Rankings

[BillBrasky4Cy]

AP and even CFP rankings aren’t meant to be a pure analytics power ranking. OSU has a better resume than ISU. A 3 point win at him doesn’t change that. If you want to use your same logic if ISU wins the next two and Iowa loses two more should they be ranked ahead of ISU?

People want to discount the early losses like it’s an ESPN NFL power ranking because ISU is playing really well. ISU is probably one of the best 12-15 teams in the country, but ISU has an 18-23 type resume.

The committee has proven time and time again that early losses don't carry as much weight... Yes, Iowa State is two loss team but who you lose to also matters. Not all resume's are created equally and for the most part the committee has done a really good job in years past weighing this.

 

[bosco]

I hate Texas, but I think I will be rooting for Texas. ISU already lost to Baylor so removing them from the log jam at #2 helps ISU. Then ISU and OSU are tied for #2 with ISU having the head to head tie breaker. Texas is already a game behind.

Texas beats Baylor and then we put the nail in Texas's coffin the week after.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

Exactly this. Maybe this is the year ISU doesn’t get a big CFP bump, but it is shaping up to happen again. As analytics are used more and more, if ISU plays a clean game and cruises vs WVU be prepared for a top 15 in the first CFP followed by lots of butthurt from other fanbases.

For fun lets say Baylor beats Texas. Iowa State would have losses against two top 15 teams and wins as well. If you add a WV road win we will actually have a pretty solid resume to date. Context matters.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

It will be interesting to see how the committee treats Wake Forest. With their resume I don't know if you can even put them in the top 10. As bad as the ACC is you also have to think that the committee won't want to position Wake to even have a shot at a playoff bid. That would be a ratings disaster and nobody wants that. Pitt would fall into this as well. They aren't going to get the bump Clemson has enjoyed.

 

[amishclone]

Baylor hosts Texas this weekend. Math nerds... Who should we cheer for? I feel like it's Texas, but I'm not sure

Never cheer for Texas

 

[cyclones500]

Never cheer for Texas

But is it OK to cheer against UT's opponent, in this scenario?

 

[knowlesjam]

Ha, saw this in the ESPN ranking discussion on BYU...

"We might as well make the Cougars Pac-12 champions at this point. With a 4-0 mark against the conference this season, BYU has more Pac-12 wins than any team in the conference."

Given that BYU, along with Cincy, Houston, and CF are coming to the Big 12...very nice! And again, please tell me why the Pac 12 still lives?

 

[Remo Gaggi]

First to 6. It's going to be like the 9-6 game they had a few years ago.

Betting the under.

 

[AuH2O]

I get the rankings of individual teams might be too high, but for all the moaning about the media over valuing the Big 10, even with that 5/14 Big 10 teams are ranked, and 4/10 Big 12 teams are ranked.

And most likely OSU knocks PSU out of the rankings next week. Gophers got 1 vote, so maybe they can climb in, or Wisconsin with a win over Iowa, but we could very well be looking at both leagues with 4 ranked teams next week.

 

[Pope]

AP and even CFP rankings aren’t meant to be a pure analytics power ranking. OSU has a better resume than ISU. A 3 point win at him doesn’t change that. If you want to use your same logic if ISU wins the next two and Iowa loses two more should they be ranked ahead of ISU?

People want to discount the early losses like it’s an ESPN NFL power ranking because ISU is playing really well. ISU is probably one of the best 12-15 teams in the country, but ISU has an 18-23 type resume.

I'm not arguing with your response, but the whole point of rankings is to supposedly identify which teams are best. Obviously, for the AP rankings the results of head to head competition are less important than the "overall resume". However, the "overall resume" is significantly less important when it comes to the College Football Playoffs Ranking, and that's why it's the only ranking that matters to me.

 

[JM4CY]

Never cheer for Texas

I agree but you probably should if you want to increase our chances of making it back to Dallas.

 

[AuH2O]

I'm not arguing with your response, but the whole point of rankings is to supposedly identify which teams are best. Obviously, for the AP rankings the results of head to head competition are less important than the "overall resume". However, the "overall resume" is significantly less important when it comes to the College Football Playoffs Ranking, and that's why it's the only ranking that matters to me.

Yes, the CFP is all that matters, but it's not simply who is the best team in a pure sense. The resume, including what happened in September are still going to be factored into that determination.

It's sort of like the NCAA tournament. There's always going to be discrepancies between who has the best resume vs. who is the team playing really well right now that no one wants to play. Those can be very different. The CFP seems to be a blend of the two, and it should be.

If it was a matter of looking at the analytics and seeing who would be favored right now on a neutral field, ISU would probably be top 10. If it was purely a matter of looking at records and SOS, ISU is probably barely in the top 25. I'm fine with the AP being just a pure reflection of resume, and the CFP being some blend of the two.

 

[Kinch]

If I am a voter I am looking at Iowa State's schedule, I am thinking,Iowa State is only halfway through their resume and they are 1-2 against three top 15 teams, including a home loss.Way too early to be concerned. Should Iowa State win the Big 12 that would mean half of their games are against Top 15 teams, including two or three games against No. 2 opponents. Iowa State still has a chance to be 4-2 against top 15 teams, riding a four-game winning streak. No one will have that resume. That's why let's enjoy the journey that is ahead.