Despite being unbeaten and having beaten the Cardinal, the new rankings have us tied at #16.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings
http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings
Despite being unbeaten and having beaten the Cardinal, the new rankings have us tied at #16.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings
That's not the AP poll, that's the ESPN Power Rankings.
Last week, some board members said it didn't matter that we stood down on points against Stanford and Duke, but it does matter. It's the same way that some are saying, and rightfully so, that the Ball St win was too close. Point spreads in wins and losses are significant. If there is one thing that has stayed consistent in College football it is point spread and the matter of it all. We are a very good team, we should have put those points on Stanford and Duke with the pick 6 [Stanford] and the first and goal at Duke.They won more convincingly against what would be perceived as a better opponent. I think that's partly Power 5 bias...Ball State showed some great talent last night, most notably QB and WR. It doesn't bother me too much and for transitive/Sagarin purposes, the stronger Stanford is perceived, the better for us.
More importantly...we're still a spot ahead of the Evil Empire...
Point spreads matter in the rankings, but the rankings don't matter. Staying in the rankings does matter, and getting into the top 20 or so matters because one loss doesn't sink you then.Last week, some board members said it didn't matter that we stood down on points against Stanford and Duke, but it does matter. It's the same way that some are saying, and rightfully so, that the Ball St win was too close. Point spreads in wins and losses are significant. If there is one thing that has stayed consistent in College football it is point spread and the matter of it all. We are a very good team, we should have put those points on Stanford and Duke with the pick 6 [Stanford] and the first and goal at Duke.
I know folks like 'sportsmanship' but that doesn't get style points and gets NO respect when it comes to rankings and $$$ at bowl season.
FWIW: One team overtook NU: Utah, which jumped from 18 to 10 thanks of its rout 62-20 of ex-#13 Oregon (which completely dropped out). Ex-#16 Arizona also dropped out after getting routed 56-30 by UCLA. Voters don't like teams that get routed, even by another ranked team (or even a higher ranked team, as in the case of UCLA routing Arizona).For those who care, we are No. 16 in the latest AP poll, two ahead of Stanford.
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
Yes...and because of our wins, we become part of that conversation...every time Stanford wins and moves up, NU is part of that. Even, god-forbid SC does well, there was enough transitive discussion last week, that we benefit by association. This is better than sneaking in mid- or late-season. Now, we just have to keep winning in the B1G...and Michigan suddenly looks pretty scary.Regarding the AP list, who here would have predicted after four games, we'd be exactly between Oklahoma and USC in the top 20, and ahead of ranked teams Florida and Wisconsin?
That some pretty heavy traditional powers to be rooming with.
Only a couple teams will end up undefeated and get in the playoffs. Rankings do matter, and point spreads do matter. It matters in regards to the bowl selections, etc. If I thought that we were going to go undefeated then this wouldn't matter.Point spreads matter in the rankings, but the rankings don't matter. Staying in the rankings does matter, and getting into the top 20 or so matters because one loss doesn't sink you then.
Keep winning and things take care of themselves.
For those who care, we are No. 16 in the latest AP poll, two ahead of Stanford.
http://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
Only a couple teams will end up undefeated and get in the playoffs. Rankings do matter, and point spreads do matter. It matters in regards to the bowl selections, etc. If I thought that we were going to go undefeated then this wouldn't matter.
So, the ranking folks think we look shitty because we barely beat Ball State, and Saragin noted it as well. That's why teams, other than us, try to hang a bunch of points on opponents to show a separation. One loss and we will be behind Stanford because it looks like we barely beat them when we could have showed more separation with a pick six instead of a pick slide.
Points matter. I'm not sure why you can't understand that? It's just not about wins or losses. Rankings are subjective in every way. Your thesis about separating points out of rankings is just silly.Hmm.... guess point spreads may NOT matter in the rankings? Could it be?
Points matter. I'm not sure why you can't understand that? It's just not about wins or losses. Rankings are subjective in every way. Your thesis about separating points out of rankings is just silly.
We moved up because several teams ahead of us lost. Can't you understand? Oregon moved out because it got blown out. Utah moved past us because it blew out Oregon. TCU barely beat TT so they moved back a spot. Thus, it's never just about wins and losses in rankings.You said points matter in the rankings. We won by only 5 and moved UP. Explain. I already proved to you in another thread that margin is now UNDERWEIGHTED in playoff selection criteria.
Yes, as I noted in an earlier post, 2 teams ahead of us got routed and dropped out (AZ and OR). Utah did one of the routs and jumped us. The net effect was a move of one slot up. It is very clear.We moved up because several teams ahead of us lost. Can't you understand? Oregon moved out because it got blown out. Utah moved past us because it blew out Oregon.
We moved up because several teams ahead of us lost. Can't you understand? Oregon moved out because it got blown out. Utah moved past us because it blew out Oregon. TCU barely beat TT so they moved back a spot. Thus, it's never just about wins and losses in rankings.
Are you following me? Kindly review the last 100 years of these rankings.
If I'm not mistaken, history will show that NU leapfrogged more objectively deserving teams for both recent New Year's Day Florida bowls. (I know it was the case versus Auburn; I believe it was the case versus Mississippi State.) What mattered then was lack of recent visits to those bowl games, a fan base that travels well, and an AD that sold the heck out of those two things. With money still needed for the practice facility, I can only assume that Dr. Jim will be selling as hard as previously.Only a couple teams will end up undefeated and get in the playoffs. Rankings do matter, and point spreads do matter. It matters in regards to the bowl selections, etc. If I thought that we were going to go undefeated then this wouldn't matter.
So, the ranking folks think we look shitty because we barely beat Ball State, and Saragin noted it as well. That's why teams, other than us, try to hang a bunch of points on opponents to show a separation. One loss and we will be behind Stanford because it looks like we barely beat them when we could have showed more separation with a pick six instead of a pick slide.
I never tried to establish that victory margin is everything. That's an absurd strawman you made. What I did establish is you shifting your position to a more reasonable one.Baylor blew out Rice ,mercilessly. Explain their meteoric rise in the rankings (hint: their ranking stayed the same). Ohio State did not blow out NIU, yet stayed #1. MSU did not blow out their MAC opponent (the margin was window dressing at the end), and on other boards on which I participate, everyone was predicting a plumment in the ranking, but, of course they stayed the same
How does this happen in your victory-margin is everything world of ranking teams? I have the magic answer for you -- WINS matter most. The taking of a knee on the Stanford int has absolutely zero to do with our ranking, Nada.
The playoff system begins in December this year. Odd. The next two weeks will be critical. I gotta think we are favs against Minny but will be dogs at Michigan.If I'm not mistaken, history will show that NU leapfrogged more objectively deserving teams for both recent New Year's Day Florida bowls. (I know it was the case versus Auburn; I believe it was the case versus Mississippi State.) What mattered then was lack of recent visits to those bowl games, a fan base that travels well, and an AD that sold the heck out of those two things. With money still needed for the practice facility, I can only assume that Dr. Jim will be selling as hard as previously.
All bowl games are subjective choices, whether by the 'new year's six' /playoff selection committee , or by the bowl committees themselves. What matters, should it come to considering NU's position for high-demand/playoff games (and how awesome would it be if we were in the running post-Thanksgiving?) will be whether NU passes the eye test in November. Whether NU covered or dominated or squeaked by against Ball State won't matter.
Absurd, head to head isn't the only given criteria in the AP. If so then USC should never be ahead of Stanford. This conversation is exhausted. Have a good evening, Mike. We just disagree."So, the ranking folks think we look shitty because we barely beat Ball State, and Saragin noted it as well. That's why teams, other than us, try to hang a bunch of points on opponents to show a separation. One loss and we will be behind Stanford because it looks like we barely beat them when we could have showed more separation with a pick six instead of a pick slide."
Doesn't sound like a person who thinks wins are more important than victory margin to me.
If we finish with the same record as Stanford, assuming that we lost to similar teams, we will most likely be ranked ahead of Stanford because head-to-head is a significant point of emphasis in both polls (in fact, I believe that it is the ONLY given criteria in the AP poll). Our victory margin vs. Ball State will matter about as much as OSUs margin vs. NIU will matter when comparing them to other undefeated teams if they remain undefeated.
You should also realize that, when you are on the same side as Feli on an argument, it is time to switch sides...
mike, this is a flagrant violation of Board rules in that you are ridiculing another poster. Shame on you."So, the ranking folks think we look shitty because we barely beat Ball State, and Saragin noted it as well. That's why teams, other than us, try to hang a bunch of points on opponents to show a separation. One loss and we will be behind Stanford because it looks like we barely beat them when we could have showed more separation with a pick six instead of a pick slide."
Doesn't sound like a person who thinks wins are more important than victory margin to me.
If we finish with the same record as Stanford, assuming that we lost to similar teams, we will most likely be ranked ahead of Stanford because head-to-head is a significant point of emphasis in both polls (in fact, I believe that it is the ONLY given criteria in the AP poll). Our victory margin vs. Ball State will matter about as much as OSUs margin vs. NIU will matter when comparing them to other undefeated teams if they remain undefeated.
You should also realize that, when you are on the same side as Feli on an argument, it is time to switch sides...
mike, this is a flagrant violation of Board rules in that you are ridiculing another poster. Shame on you.
Yes, I'm leveling. I think you should get a timeout!Lol wut? Are you leveling? The Feli item is a statement of fact, not an insult. He rarely has anyone on this board take his position in an argument, and in the rare instance he does, it is usually someone who is trolling....
You said points matter in the rankings. We won by only 5 and moved UP. Explain. I already proved to you in another thread that margin is now UNDERWEIGHTED in playoff selection criteria.
The reason we moved up is because teams ahead of us lost. Is that so hard to understand?
I didnt say we would necessarily be ranked higher. I said those pts matter and may figure in at some loint. The who thing is subjective but you dont seem to comprehend that i guess. I thought you were doing well when you finally admitted that wins mostly matter after i pointed out that stanford was behind usc.So we would have moved up more if we beat Ball State by 20? I don't believe so and Turk does; that was the point. Heck, he believes we would be ranked higher if we didn't take a knee on that int vs. Stanford. That is just flat out ridiculous to me.