The polls are so biased that FSU doesn't even have to win a game to still receive votes in the polls. They are receiving more votes then a few undefeated teams, including a couple of AAC undefeated teams.

I propose a rule for voters, you can not vote for winless teams in week 4 of the polls, period.

Circumstances

What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

Mythical,because it didn't happen.

FSU is 255th is rushing in the nation (all schools) and 212th total offense, while scoring 28 points (14 points a game) in total.

FSU erupted for 21 points against an average defense in NCST. NCST held powerhouse Marshall to 20 points and juggernaut Furman to 16 points (5 points less then FSU mustered).

In other words, NCST is not a great defense and FSU is not a good offense.

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

Rank them again once they earn it. Stop always giving the benefit of the doubt to the brand.

(09-24-2017 06:53 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

Rank them again once they earn it. Stop always giving the benefit of the doubt to the brand.

^^ This.

I wasn't talking about FSU; just a hypothetical against banning all 0-2 teams from the polls as the OP suggested.

Tradition and Prestige points lol

(09-25-2017 12:06 PM)Chappy Wrote:  I wasn't talking about FSU; just a hypothetical against banning all 0-2 teams from the polls as the OP suggested.

But your original reply wasn't realistic. I've never seen such a difficult first two game schedule in the 50+ years I've watched college football. Most teams schedule a cupcake around a tough OOC game, no less then scheduling back to back#1 and #2 OOC games. I'd think you'd have a better chance of winning the lottery then that happening.

Eye test. Recruiting services rankings.


T


...

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

There are 3 unknown quantities here. Who's to say that #1 or #2 are good if their marquee wins are against a winless team (#3).

Rankings need to go away. All that should matter is conference champions, like FCS.

(09-25-2017 01:15 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

There are 3 unknown quantities here. Who's to say that #1 or #2 are good if their marquee wins are against a winless team (#3).

Rankings need to go away. All that should matter is conference champions, like FCS.

Exactly! Rankings do the recruiting, not the other way around. Make the playing field equal and see how the "elite" recruit then.

(09-25-2017 01:15 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

There are 3 unknown quantities here. Who's to say that #1 or #2 are good if their marquee wins are against a winless team (#3).

Rankings need to go away. All that should matter is conference champions, like FCS.

Good point, you really wouldn't know those games were 1 vs 3 and 2 vs 3 until the end of the season.

(09-25-2017 12:43 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 12:06 PM)Chappy Wrote:  I wasn't talking about FSU; just a hypothetical against banning all 0-2 teams from the polls as the OP suggested.

But your original reply wasn't realistic. I've never seen such a difficult first two game schedule in the 50+ years I've watched college football. Most teams schedule a cupcake around a tough OOC game, no less then scheduling back to back#1 and #2 OOC games. I'd think you'd have a better chance of winning the lottery then that happening.

I never said it was realistic. Just possible.

(09-25-2017 01:50 PM)sfink16 Wrote:  

(09-25-2017 01:15 PM)SublimeKnight Wrote:  

(09-24-2017 06:39 PM)Chappy Wrote:  What if a team lost in overtime to the #1 team in week one and the #2 team in week two? They could hypothetically be the third best team in the country but 0-2.

There are 3 unknown quantities here. Who's to say that #1 or #2 are good if their marquee wins are against a winless team (#3).

Rankings need to go away. All that should matter is conference champions, like FCS.

Exactly! Rankings do the recruiting, not the other way around. Make the playing field equal and see how the "elite" recruit then.

Last week when LSU got rolled by MissSt, Booger McFarland (former LSU) said it was "obvious" LSU had more talent, but poor execution.

This is like someone winning a flex off before a chess match. You have to actually be good at football at some point, which is a team game. It matters little how fast or strong each individual player is if they can't work together.

The polls have been a scam since......forever

(09-25-2017 02:15 PM)shere khan Wrote:  The polls have been a scam since......forever

I agree. Power Indexes on the other hand, completely different beast.

(09-25-2017 02:15 PM)shere khan Wrote:  The polls have been a scam since......forever

The Coaches even more so. They don't even watch the games. The reality is, I know more about (insert random team) in (insert random eastern conference) than a Coach who coaches in the PAC 12, as that coach only watches the teams that he is playing.