ISU unranked in AP poll

I will believe it when I see a B12 team that does not win the title jump teams from the SEC and B10, we can talk all we want about what should happen, but those in power view the B12 as the 4th power conference, behind the other three.
Yeah there hasn’t been a situation yet for that to happen, but a Big 12 team whose only loss is the Big 12 title vs. teams that lost three regular season games?

Idk I get where your mindset comes from I’m just saying it’d completely go against what they even did last year with SMU. It’s ******** we even have to have this conversation. If the mindset of Big 10 and SEC fans is that “well we can still get in with three losses” whereas Big 12 is “we have to go undefeated”, then **** that.
 
This just isn’t going to happen. Because an 11-2 SMU team that was the ACC runner-up got in over three SEC teams that had 3 losses.
Things have changed even since last year. The CFP Committee has made it clear that they are weighting SOS much more than past years.


This is why it is important for their shills with AP votes to vote as many SEC and big 10 teams as high as possible so every win and every loss is a great win or a good loss. So far mission achieved with 10 SEC schools in the top 20.
 
Things have changed even since last year. The CFP Committee has made it clear that they are weighting SOS much more than past years. This is why it is important for their shills with AP votes to vote as many SEC and big 10 teams as high as possible so every win and every loss is a great win or a good loss. So far mission achieved with 10 SEC schools in the top 20.
You’re not wrong, but I’m not arguing a two loss Big 12 runner up wouldn’t get removed. I think it’d be ******** if they did, but we just saw a couple 2 loss Big 12 schools last year not even get talked about.

I’m saying a Big 12 team with one singular loss in the title game is getting in. Why? Because that team (especially if it’s ISU/TTU) would be likely ranked in the top 6 sitting at 12-0 going into CCG week. And they’re going to drop 7 spots and out with that one loss?
 
You’re not wrong, but I’m not arguing a two loss Big 12 runner up wouldn’t get removed. I think it’d be ******** if they did, but we just saw a couple 2 loss Big 12 schools last year not even get talked about.

I’m saying a Big 12 team with one singular loss in the title game is getting in. Why? Because that team (especially if it’s ISU/TTU) would be likely ranked in the top 6 sitting at 12-0 going into CCG week. And they’re going to drop 7 spots and out with that one loss?
Fair enough.

However the league eats its young. It would be lucky to have one undefeated team going into the CCG, but the chances of two are pretty much nil.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Statefan10
Last year 10-0 Indiana was ranked # 5 in the CFP rankings even though they had 0 wins over AP Top 25 teams. 11-1 SMU was ranked # 8 in the CFP rankings even though they had 0 wins over AP Top 25 teams.

This year ISU already has 1 win over an AP Top 25 team. There's almost no chance that an 11-1 ISU with multiple AP Top 25 wins would be ranked any lower than # 8 in the final CFP rankings.
 


It also doesn't help that we have incompetent people holding AP votes, and the AP vote does impact CFP ranking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinch
Last year 10-0 Indiana was ranked # 5 in the CFP rankings even though they had 0 wins over AP Top 25 teams. 11-1 SMU was ranked # 8 in the CFP rankings even though they had 0 wins over AP Top 25 teams.

This year ISU already has 1 win over an AP Top 25 team. There's almost no chance that an 11-1 ISU with multiple AP Top 25 wins would be ranked any lower than # 8 in the final CFP rankings.
Who's that?
 
I don't think we should get too excited about the chances of getting a second Big 12 team in the playoff. The AP voters are setting things up nicely for all of the SEC and Big 10 teams to have plenty of quality wins and quality losses so they are sure to dominate the berths with the committee's new emphasis on strength of schedule.
Get outta there with that negativity. Big 12 deserves 3 teams and I'm not gonna apologize for saying it. You shouldn't either.
 
Get outta there with that negativity. Big 12 deserves 3 teams and I'm not gonna apologize for saying it. You shouldn't either.
There is a lot of green between deserves and "are a lock to get in". The Playoff Committee has an almost unblemished track record of screwing the Big 12 in this regard.
 
Last edited:
I don't think its that bad. But it depends how it all shakes out, how many 3 loss B1G/SEC teams there are, and also WHO they are.

2 loss ISU would get in vs 3 loss Illinois, but probably not against 3 loss Michigan, for example.

Right now I think both Miami and FSU look the part.

So if you want B12 to be a 2 bid conference, need the SEC and especially the B1G to become real top heavy, real fast.

It would help a ton if Oregon and Ohio St would go undefeated - that would give Penn St 2 losses and they will probably find a third. Maybe you want Indy to go undefeated too and have 1 loss. Then hope Michigan losses another game or two. I think the B1G is where the B12 has to "steal" a bid. I don't think Maryland, USC, UW, or Bert Bulimia are going to win 10 games.

The other side of it is the B12 needs to be top heavy to get 2 bids. Can't have 7 teams with 2 or 3 losses each. That's a recipe for 1 bid.
The issue now is scheduling. These big conferences almost guarantee the big ten and sec to have several 1-2 loss teams. Throw in the media ranking all their schools high and it’s hard to break through.
 
KSU was ranked when the two schools played, when was the last time the squawks beat a ranked team? Changing the goal line to they have to be ranked at the end of the year is just as crazy as saying they are not going to be ranked at the end of the season.
To be fair the way the 'Cats have been in a free fall since Iowa State broke them, I have a hard time calling that a ranked win (in any way that really matters) with a straight face.
 


It also doesn't help that we have incompetent people holding AP votes, and the AP vote does impact CFP ranking.

The AP and Coach's poll should both be released on Mondays, not Sundays. Asking reporters to absorb and process all of the games on a Saturday, and submit a ranking by like 9AM EDT on Sunday is stupid. It forces bad ballots and voting with incomplete information.

There is a reason that the CFP Committee releases their ranking on a Tuesday.
 
The AP and Coach's poll should both be released on Mondays, not Sundays. Asking reporters to absorb and process all of the games on a Saturday, and submit a ranking by like 9AM EDT on Sunday is stupid. It forces bad ballots and voting with incomplete information.

There is a reason that the CFP Committee releases their ranking on a Tuesday.
I completely agree with that and think rankings would definitely be better. I still believe that giving media members the power to rank teams however they want with virtually zero consequences is ridiculous for the most important sport in college athletics.

Imagine if the NFL did it this way, and team writers got to rank who they believed were good or not and that essentially determined the playoffs? I get there’s a structure in place there but there needs to be something better in this sport.
 
The AP and Coach's poll should both be released on Mondays, not Sundays. Asking reporters to absorb and process all of the games on a Saturday, and submit a ranking by like 9AM EDT on Sunday is stupid. It forces bad ballots and voting with incomplete information.

There is a reason that the CFP Committee releases their ranking on a Tuesday.
They also should be federally banned from issuing any type of preseason poll, or any poll at all until after week 3.