cartman's FOFC College Football Top 25 Poll, open for voting, games of Oct. 6th

[sooner333]

Two weeks ago Oklahoma lost to Colorado and it should have knocked them down farther in the rankings, however many other teams similarly ranked had a similar or worse loss. So, I kept Oklahoma in my top-ten. Last week, they beat a rival at a netural site and played a pretty good game...other teams around them lost.

The real beef, I guess, with Oklahoma being as high as fourth, is that teams like Boston College, South Florida, and Missouri, and to a leser extent Kansas, are behind Oklahoma.

Boston College is one of those teams I am less than impressed with. Their best win is at Georgia Tech, which is less impressive than OU's win over Texas. The thing that sticks out to me is the Umass win by only ten points. Plus, I devalue teams that win games because of getting a huge margin of turnovers (+6 vs. NC St. and +5 vs. Bowling Green). By the end of the year we will find out if that is for real or a fluke. South Florida is another one of those teams and I came away from the WV win less impressed with both teams than I was before the game...and who knows if Pat White stays in.

Missouri could have a case of being better than Oklahoma. We will find out where they stand tomorrow night. I think Oklahoma is the more talented team and there was no need to jump Mizzou higher than I did. Nebraska is a solid win, but nothing spectacular at home...remember, Nebraska has had trouble with Ball State this season. The Huskers could quite possibly lose to Oklahoma State tomorrow.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

I will mention again that Missouri has not won a meaningful road game while Kansas has. Missouri's win over Illinois is certainly, on its face, a better win than any Kansas has had. But that was at a neutral site while Kansas has won on the road.

Then someone better tell Florida that Old Miss isn't a meaningful road game. Florida struggled to win at Old Miss (won by 6), while Mizzou was up big by halftime and coasted to a win in Oxford, MS. I guess wins against BCS conference opponents on the road no longer count as meaningful wins.

[st.cronin]

I don't know how people can look at today's college landscape and think that a 2 loss team could be ranked ahead of a 0 loss team. There are no easy wins in D1 football, for any team. USC struggled against Idaho, LSU struggled against Tulane. That Kansas absolutely pasted all 4 of their "cupcakes" is actually quite impressive. Boston College beating UMass by 10 should count as a positive - they won the damn game, didn't they?

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Then someone better tell Florida that Old Miss isn't a meaningful road game. Florida struggled to win at Old Miss (won by 6), while Mizzou was up big by halftime and coasted to a win in Oxford, MS. I guess wins against BCS conference opponents on the road no longer count as meaningful wins.

Ole Miss? Seriously?

Look, I'm a part-time Missouri fan. Generally speaking I like the people and pull for the program in all sports in the North. But you obviously aren't experienced at this good football team thing. Ole Miss sucks. You can't call that a good road win. Just because Florida had a bad game there doesn't mean much. Ole Miss is 2-4. They barely beat Memphis. They lost to Vanderbilt. Their only home win was against Louisiana Tech. Not impressive.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Boston College beating UMass by 10 should count as a positive - they won the damn game, didn't they?

It's positive in the sense that they are still in the top 10...if they had lost they probably wouldn't be in the top 25. It's not positive in the sense that it doesn't give me very much confidence that they can beat OU or Oregon. Plus, it shows that they probably deserve to be closer to the bottom of the teams that have no losses. They have games to prove themselves later on, however I'll wait until they play and win those games to change my opinion of the Golden Eagles, which is clouded by a close win to a I-AA team and due to large turnover margins that helped pad the scores in wins over some not-so-quality opponents.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by sooner333

It's positive in the sense that they are still in the top 10...if they had lost they probably wouldn't be in the top 25. It's not positive in the sense that it doesn't give me very much confidence that they can beat OU or Oregon. Plus, it shows that they probably deserve to be closer to the bottom of the teams that have no losses. They have games to prove themselves later on, however I'll wait until they play and win those games to change my opinion of the Golden Eagles, which is clouded by a close win to a I-AA team and due to large turnover margins that helped pad the scores in wins over some not-so-quality opponents.

I don't believe there are any undefeated teams that have won all their games impressively. And if you don't want to give credit for turnovers, you practically have to give LSU a loss against MSU...

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Ole Miss? Seriously?

Look, I'm a part-time Missouri fan. Generally speaking I like the people and pull for the program in all sports in the North. But you obviously aren't experienced at this good football team thing. Ole Miss sucks. You can't call that a good road win. Just because Florida had a bad game there doesn't mean much. Ole Miss is 2-4. They barely beat Memphis. They lost to Vanderbilt. Their only home win was against Louisiana Tech. Not impressive.

They certainly aren't any worse than the 4 cupcakes that KU beat at home. Just because KU beat one team on the road that was barely ranked in the top 25 doesn't make them a top 10 team, regardless of where MU lies.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by sooner333

It's positive in the sense that they are still in the top 10...if they had lost they probably wouldn't be in the top 25. It's not positive in the sense that it doesn't give me very much confidence that they can beat OU or Oregon.

So Oklahoma losing to Colorado gives you confidence that they could beat Boston College? I mean, if you put so much stock into BC beating UMass by only 10, shouldn't you be putting equal stock into the fact that Oklahoma lost to an unranked team?

Seriously...I can play that game and say that Oklahoma losing to Colorado shouldn't give anyone any confidence that OU would finish in the top half of the ACC. Much less any indication that they're better than Boston College.

[Swaggs]

The biggest problem I have with human rankings and polls is that their terms are pretty much undefined. Are you picking the most talented team, the team you think could beat team X, the team that has the best record, the team that has lost but has "good wins," etc?

USC and Oklahoma are clearly two of the most talented teams, have some pretty good wins, and I think they could beat just about anyone, but, in my opinion they are not having good seasons because they have each lost to teams that have horrible records over their past 15-20 games. That should factor into rankings, and it does for some voters, but I think many of them really do not consider on-field success/failure as much as they should.

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

They certainly aren't any worse than the 4 cupcakes that KU beat at home. Just because KU beat one team on the road that was barely ranked in the top 25 doesn't make them a top 10 team, regardless of where MU lies.

Who said they were worse? You guys keep bringing up pointless arguments. Now you are saying that Missouri has a road win better than Kansas' home wins over bad teams. So what? Go take care of business against OU and it will all take care of itself. You haven't had the opportunity to prove yourselves on the road against a good team yet, so why are you complaining about not having that as a benefit? This isn't the final poll. Your chance is coming.

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

USC and Oklahoma are clearly two of the most talented teams, have some pretty good wins, and I think they could beat just about anyone, but, in my opinion they are not having good seasons because they have each lost to teams that have horrible records over their past 15-20 games.

What good wins? Meaning wins better than, for example, Kansas' win at Kansas State?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Who said they were worse? You guys keep bringing up pointless arguments. Now you are saying that Missouri has a road win better than Kansas' home wins over bad teams. So what? Go take care of business against OU and it will all take care of itself. You haven't had the opportunity to prove yourselves on the road against a good team yet, so why are you complaining about not having that as a benefit? This isn't the final poll. Your chance is coming.

Oh, I agree with your final comment. MU will likely be in the top 15 at the end of the year with 1 or 2 league losses and KU will be unranked and below .500 in the league as they have been every year under Mangino.

[sooner333]

Comparing Colorado on the road to UMass at home is laughable. Granted, Boston College won the game, but let's compare apples to apples. I don't care if UMass is #4 in I-AA, it was 10 points away from being Michigan-App. State again.

I look at turnovers to see if a score is misleading. LSU's win over MSU was impressive, but somewhat misleading too since, by watching the game, I saw that their offensive line had issues...issues that came up again in the part of the Tulane game I saw. Unfortunately I can't see every game, but I can see that getting a huge advantage in turnovers can make a score misleading. I'm not saying getting turnovers is all luck, but getting 4 or 5 more than the other team is. Notre Dame isn't better than UCLA, but they got 7 turnovers more than they gave up and won the game...they probably lose 9 out of 10 times.

The only reason I have Cal at #2 is because they have an impressive win at Oregon, one more impressive win than Ohio State, Boston College, or any of the other undefeated teams.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Comparing Colorado on the road to UMass at home is laughable.

FSU didn't have a problem with Colorado on the road...and FSU won't come within two touchdowns of BC. The fact that you are seeminlgy ignoring the fact that a loss is worse than any win is laughable.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by VPI97

FSU didn't have a problem with Colorado on the road...and FSU won't come within two touchdowns of BC. The fact that you are seeminlgy ignoring the fact that a loss is worse than any win is laughable.

Losing is worse than winning always. That doesn't mean that a team who wins all of their games is better than a team that loses one or more. And, I wouldn't be shocked if Florida State kept it close.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by sooner333

The only reason I have Cal at #2 is because they have an impressive win at Oregon, one more impressive win than Ohio State, Boston College, or any of the other undefeated teams.

That pretty much sums it up for me too. Ohio State's best win is against Purdue and they are a suspect team in my mind. This year more than any other (in my mind) there is just so much uncertainty with most of the teams. One week a team looks great and then the next they lose to a team that had no business being on the field with them. I even have Oregon pretty high because they gave Cal one heck of a game.

I would be lying if I said I didn't take past performances into account when ranking teams. A few examples I can give is how Michigan State seems to hit the skids after a tough loss or Purdue always starts out good (because they play a weak OOC schedule) and falter when they play tougher opponents. So in my mind I am willing to drop them more after a loss because of their past track record.

I enjoy debating these topics and even moreso learning how other people look at and decide where to put teams in their weekly polls. My way is far from perfect so I always look to get input from others.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Losing is worse than winning always. That doesn't mean that a team who wins all of their games is better than a team that loses one or more. And, I wouldn't be shocked if Florida State kept it close.

...and beating a I-AA opponent by 10 doesn't mean you're worse than a team who lost to an unranked opponent, yet that's been the gist of your argument. (side note: the fact that you have OU over USF is hilarious, as well...apparently being undefeated and having a top 10 win on your resume is worse than losing to an unranked opponent, too)

If your going to rank teams, at least make your overwhelming bias towards Oklahoma less obvious.

[st.cronin]

Kansas' best win is better than Oklahoma's best win. Kansas has no losses. Oklahoma has one loss. Oklahoma may finish with a better record than Kansas, but at this point Kansas is unquestionably having the better year.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by VPI97

...and beating a I-AA opponent by 10 doesn't mean you're worse than a team who lost to an unranked opponent, yet that's been the gist of your argument. (side note: the fact that you have OU over USF is hilarious, as well...apparently being undefeated and having a top 10 win on your resume is worse than losing to an unranked opponent, too)

If your going to rank teams, at least make your overwhelming bias towards Oklahoma less obvious.

There are plenty of voters in the national polls that have OU over South Florida. I actually watched most of the WVU-USF game and came out with the idea that both teams were overrated.

I've pretty much just said that I think OU beats Boston College head to head. You apparently have no issue with one-loss Oregon being up there even though they don't have a win over a top-25 team either. I just think they beat Boston College, South Florida and everyone else.

Again, my poll is not only based on who is having the best season, but who has the best team. I am biased in the sense that I follow OU football and watch every minute of every game and I am an OU fan. But, you look at OU's talent level and it is just better than most teams out there.

USC lost to Stanford, that doesn't mean they wouldn't beat many teams out there...each individual game is only part of the big picture. I'm not basing BC's rating solely on UMass game, it's just part of the picture. BC goes undefeated, they will likely surpass OU because they will have passed harder tests...I don't think it happens though.

[st.cronin]

dola, you can do the same with Florida. Their best win is home against Tennessee; it was an ass-kicking, so maybe you can argue its as good a win as Kansas' road win, or a little bit better. But you have to disregard TWO losses to put Florida above Kansas. To me, that's lunacy.

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Again, my poll is not only based on who is having the best season, but who has the best team. I am biased in the sense that I follow OU football and watch every minute of every game and I am an OU fan. But, you look at OU's talent level and it is just better than most teams out there.

So if your poll is based on your perception of teams' talent levels, why do teams ever move in your poll? OU's talent level won't change this year regardless of whether they go undefeated for the remainder of their schedule or lose three more games. Actual game outcomes cease to have meaning with your approach.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

So if your poll is based on your perception of teams' talent levels, why do teams ever move in your poll? OU's talent level won't change this year regardless of whether they go undefeated for the remainder of their schedule or lose three more games. Actual game outcomes cease to have meaning with your approach.

It's partly based on talent levels and who would win each game. Obviously games show shortcomings and strengths that aren't already known. Perception of teams changes after each game. We have different methods of voting, you use a more scientific approach and I use an approach more based on my feel of where teams are. Both are solid and combine to make a "better" poll than either one because it combines different methods and helps drown out biases.

I don't have a problem with people who put OU lower than I do, or any other team for that matter. But, when asked I will try to defend where I stand. My answer isn't really satisfactory to some, but that's okay, and I'll stand by my method and rankings.