficient reason to refute your claim that TCU wasn't deserving of a BCS bid, assuming that's your opinion.
First of all, you are only partly correct in your contention that TCU didn't play good enough football to be considered.
They beat Oklahoma, in Oklahoma. The only team to do that, by the way, this season, all other losses were road losses, although Baylor did come close, losing 37-30. But in my book, a W is a W and an L is an L, regardless, so consolation prize goes to Baylor.
Secondly, Baylor did beat SMU in Dallas, but then again so did some other teams, like Tulane, so that's not in itself sufficient reason to put Baylor over TCU, but it's relevant, I suppose for comparison purposes.
They 'tie' in intra-conference games, against Army and Iowa State.
And Baylor did finish the year strong, beating Oklahoma State. SMU also finished the year with a W, so there's your point of comparison SMU and Baylor two very comparable teams, in general.
SMU isn't a powerhouse. TCU ought not to have lost to them, but they did, early in the year. SMU finished strong, beating Houston (in Houston) and UTEP, also.
Texas was national champions this year, maybe they're supposed to be dominant against inferior teams, which makes people wonder when they werent' against Texas A&M and Oklahoma State.
So is your point that Texas dominates TCU? Well, that's probably a 'fair' assessment, but Texas dominated a lot of teams. TCU doesn't dominate anyone, probably never have, either, in their history.
Nothing has been proven other than that its' questionable how well TCU might have done had they been in the Big XII. But they would in all likelihood have been competitive.

[mountainman]

Hey, Yeofoot.

Use 'whom' after a preposition or a verb.

To whom it may concern ..... 'to' being the preposition.
You saw whom? ...... 'saw' being the verb.

There's some other rules that are debated, but these are accepted by all.

I have no idea why I'm making this post ...... "Who" and "Whom" .... one sounds to this hillbilly like an owl and the other sounds like an owl with an nasal condition.

Does an owl have a nose or is it just part of his beak?

[Spence]

Does an owl have a nose or is it just part of his beak?

I would think their nasal cavity connects through their beak. Owls are some nasty critters, so I would suggest not getting close enough to find out.

[Yeofoot]

you guys crack me up! Chris, I besides your TCU rants, I don't know anything about TCU. I was just trying to explain to you what most people think of them.

[..fanatic]

That's the problem with the existing polls - there isn't a defined method to the madness. Everyone has their own individual criteria.

If I were to vote, I'd rank 'em as I saw 'em in that particular week based on who they played and their own won-loss record. I'd want to be fair to the non-BCS teams. If a TCU or a Boise State is beating the crap out of everyone in their league every week, they shouldn't have to go 8-0 before they even get noticed. They can only prove themselves against the schedule they have. To me, the ranking shouldn't mean the higher team can beat the lower team. It just means that team has performed to a certain standard.

It's probably easier to vote a top 10 than a top 25.