College football week 6 thread: Green Grass and Roll Tides

[Neutral Corner]

Wouldn’t the top two preseason teams being off the map before Columbus Day indicate that voters aren’t keeping dead weight around?

Five weeks in. I know I'm an old man yelling at a cloud, but how about not ranking until actual games are played?

"Texas has defeated Sam Houston, UTEP and San Jose State. Penn State has defeated Nevada, FIU and FCS Villanova."

Why are those wins sufficient to put a team at 1 or 2? They are not. However, if a team starts at 1 or 2 and looks like crap it still takes weeks for them to get out of the Top 25. Unbeaten teams with good wins who didn't start out ranked can't get ranked because the deadwood has not fallen out yet.

Preseason rankings are based on last season, the rep of the school, and the ranking of recruiting classes which have not stepped on the field, not on any form of accomplishment.

Yeah, I know that preseason rankings are an industry in themselves, and not ranking teams immediately means that you can't write columns and argue about them. I know this is a useless gripe. I just look at Texas, Penn State, and Ohio State and ask what wins they have that put them at the top of the rankings, and the answer is that they don't have any.

 

[Here me roar]

I agree. I think 3 weeks in is a reasonable time to put together a legitimate top 20

 

[BitterYoungMatador2]

I'd honestly be okay with eliminating rankings completely until the playoff rankings come out, especially in the wake of the one wannabe Instagram influencer who has a vote in the AP poll who moved Florida up two spots after losing to USF.

 

[BTExpress]

Unbeaten teams with good wins who didn't start out ranked can't get ranked because the deadwood has not fallen out yet.

We've been over that. Name one. There are zero undefeated teams with "good wins." Zero.

Hell, Vanderbilt --- a perennial have-not --- made it to No. 16 with wins over Charleston Southern, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, Georgia State and Utah State.

 

[dixiehack]

Rankings also help the sport because they sharpen interest for viewers who otherwise might be too overwhelmed by the volume of games to pick any. If there are no rankings, how many casuals would be anticipating Oregon-Indiana given that the Hoosiers are still associated with historical futility?

For that matter, without that little 24 beside USF’s name, outside interest in their trip to North Texas goes from niche to non-existent.

It helps to remember why the polls were created too. When newspapers were king, a Top 10, 20 or 25 was a way to determine what games would get any mention in the paper beyond the local team or conference it covered.

That’s less important these days, but by now the poll has become an ingrained tradition and part of what makes this entertainment business entertaining.

 

[swingline]

Rankings also help the sport because they sharpen interest for viewers who otherwise might be too overwhelmed by the volume of games to pick any. If there are no rankings, how many casuals would be anticipating Oregon-Indiana given that the Hoosiers are still associated with historical futility?

For that matter, without that little 24 beside USF’s name, outside interest in their trip to North Texas goes from niche to non-existent.

And I ask you, Who cares? You sound like the folks worrying about TV ratings. Nothing you posted makes me want to care about some random ranked team. And it ain’t my job to prop up the college football industrial complex.

 

[Batman]

We've been over that. Name one. There are zero undefeated teams with "good wins." Zero.

Hell, Vanderbilt --- a perennial have-not --- made it to No. 16 with wins over Charleston Southern, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, Georgia State and Utah State.

Putting rankings aside, what meets your definition of a "good win"?
Texas A&M winning at Notre Dame, or Ohio State going on the road and beating Washington don't count?
Ole Miss beating a somewhat shaky but still very good LSU team doesn't count?
Miami beating Notre Dame, a hot South Florida team, and Florida State and Florida means nothing?

If nobody is good, is anybody good?

 

[micropolitan guy]

Georgia Tech has won at Colorado, at Wake Forest and at home vs. Clemson. Not great wins, but they'd be considered good wins in any season I remember.

 

[BTExpress]

Putting rankings aside, what meets your definition of a "good win"?
Texas A&M winning at Notre Dame, or Ohio State going on the road and beating Washington don't count?
Ole Miss beating a somewhat shaky but still very good LSU team doesn't count?
Miami beating Notre Dame, a hot South Florida team, and Florida State and Florida means nothing?

If nobody is good, is anybody good?

I phrased my point very poorly, leaving out a key qualifier.
There are zero undefeated AND UNRANKED teams with good wins.

Nobody is getting "screwed" in the polls because of preseason rankings.

 

[dixiehack]

There are zero undefeated AND UNRANKED teams with good wins.

In fact there are only three of them at all: Navy, North Texas and UNLV.

 

[Della9250]

In fact there are only three of them at all: Navy, North Texas and UNLV.

And North Texas gets off that list either way -- it loses to USF or just replaces them in the rankings next week

 

[DanOregon]

I see nothing wrong with the two polls. They help provide some structure and narrative to the season. Seems every conference does its own "poll" on how the teams stack up during their media days in any event. And I do think the AP voters do a good job of "recalibrating" their polls if a team that gets "credit" for a close loss against a higher ranked team also falls if the team they lost too suddenly is exposed. They've also done a good job of not reflexively just moving teams up if they win.

 

[qtlaw]

Allar was fine. (One of the turnovers was when the receiver fumbled.) Hackenberg had much worse games. So did Zack Mills and Anthony Morelli, who were supposed to be the second comings. The last pro-ready quarterback they had was more than a generation ago.

I think he’s still on ABC….

 

[Sam Mills 51]

I think he’s still on ABC….

I think he was referring to Kerry Collins, not Todd Blackledge ...

 

[wicked]

I was thinking Kerry Collins, although you could make an argument for that guy.