Cyclones will be ranked preseason #5 or #6

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
10,958
16,693
113
I have a friend who I agree with say there shouldn't even be top 25 rankings until week 4. Rather than hyping up some of these teams so early let them play then figure it out.
This is certainly true. Indiana was a fraud and shot to 12th or so by getting a blown call to beat Pedo State in OT. Based on last year and what they had back it was reasonable to have PSU ranked high in the preseason, but of course that turned out to be wrong. Still, Indiana benefited from this error and stayed ranked way too high all year based on losing to OSU and beating bad teams. Obviously this year was different since there were weeks of games in other conferences, but it was a good example of what happens.
 

ZRF

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2015
4,392
2,114
113
It's possible but not very likely given the reasons already mentioned. Clemson and Alabama are locks due to their consistency as well as run of recent playoff appearances and championships. Ohio State will be another that will be there and possibly Notre Dame. OU was the conference champ and the hype train on Rattler (and rightfully so) will be high. Georgia had a lot of pub early in the seasons and getting their QB back will put them in the top 6. That's before the persistent SEC bias plaguing preseason polls (A&M and Florida will likely be massively overrated).

We will likely be in the 7-10 range. 5 or 6 would be a justifiable surprise while lower than would be a slight. Anything lower than 15 would be unjustifiable.
 

bozclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 18, 2011
4,642
6,230
113
Indiana
The top ten were all traditional powers, but they also happened to finish 2019 ranked highly and none had lost (some hadn't played). Miami was ranked so highly due to the transfer of a QB thought to be a Heisman candidate, and they were off to a good start. Texas was a few spots higher than they should've been, but what's new?

I think people are acting like the top 10 or playoffs are always full of undeserving big-name teams. These teams are usually in the playoff/top 10 because they are the best teams.

As for the CFP, the biggest outrage that people point to is Ohio State getting picked over TCU and Baylor. It was not clear-cut. At the time of the playoff selection they all had one loss. Baylor's SOS sucked. OSU and TCUs were both were pretty good and very similar. However, do you pick TCU when Baylor won the head to head and also had one loss? Not to mention, OSU used their last weekend to completely dismantle a solid Wisconsin team. It just was not as clear cut as people remember.

And this year people are mad about OSU getting in over A&M? Going in to the selection OSU was 2-0 vs. the last CFP top 25. A&M was 1-1. Are we going to value a bunch of wins vs. unranked teams? I would've preferred A&M getting in since their only loss was to Alabama and avoiding a slip-up in the SEC for that many games is impressive. But I am not going to buy that OSU getting in over A&M is some travesty.

My point is that it is difficult to be a non traditional football power and be ranked in the preseason top 10. I think we should be, but I don't think it is a slam dunk. Schools like Texas, Georgia, Auburn, Penn St, LSU..... are going to get the benefit of the doubt most years. They have a lot of talent on their rosters and the press will often project them higher than a team like Iowa State. Some of those schools had really bad 2020 seasons, we will see if the press takes that into consideration.
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
10,958
16,693
113


I think a few of us mentioned earlier, UNC is going to be that team that gets lots of love this year that will make the average fan take a second look.

Because it wasn't the subject of endless crying, UNC had a ton of opt-outs vs. A&M and gave them all they can handle. UNC has the two ingredients that voters look for - Coach and QB. Howell is so damn good.
 

mj4cy

Asst. Regional Manager
Staff member
Mar 28, 2006
31,194
13,551
113
Iowa
Probably 10-13, because preseason rakings favor the B1G and SEC and bluebloods and sexy sleepers. There is 7 months for the sports world to talk themselves into over ranking those teams.

Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Georgia, Notre Dame will all be ahead of ISU

Clemson, USC, Florida, Texas A&M will probably be ahead of ISU

Indiana, Miami, North Carolina, Northwestern, BYU, Wisconsin, Texas may be ahead of ISU

Nebraska will work its way back into the Top 25 somehow.
 

RustShack

Chiefs Dynasty
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 27, 2010
13,248
7,435
113
Overland Park
I have a friend who I agree with say there shouldn't even be top 25 rankings until week 4. Rather than hyping up some of these teams so early let them play then figure it out.

That’s why the playoff rankings start later in the season. The only rankings that matter.
 

tolfbfan

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2015
2,890
4,500
113
58
Ohio
Start slow? Or Start Bad?

Bad isn't going to cut it, but "slow" is acceptable. I really think Campbell approaches the beginning of the season cautiously. You don't want to play your best football in September (at least psychologically). You need to be just good enough to win, and then continue to improve throughout the season. Check his comments after our Louisiana loss. He basically says exactly that. "I thought we were at a point in our program where a loss like this wouldn't happen" I believe he intentionally avoids getting the guys to play their A game week 1. You just have to be good enough to win, and then move on.

Save your best football for October and into November+
I think early in the year, talent level drives wins more than "The Process". But, I think CMC hopes that experience and depth will be enough early in the season to "win Ugly".
 
  • Agree
Reactions: dualthreat

cyclones500

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2010
35,663
23,144
113
Michigan
basslakebeacon.com
SIAP

Sporting News says #9


247's placement of ISU is more fun, but SN list looks more believable overall (at least as far as predicting actual AP rank). 247 is a bit light on SEC teams, compared to what we see historically. Not to say SEC "deserves" more teams for '21, since each season is different. I just don't think voting will materialize that way.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: bozclone

cyclonedave25

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 10, 2007
21,216
10,609
113
Chicago, IL
I have a friend who I agree with say there shouldn't even be top 25 rankings until week 4. Rather than hyping up some of these teams so early let them play then figure it out.
100% agree. The AP poll is for talking points and TV ratings only. The casual fan is more likely to tune into #7 Iowa St vs #15 Iowa, rather than just Iowa State vs Iowa.
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
45,603
34,886
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
100% agree. The AP poll is for talking points and TV ratings only. The casual fan is more likely to tune into #7 Iowa St vs #15 Iowa, rather than just Iowa State vs Iowa.
Absolutely agree. The problem is that it sets a baseline that every following poll stems from. Instead of seeing a highly ranked team lose an early game and reevaluating everything they look at "how far should we drop team X". And instead of looking anew at their entire body of work each week they simply look at how they did last week. Yeah they lost to another ranked team in week 1, but that other ranked team is now 3-3 so that loss is worse than we thought when we voted week 2. So maybe they haven't lost since but the fact that the loss is worse than we thought means it should be reevaluated and they might continue to drop because of it. Or that unranked team a barely ranked team lost to in week 1 is now 6-0 and ranked. It was a bad loss when we ranked in week 2 but definitely isn't now (sound familiar?).

The pollsters should throw away last week's rankings and evaluate teams each week. The problem is that practically no AP voter does this and definitely no Coaches voter does this.
 

tolfbfan

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2015
2,890
4,500
113
58
Ohio
Another reason - new comers. Where is our recruiting class rank, somewhere in the 40s? (I haven't looked in a while)

5 years of having a class in the 40s makes it hard for an outsider to rank you preseason in the top 10.
True, but when you typically take that top 40 talent and get into top 20 annually people notice and higher rankings result.
 

ZRF

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2015
4,392
2,114
113
I think a few of us mentioned earlier, UNC is going to be that team that gets lots of love this year that will make the average fan take a second look.

Because it wasn't the subject of endless crying, UNC had a ton of opt-outs vs. A&M and gave them all they can handle. UNC has the two ingredients that voters look for - Coach and QB. Howell is so damn good.

Much better rankings than Sporting News'.
 

jctisu

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2017
7,390
9,184
113
36
That’s why the playoff rankings start later in the season. The only rankings that matter.
Problem is it’s human nature to look at things that are already in place. You can’t tell me those on the committee don’t see the AP rankings leading up to those first CFP rankings. As some have said Indiana got a massive jolt due to a supposed top-ten win against Penn State. Well Penn State ended up being trash but the damage was done and even the CFP committee have them the benefit of the doubt coupled with playing Ohio State close.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: VeloClone

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
45,603
34,886
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
Problem is it’s human nature to look at things that are already in place. You can’t tell me those on the committee don’t see the AP rankings leading up to those first CFP rankings. As some have said Indiana got a massive jolt due to a supposed top-ten win against Penn State. Well Penn State ended up being trash but the damage was done and even the CFP committee have them the benefit of the doubt coupled with playing Ohio State close.
Agree. The committee(s*) should have unlabeled nitty-gritty sheets where they are evaluating resumes without team names attached. Then after that evaluation they can look at "eye-test" but not before. It might be eye-opening for them to see their own biases there in black and white.

*same goes for the BB tournament selection committee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jctisu

qwerty

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 3, 2020
6,014
8,425
113
59
Muscatine, IA
Agree. The committee(s*) should have unlabeled nitty-gritty sheets where they are evaluating resumes without team names attached. Then after that evaluation they can look at "eye-test" but not before. It might be eye-opening for them to see their own biases there in black and white.

*same goes for the BB tournament selection committee.
NET actually does a decent job of placing wins and losses into the quadrants. The W/L moves with the current ranking of the team, not at time of event.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: VeloClone