The AP released its all-time Top 100 football poll today and four MAC teams made the list:

76. Toledo
81. Miami (ironically, tied with Cincinnati)
96. Northern Illinois
99. Bowling Green (tied with Columbia, William & Mary and Nevada)

All-time No. 1 was Ohio State followed by Oklahoma.

Toledo truly is underrated in the CFB world, great honor to make the list with them though

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(08-02-2016 03:36 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Toledo truly is underrated in the CFB world, great honor to make the list with them though

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Yea, they're almost never bad, and usually solid, going back a long way.

We're number 96! We're number 96!. Kinda lacks effect...

(08-02-2016 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 03:36 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Toledo truly is underrated in the CFB world, great honor to make the list with them though

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Yea, they're almost never bad, and usually solid, going back a long way.

We're number 96! We're number 96!. Kinda lacks effect...

Flip it around

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

AP lets biased journalists have votes. If you're a journalist in SEC, ACC, Pac-12, Big Ten, or Big 12 territory you're likely to vote those teams. If a team happens to be your alma mater you're likely to vote for them as well.

The other problem is, do teams get credit for being ranked prior to the season? Note Dame is a classic example where even in lean years, the media ranked them high. Then if you start the season with a couple wins you're in the poll for several weeks, and maybe you finish the season 5-7, well outside of rankings.

(08-02-2016 11:55 PM)MacLord Wrote:  The other problem is, do teams get credit for being ranked prior to the season? Note Dame is a classic example where even in lean years, the media ranked them high. Then if you start the season with a couple wins you're in the poll for several weeks, and maybe you finish the season 5-7, well outside of rankings.

True. Even if they start the season with a loss, they can still be ranked if they started high enough.

(08-02-2016 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 03:36 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Toledo truly is underrated in the CFB world, great honor to make the list with them though

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Yea, they're almost never bad, and usually solid, going back a long way.

We're number 96! We're number 96!. Kinda lacks effect...

And number 96 almost completely based on just the last 16 years. That's actually pretty impressive considering pre-21st century NIU football.

(08-03-2016 02:58 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 03:36 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Toledo truly is underrated in the CFB world, great honor to make the list with them though

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Yea, they're almost never bad, and usually solid, going back a long way.

We're number 96! We're number 96!. Kinda lacks effect...

And number 96 almost completely based on just the last 16 years. That's actually pretty impressive considering pre-21st century NIU football.

Shhhhhhh don't mention those dark, dark times...

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

An all-time top 100? Aren't there only 128 teams?

Quote:An all-time top 100? Aren't there only 128 teams?

ALL-Time, there's far more than 128 teams. Think # of basketball teams today in D1, I would imagine. We're going from the 1900s to past the 2000s.

So what teams not in the current 128 are included in the top 100?

Quote:99. Bowling Green (tied with Columbia, William & Mary and Nevada)

Two who BGSU is tied with aren't in FBS 128. :)

(08-03-2016 04:45 PM)axeme Wrote:  So what teams not in the current 128 are included in the top 100?

#72 Cornell
#77 Santa Clara
#83 Fordham
#85 Holy Cross
#87 Dartmouth
#90 Yale
#91 Princeton
#95 Villanova
#97 Duquesne
#98 Iowa Pre-Flight
#99 (tie) Columbia
#99 (tie) William and Mary

It's worth noting that the AP Poll has only existed since 1936. If it had started earlier, and you would almost certainly see some different names on there, like Oberlin and Case Western.

Also, I'm not a fan of their formula. At all. Giving teams 2-24 from each year just one point and the #1 10 points doesn't make sense. Why not give out points inverse to the rank (1-15) each year? I'd bet you would see some big changes.

(08-03-2016 05:27 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 04:45 PM)axeme Wrote:  So what teams not in the current 128 are included in the top 100?

#72 Cornell
#77 Santa Clara
#83 Fordham
#85 Holy Cross
#87 Dartmouth
#90 Yale
#91 Princeton
#95 Villanova
#97 Duquesne
#98 Iowa Pre-Flight
#99 (tie) Columbia
#99 (tie) William and Mary

It's worth noting that the AP Poll has only existed since 1936. If it had started earlier, and you would almost certainly see some different names on there, like Oberlin and Case Western.

Also, I'm not a fan of their formula. At all. Giving teams 2-24 from each year just one point and the #1 10 points doesn't make sense. Why not give out points inverse to the rank (1-15) each year? I'd bet you would see some big changes.

Yep, doesn't make sense.

The MAC would have worse standings if we were penalized for only getting teams in the 20's.
I like that it ranks you by weeks in the top 25, and more points for being #1. Makes sense to me.
Come to think of it Toledo did have 3 seasons in the top 15. Miami had a couple as well.

Actually, in the FWIW category, Miami had 5 top 15 finishes in the AP: 1955 (15th), 1973 (15th), 1974 (10th), 1975 (12th) and 2003 (10th).

----------------------------
P.S. this is the exCincyKid.....retired and have new laptop and email so had to change my moniker. So, it looks like I'm a rookie again on the board (clean slate as it were). But it's just lil' ol' me!

(08-04-2016 01:23 AM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  The MAC would have worse standings if we were penalized for only getting teams in the 20's.
I like that it ranks you by weeks in the top 25, and more points for being #1. Makes sense to me.
Come to think of it Toledo did have 3 seasons in the top 15. Miami had a couple as well.

It should be a gradual drop in points from #1 to lower rankings. Especially considering you usually never know which team is really better, #1 or #2 (or #3, etc.), until they added their fake playoffs recently.

Seems like number of wins vs games played/winning percentage would be a better way of ranking. Also, teams that have been playing at the highest/Division 1 level for decades should be given more weight than a school that only played at that level for a short time.

The polls used to be (and still are to some extent) just a popularity contest of the big time schools at times, especially before the last couple decades. Giving too much weight to final rankings only skews the results to the big (now P5) schools. Most MAC teams do not get ranked in the top 25 very often.