forums

Is it really neccessary to rank 25 teams?

J

jackedaround

Junior
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
4,086
I mean really? IA state with 4 losses at 22 just because they beat an over rated texas team and had a close loss to OU. Same with USC W.

I'm not sure why it even matters to me. It shouldn't but it is annoying to see 4 loss teams ranked above 1 loss teams.
 
Advertisement
jackedaround said:
I mean really? IA state with 4 losses at 22 just because they beat an over rated texas team and had a close loss to OU. Same with USC W.

I'm not sure why it even matters to me. It shouldn't but it is annoying to see 4 loss teams ranked above 1 loss teams.
Click to expand...
Yes its necessary but no its not necessary to have all but 4 SEC teams in the top 25
 
Tbh..it’s really not lol..but it’s the world we live in so why is this a thread??
 
Advertisement
giphy.gif
 
This post has moved the human experience one step forward.
 
It's necessary for two main reasons:

1. You need the rankings to measure and weigh the competition. This is one of the ways strength of schedule is measured and how far a team can move up or down in the rankings. LSU is #1 because they have the most wins against highly ranked teams. In other words, who you play matters.

2. Rankings are needed for CFP and Bowl Games. Obviously the top 4 make it to the CFP. However, bowl game matchups are determined by conference affiliation and rankings. It's the reason why we could be playing in the Orange Bowl. No team in the ACC other than Clemson is ranked in the top 25. Orange Bowl rule says highest ranked ACC team not in the CFP is selected. So, if Clemson makes it to the CFP and no other ACC team is ranked in the top 25, then the Orange Bowl committer can chose whatever ACC team they want and most likely Miami if we win out.
 
Last edited:
Do this: Power 5 Conference winners go to playoffs along with 3 at large. Not sure it's necessary to really rank 25 teams especially from pre-season on, but it's not going away. Also, our fan base would be giddy if we were in the rankings.
 
Advertisement
It helps sell games that most people would also flip on the tv. They look a lot more appetizing to watch when that little number is next to the teams name.
 
jackedaround said:
I mean really? IA state with 4 losses at 22 just because they beat an over rated texas team and had a close loss to OU. Same with USC W.

I'm not sure why it even matters to me. It shouldn't but it is annoying to see 4 loss teams ranked above 1 loss teams.
Click to expand...

You're not entirely off base here, IMO. The only rankings that really matter anymore are the Playoff 4, the rest is just tradition. It's helps sell interest in all the completely irrelevant bowl games.
 
jackedaround said:
I mean really? IA state with 4 losses at 22 just because they beat an over rated texas team and had a close loss to OU. Same with USC W.

I'm not sure why it even matters to me. It shouldn't but it is annoying to see 4 loss teams ranked above 1 loss teams.
Click to expand...
Totally agree.
 
Number1CanesFan said:
It's necessary for two main reasons:

1. You need the rankings to measure and weigh the competition. This is one of the ways strength of schedule is measured and how far a team can move up or down in the rankings. LSU is #1 because they have the most wins against highly ranked teams. In other words, who you play matters.

2. Rankings are needed for CFP and Bowl Games. Obviously the top 4 make it to the CFP. However, bowl game matchups are determined by conference affiliation and rankings. It's the reason why we could be playing in the Orange Bowl. No team in the ACC other than Clemson is ranked in the top 25. Orange Bowl rule says highest ranked ACC team not in the CFP is selected. So, if Clemson makes it to the CFP and no other ACC team is ranked in the top 25, then the Orange Bowl committer can chose whatever ACC team the want and most likely Miami if we win out.
Click to expand...
sure but division 1 baksetball has over 300 teams. they arent ranking 60 of them.

i just think the top 15 is fine. but i know why it has to be. the AP and coaches can still rank them. Just not certain the committee needs to waste time doing teams 16-25.
 
Advertisement
Having answered all other questions about college football, attention has finally turned towards the burning issue of what exactly is the correct number of teams to rank.
 
Advertisement
People used to care about things that weren't national championships. Making a bowl game used to be a big thing. Winning your conference. Now it's 120 teams that don't matter and 4 that do. Kind of a shame.
 
I think they need to rank all 130-whatever teams, to be honest.

25 is lazy and subjective and its clear to me these committee members do not watch enough college football.

I tend to look at SP+ anyway, which ranks all 130 schools in a measurable manner.

Only subjectivity you need to incorporate beyond SP+ is did you play in your conference title game, did you win your conference?

If you look at it that way...your Top 4 would be Ohio State, LSU, Clemson...and 4th spot, depending on how the rest of the season turns out will be Georgia, Big XII Champ (if Oklahoma), or Pac12 Champ (if Utah) - Oregon is a bit behind currently, and Big XII champ would get in over them if they won the Pac12.

You could knock 2-loss Georgia out if 1-loss Pac12 or Big XII champ. If everything holds, #4 would be Oklahoma in this scenario. Which, seems pretty ******* accurate to me, idk.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top