Preseason College Football Rankings

More 1st place votes but second place? hmmmm

 

I hate the people who complain about the existence of preseason rankings. It makes us happy. Get over it.

Pac 12 is my conference to watch this year. Lots of coaching personalities in that league, each with their own distinct philosophy (the way it has come together reminds me of Big 12 basketball circa 2006). Hell, you'll see 3-4 different variations of just the spread offense for starters. Hopefully we'll get some quality games to watch at 9-10pm CST over the years instead of UCLA vs Colorado.

 

Im surprised but I bet it had something to do with weed. Remember he got suspended for having synthetic weed last season? Dude is a potential top 5 pick, not smart at all.

 

Preseason Rankings are another one of the reasons why college Football sucks ass.

 

Does college basketball also suck ass?

 

It does until the tournament. These rankings are totally arbitrary and pointless. If the BCS rankings determine whether you play in the championship then what is the point of these rankings? with no objective way to determine a champion college football is a waste of time. I also forgot the ability of schools to schedule 1/4th of their own games, which always results in the likes of Texas , Oklahoma, Alabama etc beating the likes of northern penisbutt state by a score of 74-0. The current playoffs is going to be a farce as well because the teams are still picked by a selection committee. At least in Basketball there are 64 teams picked which pretty much includes every team that is possibly good enough to have a fair shot at the championship.

 

While I agreethat preseason rankings are for the most part silly, I'm pretty sure the BCS takes into account the rankings when it calculates the BCS rankings.

What I would like to see done is maybe hold off on the polls until a week before the 1st BCS rankings are announced. That way preseason bias cannot effect the polls. That we we would have a more unbiased poll which will ultimatley make the BCS better.

 

Just because rankings aren't published doesn't mean people will not be thinking about them. The Harris Poll, used in the BCS, isn't voted on or published until the first set of BCS rankings - but the rankings are generally the same as the Coaches' Poll and the AP poll anyway.

 

I'd say a big part of that, though, is that Harris voters see the AP and Coaches rankings everywhere in college football coverage. It's a subconscious thing. If you take away all the rankings and don't have "No. 2 Alabama" on the screen 1000 times per week (and for four non-stop hours in the kickoff game), it might help.

 

Is OU really going to be that good? I'm to the point of taking for granted they are a pretender and not a real contender.

A customer of mine is a Georgia alum and is really pumped about this year. For some lucky reason, they avoid LSU, Alabama and Arkansas. Their toughest game is at South Carolina and he's also worried about Auburn, but they have a real chance to run the table straight to the SEC championship game.

If Oregon's QB situation ends up being solid, they have a good chance to beat USC. Their November matchup could be the game of the year (outside the SEC).

I hope Michigan is as good as this poll indicates. Have always liked them since Bo's days.

 

I'm biased of course, but it's an absolute joke that Mizzou isn't ranked (they're criminally underrated every year, save 2008), and a home night game against Georgia in Week 2 is VERY much a 50-50 game. Not saying Mizzou will certainly win, but any Georgia fan overlooking that is kidding themselves.

 

Sure - but you can't prevent rankings from existing. Even if they are not official, ESPN, Yahoo, etc will make their own rankings because people want to talk about them. If there's no AP or Coaches poll, there will just be ESPN Power Rankings and whatever else.

 

How are they underrated every year? Last year, they started the season #21, opened by going 4-5, ended up 8-5 and unranked. They lost to a bunch of really good teams, but they also didn't beat anyone very good (their best wins being against seriously flawed and mediocre A&M and UT teams). I think there's a wide-range there of how good or bad they might be, but I also don't know anything about their recruiting, who's back, etc relative to last year.

 

Missouri (-6.8) has finished the season in the SRS top 20 four of the past five five seasons and begun the year rated in the AP Top 20 just once.

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php...hat-teams-are-likely-to-be-overrated-in-2012/

They've won 10 or more games in three of the past five seasons, never fewer than eight. One of those eight-win years came against one of the toughest schedules in the country (2011) and with a new QB. Considering they return almost everyone on both sides of the ball, including Franklin at QB, and added the top prospect in the nation on offense - that resume should get them the benefit of the doubt. It doesn't.

 

College basketball has a playoff where everyone has a legit chance at a national title so their rankings are irrelevant.

 

Understood, but I don't think those rankings would carry anywhere near the significance of the actual polls themselves that end up being used to largely determine the national title game.

 

So you think college football has always "sucked"?