Post your Final Top 25 here

[24seven]

So posting completely ignorant and ridiculous things is only ok for you? Got it.

Missouri and southcarolina beat no one and they deserve to be top 5 and UCF, really? But Michigan State has better wins than Missouri and USC combined.

???
Gamecocks beat 6 teams that WON bowl games.
Beat 4 teams that had 10+ wins.
Beat 3 teams that finished in Top 12 (and 5 that finished Top 25)
Have the longest home winning streak in nation (18)

You ain't be lookin to smart win you say stoopid shyt, dude.

 

[RACER-MIKE]

1. Florida State (14-0)
2. Michigan State (13-1)
3. Oklahoma (11-2)
4. Auburn (12-2)
5. South Carolina (11-2)
6. Alabama (11-2)
7. Clemson (11-2)
8. Missouri (12-2)
9. UCF (12-1)
10. Ohio State (12-2)
11. Stanford (11-3)
12. Oregon (11-2)
13. Baylor (11-2)
14. UCLA (10-3)
15. LSU (10-3)
16. Arizona State (10-4)
17. Wisconsin (9-4)
18. Texas A&M (9-4)
19. Notre Dame (9-4)
20. USC (9-4)
21. Duke (9-4)
22. Nebraska (9-4)
23. Vanderbilt (9-4)
24. Washington (9-4)
25. Fresno State (11-2)

 

[963BUSC]

1. Florida State
2. Michigan State
3. Auburn
4. South Carolina
5. Oklahoma
6. Clemson
7. Stanford
8. Oregon
9. Missouri
10. Ohio State
11. Alabama
12. UCF
13. Baylor
14. UCLA
15. Oklahoma State
16. USC
17. Wisconsin
18. Texas A&M
19. Duke
20 LSU
21. Nebraska
22. Arizona State
23. Washington
24. Notre Dame
25. North Dakota State

My favorite list so far.

 

[BigRedMoe]

But it wasn't a better record.

Got it. Throw math out window. Throw head to head out window.

 

[4down20]

Got it. Throw math out window. Throw head to head out window.

Just because you have a 9-4 record vs a 8-5 record says nothing about who those wins and losses come to.

The poll you are complaining about are the results of a computer poll, so it's 100% based on math. As it turns out, Georgia went 8-5 on what it considers to be the 5th toughest schedule for the season. While Nebraska went 9-4 on what it considers to be the 76th most difficult schedule in the country. And that is while my computer generally gives the Big10 more respect than others.

In fact, my computer pretty much agrees with the overall composite of ALL computers when it comes to Georgia vs Nebraska.

College Football Ranking Composite

The average ranking of Georgia: 23rd
The average ranking of Nebraska: 36th.

My rankings: Georgia 21st, Nebraska 36th

As for head to head, if they were close together, then head to head does kick in. But this isn't even close.

Sorry, I can't please everyone. And like it or not, I use the principles people claim they care about. The bowl game was 1 game, it doesn't justify a ranking all alone.

 

[4down20]

And btw, I had Nebraska ranked #10 at the end of last year on a 10-4 record.

Was that awful too?

The difference: Nebraska was seen as having the 4th toughest schedule overall.

 

[The Crimson King]

Should we count this up?

 

[Wild Turkey]

Btw, Michigan St beat an Ohio St that really don't play any good teams until it played Michigan St. Ohio St went on to lose to Clemson, a team South Carolina beat much more convincingly.

South Carolina did lose to Tennessee and Georgia(who Clemson beat) during the year. However, South Carolina also beat Missouri a top5 team by most peoples rankings, as well as the UCF team that most people have ranking in the top10 and just beat Baylor in a bowl game. UCF's only loss on the year.

I rank South Carolina with a top10 SoS this year, worlds ahead of Michigan St.

You beat a Stanford team who lost 2 games during the year, one of which was to USC and the other to Utah.

So, cry more. I have no interest coddling to teams who play weak schedules, not even my own team.

Explain South Carolina being ranked above Auburn please...would love to hear that one.

 

[Olyduck]

1. Florida St
2. South Carolina
3. Auburn
4. Missouri
5. UCF
6. Michigan St
7. Stanford
8. Ohio St
9. Oklahoma
10. Clemson
11. Baylor
12. Alabama
13. Louisville
14. LSU
15. Arizona St
16. UCLA
17. Oklahoma St
18. Oregon
19. Texas A&M
20. Notre Dame
21. Georgia
22. Washington
23. Southern California
24. Wisconsin
25. Duke

 

[BigRedMoe]

And btw, I had Nebraska ranked #10 at the end of last year on a 10-4 record.

Was that awful too?

The difference: Nebraska was seen as having the 4th toughest schedule overall.

Yes, that was insanely too high.

 

[BigRedMoe]

Just because you have a 9-4 record vs a 8-5 record says nothing about who those wins and losses come to.

The poll you are complaining about are the results of a computer poll, so it's 100% based on math. As it turns out, Georgia went 8-5 on what it considers to be the 5th toughest schedule for the season. While Nebraska went 9-4 on what it considers to be the 76th most difficult schedule in the country. And that is while my computer generally gives the Big10 more respect than others.

In fact, my computer pretty much agrees with the overall composite of ALL computers when it comes to Georgia vs Nebraska.

College Football Ranking Composite

The average ranking of Georgia: 23rd
The average ranking of Nebraska: 36th.

My rankings: Georgia 21st, Nebraska 36th

As for head to head, if they were close together, then head to head does kick in. But this isn't even close.

Sorry, I can't please everyone. And like it or not, I use the principles people claim they care about. The bowl game was 1 game, it doesn't justify a ranking all alone.

I admit, I don't care much for your poll or its methods. SOS is not the end all be all for me. Teams are limited to playing who is on their schedule and thus it should fall further down the list when coming up with rankings. Common logic would dictate that more wins + a head to head matchup = higher ranking.

 

[4down20]

Same reason Alabama is way down @ #12, SoS.

 

[4down20]

Explain South Carolina being ranked above Auburn please...would love to hear that one.

South Carolina has a slightly better SoS than Auburn. Slightly better power rating(makes up very little, but some). Points wise, they are extremely close, South Carolina is only ahead by 9 points, so it's a virtual tie really.

 

[4down20]

Yes, that was insanely too high.

I think it was fitting for their SoS.

 

[BigRedMoe]

I think it was fitting for their SoS.

Agree to disagree.

 

[4down20]

I admit, I don't care much for your poll or its methods. SOS is not the end all be all for me. Teams are limited to playing who is on their schedule and thus it should fall further down the list when coming up with rankings. Common logic would dictate that more wins + a head to head matchup = higher ranking.

Well if I just wanted to copy ESPN and hype, I wouldn't need a computer for it. I apply the principles everyone says they care about. It's not perfect, that is for sure. However, it does what it does and it does it without any bias towards teams, and without any ESPN hype.

As for your argument about your schedule being who it's on, that's the Boise St argument and it's weak. But aside from that, I don't use a raw SoS number. If you had actually won all the games on your schedule, then you would probably ranked really high, as in #1 because Florida St had a weak SoS. Instead you lost 4 games on a weak schedule.

1 game does not make a schedule. That is the difference between you and the computer. You want to pretend that 1 bowl game was the entire year. That it's the only head to head matchup that matters.

How far ahead of Nebraska should I have Minnesota? Since head to head is what matters most?

How far ahead should I have UCLA? is #16 high enough? Or do I need to rank UCLA higher than that to make room for Nebraska?

I have Michigan St #6, I guess they need to be up to #2 like others here.

And Iowa St, I'll suppose I need to add them to the top 25 as well.

And gosh, now that we've got those guys in the top25, I suppose we need to look at who beat those teams and add them ahead, since they won head to head as well. Minnesota lost to Syracuse(7-6), where in the top 25 do I need to rank Syracuse?

Bottom line, your method sucks and it's not really a method at all, it's just you looking for any thing to throw out there to rank your own team higher to support your bias. All the while throwing shit at me because I don't follow your bias.

 

[BigRedMoe]

Well if I just wanted to copy ESPN and hype, I wouldn't need a computer for it. I apply the principles everyone says they care about. It's not perfect, that is for sure. However, it does what it does and it does it without any bias towards teams, and without any ESPN hype.

As for your argument about your schedule being who it's on, that's the Boise St argument and it's weak. But aside from that, I don't use a raw SoS number. If you had actually won all the games on your schedule, then you would probably ranked really high, as in #1 because Florida St had a weak SoS. Instead you lost 4 games on a weak schedule.

1 game does not make a schedule. That is the difference between you and the computer. You want to pretend that 1 bowl game was the entire year. That it's the only head to head matchup that matters.

How far ahead of Nebraska should I have Minnesota? Since head to head is what matters most?

How far ahead should I have UCLA? is #16 high enough? Or do I need to rank UCLA higher than that to make room for Nebraska?

I have Michigan St #6, I guess they need to be up to #2 like others here.

And Iowa St, I'll suppose I need to add them to the top 25 as well.

And gosh, now that we've got those guys in the top25, I suppose we need to look at who beat those teams and add them ahead, since they won head to head as well. Minnesota lost to Syracuse(7-6), where in the top 25 do I need to rank Syracuse?

Bottom line, your method sucks and it's not really a method at all, it's just you looking for any thing to throw out there to rank your own team higher to support your bias. All the while throwing shit at me because I don't follow your bias.

End of year ranking should have more weight to how the teams finished. As in most recent games. Having a Georgia team ranked that had just lost to a team with more overall wins while that team is left out of said rankings makes little sense.

And apparently your Jimmies are Rustled and your poll is shit, imho.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

4down20 is such a crybaby about people criticizing his computer rankings. Why do you post them if you don't want to hear criticism? They put out screwy results that only you think are "unbiased" and "correct". When you write the ranking system you inject your bias into it by weighting what you believe to be important in your criteria. Why you can't grasp that I will never understand. Computer rankings have a place and I enjoy looking at them and using them as a source for ranking teams. They are not the end all be all of unbiased ranking though. They just are a different method that doesn't really fit in an opinion poll. It screws up the results. We should have our own computer rankings poll. I bet it would end up awesome if we could get enough people who participated.

 

[4down20]

End of year ranking should have more weight to how the teams finished. As in most recent games. Having a Georgia team ranked that had just lost to a team with more overall wins while that team is left out of said rankings makes little sense.

And apparently your Jimmies are Rustled and your poll is shit, imho.

I already showed you a link that averages over 100 different polls, and the average rankings of all that has Georgia in the top25 and Nebraska right where I have them at #36.

In the human polls, the AP has neither ranked. The Coaches has Nebraska #25 and Georgia not ranked and the Harris has Georgia #23 and Nebraska not ranked.

Apparently you are in a minority.

There are a few things I wished turned out different in my results. Oregon for example. Maybe not having South Carolina quite so high. But of those things, Georgia and Nebraska is not among them, I would not change them at all.

 

[4down20]

4down20 is such a crybaby about people criticizing his computer rankings. Why do you post them if you don't want to hear criticism? They put out screwy results that only you think are "unbiased" and "correct". When you write the ranking system you inject your bias into it by weighting what you believe to be important in your criteria. Why you can't grasp that I will never understand. Computer rankings have a place and I enjoy looking at them and using them as a source for ranking teams. They are not the end all be all of unbiased ranking though. They just are a different method that doesn't really fit in an opinion poll. It screws up the results. We should have our own computer rankings poll. I bet it would end up awesome if we could get enough people who participated.

People asked why the results are a certain way, and because I respond to that I'm crying?



I'd love to see you try to do a computer poll. I seriously doubt you could do it.