• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2022 College Football Polls

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
AP looks pretty good this week except for the 2 idiots that voted Scum #1. Bama and Clemson are way on down there now which is nice.

The top 4 are how they should be. Tennessee only dropped to #5 though which could be problematic. Just win baby
 
Upvote 0
Bestbuck36 said:
AP looks pretty good this week except for the 2 idiots that voted Scum #1. Bama and Clemson are way on down there now which is nice.

The top 4 are how they should be. Tennessee only dropped to #5 though which could be problematic. Just win baby
Click to expand...

Who watches what UGA did to Oregon and Tennessee and votes scUM #1? Fucking joke
 
Upvote 0
BB73 said:
Not that it matters, but here’s how I’d rank the top-15 now. Not a prediction, just my evaluation.

01. Georgia
02. tOSU
03. TTUN
04. TCU
05. Tenn
06. Oregon
07. LSU
08. USC
09. Ole Miss
10. Bama
11. UCLA
12. Clemson (probably won’t drop this far, but they should)
13. Utah
14. Penn St
15. N. Carolina
Click to expand...
This is what the AP poll is this week, except for flipping Ole Miss and UCLA at #9 and #11. So the voters were seemingly paying attention.
 
Upvote 0
OREGONSOCKPUPPET said:
1) Georgia
2) Ohio State
3) Michigan
4) TCU

That better be the 4 when they reveal the playoff rankings this Tuesday. Anything else is straight up bs.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of standards of value out there

Not sure which one leads you to believe that those 4 are right. There are several that could lead you to that conclusion, and I won’t tell you they’re wrong.

But how do you come to the conclusion that anything else is BS?

There are a lot of decent, intelligent people that would prefer the top 4 to be the 4 best teams, and they honestly believe that TCU is not one of them. That’s not bs, it’s just seeing the world differently
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks said:
There are a lot of standards of value out there

Not sure which one leads you to believe that those 4 are right. There are several that could lead you to that conclusion, and I won’t tell you they’re wrong.

But how do you come to the conclusion that anything else is BS?

There are a lot of decent, intelligent people that would prefer the top 4 to be the 4 best teams, and they honestly believe that TCU is not one of them. That’s not bs, it’s just seeing the world differently
Click to expand...
Yeah, part of it being the ‘4 best teams’ versus the ‘4 most deserving’ teams. I’ve always gone for the most deserving, since results to me are way more important than some eye test or other methods that seem to invite more biases being involved.

And margin of victory and game control are factors, but less important than did you win and who did you play.
 
Upvote 0
At some point you have to throw the win/loss record out the door when comparing Clemson and notre dame. There is no situation where someone can say Clemson is the better team. I don’t care if you put them at 11/12 or 24/25, Clemson isn’t a better team.
 
Upvote 0
TampaBuckeyes said:
At some point you have to throw the win/loss record out the door when comparing Clemson and notre dame. There is no situation where someone can say Clemson is the better team. I don’t care if you put them at 11/12 or 24/25, Clemson isn’t a better team.
Click to expand...

Sure, but the other games matter too. Notre Dame is 6-3 with God awful losses to Marshall and Stanford.
 
Upvote 0
BB73 said:
Yeah, part of it being the ‘4 best teams’ versus the ‘4 most deserving’ teams. I’ve always gone for the most deserving, since results to me are way more important than some eye test or other methods that seem to invite more biases being involved.

And margin of victory and game control are factors, but less important than did you win and who did you play.
Click to expand...

Your last four words are all it takes to leave TCU out IMHO

This comes down to three questions
  • How many games did you lose?
  • Who did you play?


  • Margins of victory etc…

The big gap between the first two and the other one is intentional

The real debate is really over how much each of these things should matter. The wins-and-losses-uber-alles crowd act like the who-did-you-play crowd don’t care about wins and losses at all, and the latter act like the former don’t care about schedule strength at all.

In order to have a rational discussion about this we first need to get everyone to agree that we’re not discussing whether these things should matter, we’re discussing how much.

For my part, I think that how much each of those things should matter should depend on your standard of value, and that’s a personal thing and there is no right answer.

BUT

The simple truth is, by going to a playoff system, the powers that be have chosen to give us a champion that, at least among the participants, isn’t just based on who’s best, it’s based on who’s best right now. Ohio State 2014 was the best example of that I’ve ever seen. Game 11 they struggle against Indiana at home. Game 14 they win the Nati by several scores.

One final thing: Some of you might have noticed that my baby, DSA, is neither more nor less than a complete analysis of every margin of victory of every FBS game; and I just implied above that MoV is a distant third among these considerations. Well spotted. And it’s true. DSA should only come into it to compare teams after you have taken into consideration 1) W/L record and 2) SoS in that order. It is something that adds context and a unique perspective to the discussion. It isn’t more than that, but it most certainly is not less.
 
Upvote 0
OregonBuckeye said:
Sure, but the other games matter too. Notre Dame is 6-3 with God awful losses to Marshall and Stanford.
Click to expand...

This is another thing that is a big part of the discussion. How much does does recency matter? Again, I think it’s a matter of personal values and what you value is yours. You do you.

This is a more interesting conversation to me though for a reason I mentioned in the post above. Our current system determines the champion from among the 4 participants based on who’s best right now.

Some people might say that means we should make the 4 participants the four teams that are the best right now. Some might say so because “it’s fair”, some might say so because, “it gives us the best games”, some might have other reasons for saying so, most of which are just verbose means of defining what they call “fair”.

Other people will look at exactly the same playoff system and say that we should feed the playoff with teams that have the best “body of work”, not based on who’s best right now, because that is what the playoff determines. Some might say so because “it’s fair”, some might say so because, “nothing else makes sense”, some might have other reasons, most of which are just verbose means of defining what they call “fair”.

I don’t care that much one way or another because I can see the value in doing it a lot of different ways. I might have a preference though. And I freely admit it’s not rational. I tend to prefer rewarding the teams who are best right now, and my reason for that is that the primary reason for keeping the 2014 Buckeyes out of the playoff was the other side of that argument.
 
Upvote 0
DaddyBigBucks said:
This is another thing that is a big part of the discussion. How much does does recency matter? Again, I think it’s a matter of personal values and what you value is yours. You do you.

This is a more interesting conversation to me though for a reason I mentioned in the post above. Our current system determines the champion from among the 4 participants based on who’s best right now.

Some people might say that means we should make the 4 participants the four teams that are the best right now. Some might say so because “it’s fair”, some might say so because, “it gives us the best games”, some might have other reasons for saying so, most of which are just verbose means of defining what they call “fair”.

Other people will look at exactly the same playoff system and say that we should feed the playoff with teams that have the best “body of work”, not based on who’s best right now, because that is what the playoff determines. Some might say so because “it’s fair”, some might say so because, “nothing else makes sense”, some might have other reasons, most of which are just verbose means of defining what they call “fair”.

I don’t care that much one way or another because I can see the value in doing it a lot of different ways. I might have a preference though. And I freely admit it’s not rational. I tend to prefer rewarding the teams who are best right now, and my reason for that is that the primary reason for keeping the 2014 Buckeyes out of the playoff was the other side of that argument.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think all the criteria you've listed has to matter. In regards to who's playing the best currently, that only matters to me as a tie-breaker situation. If you have teams with near identical bodies of work, the team that is surging should be ahead of the team that is stagnating or trending downwards.

6-3 ND vs 8-1 Clemson isn’t even worth a discussion to me. ND has a significantly worse record with 2 awful losses. They won convincingly at home but it wasn't remotely in the 59-0 B1G CG realm. Just like ranking Iowa ahead of us in 2017 would've been ridiculous too. A singular game can't override everything.
 
Upvote 0
OregonBuckeye said:
Yeah, I think all the criteria you've listed has to matter. In regards to who's playing the best currently, that only matters to me as a tie-breaker situation. If you have teams with near identical bodies of work, the team that is surging should be ahead of the team that is stagnating or trending downwards.

6-3 ND vs 8-1 Clemson isn’t even worth a discussion to me. ND has a significantly worse record with 2 awful losses. They won convincingly at home but it wasn't remotely in the 59-0 B1G CG realm. Just like ranking Iowa ahead of us in 2017 would've been ridiculous too. A singular game can't override everything.
Click to expand...
Very good discussion here. Part of it is who is good right now. Had ND beat Clemson week 1-3 and then lost to Ohio State, Marshall, Stanford I'd have them out.

The 2017 Iowa is an interesting point and makes me think on it more as they did dominate that game. They had 3 close losses and 1 good win, and Ohio State had 2 blowout losses and 1 good win. As another data point, OSU and Iowa had played a few common opponents prior to the game, and OSU handled all of them better. Ohio state had also dominated other opponents and looked like a top 10 team, and Iowa hadn't. That makes it a little more even when factoring in total body of work. I would say looking back at it I would have put a 6-3 Iowa over a 7-2 Ohio State that week (until they got hammered by Wisky the next week).

Yes ND dominated Clemson, but they also have been more dominant over 2 common opponents. ND lost 2 games they should have won, and lost 1 game they should have lost, and has looked like shit every time they weren't playing an ACC school. Clemson also has looked like shit week in and week out. If they had dominated through the year and had a fluke of a bad game, I would keep them in the top 10. So it's the head to head, but also a total body of work that makes me think ND is a better team at this point in the season even with the losses. Clemson could take it as a kick in the nuts and dominate the next few weeks. ND could get a big head and drop to USC. Either of those would change my opinion.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top