17
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why do people use rankings at the time a game was played vs current/final season ranking?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:33 am
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:33 am
Do they realize this makes zero sense?
If it’s the current season, teams current ranking should be used.
If it’s in reference to a season already completed, the final rankings should absolutely be used when referencing games.
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about from another thread, talking about how good FSU schedules was:
If it’s the current season, teams current ranking should be used.
If it’s in reference to a season already completed, the final rankings should absolutely be used when referencing games.
Here’s an example of what I’m talking about from another thread, talking about how good FSU schedules was:
quote:
FWIW, they did beat #5 LSU, #16 Duke and #15 Louisville. Those were the rankings at the time of the game.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:39 am to Flaming Meons
You use whatever makes your team look better
Duh
Duh
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:40 am to Flaming Meons
quote:
Why do people use rankings at the time a game was played vs current/final season ranking?
-they're dumb
-they lack any semblance of logical thinking skills
-it makes their argument look better
Pick one
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:45 am to Flaming Meons
The SEC uses it because all of our teams cannibalize each other throughout the season, so a 9-3 or 8-4 SEC team could be as good as a 12-0 ACC or B12 team or an 11-1 or 10-2 B10 team.
The college football ranking system is a complete farce. There needs to be metrics formally adopted like NET in CBB.
The college football ranking system is a complete farce. There needs to be metrics formally adopted like NET in CBB.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:56 am to Flaming Meons
It would take the value of beating them away. If you beat a good team they drop so your win would lose value. You’d essentially be punishing the teams who win for winning.
This post was edited on 10/22/26 at 10:57 am
Posted on 10/22/26 at 10:59 am to Madking
quote:
It would take the value of beating them away. If you beat a good team they drop so your win would lose value.
What if the value was artificially inflated?
quote:
You’d essentially be punishing the teams who win for winning.
This post was edited on 10/22/26 at 11:00 am
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:00 am to Flaming Meons
The explanation is pretty simple.
If you pull up a team's schedule from the previous year, it gives you the ranking at the time of the game.
The point you're making is valid, but these arguments aren't that serious that we should expect people to then cross check with end of season rankings.
It's not that deep
If you pull up a team's schedule from the previous year, it gives you the ranking at the time of the game.
The point you're making is valid, but these arguments aren't that serious that we should expect people to then cross check with end of season rankings.
It's not that deep
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:00 am to Flaming Meons
quote:
If it’s the current season, teams current ranking should be used.
So if I upset the #1 team in the country, I have to say I beat the #5 team the next day after the polls are released?
This post was edited on 10/22/26 at 11:01 am
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:03 am to Madking
quote:
If you beat a good team they drop so your win would lose value. You’d essentially be punishing the teams who win for winning.
ok, or...
what if you beat a team in the first few games of the season that was artificially highly rated based on summer workouts, then that team goes on to finish 3-9. Why should you get credit for a "TOP 10 WIN" when that team in reality was completely trash?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:03 am to Flaming Meons
Think about it this way, you beat a top 5 team, they drop to say 11 then lose another game and end up in the teens. If you hadn’t beat them they’d be a top 10 team. If you lose to them and they lose one more game the same team stays or is around the top 5. So beating them is worse than losing to them because of how you perceive rankings?
This post was edited on 10/22/26 at 11:06 am
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:04 am to Dadren
quote:
So if I upset the #1 team in the country, I have to say I beat the #5 team the next day after the polls are released?
Potentially having a small sample size makes things iffy.
At the end of the season, if they are 5, yea you should say you beat 5.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:05 am to WG_Dawg
How many times has that happened?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:05 am to Dadren
quote:
So if I upset the #1 team in the country, I have to say I beat the #5 team the next day after the polls are released?
No but at end of season if said #1 team finishes 7-6 unranked like 2012 USC that win means nothing when looking back at the season
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:06 am to Madking
quote:
So beating them is worse than losing to them because of how you perceive rankings?
In no world ever is losing better than winning lol. Don’t be an idiot.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:07 am to Flaming Meons
quote:
Don’t be an idiot.
You must not have a mirror in your house
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:08 am to Madking
You’re making things up to fit an argument that makes no sense.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:11 am to Flaming Meons
Makes no sense to you because you’re an ignorant nerd
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:12 am to Flaming Meons
But in college when you're ranking the teams rather than just who wins the Division goes to the playoffs
it matters when you played the team how good they were at the time
like if a team loses a starting quarterback but you beat them when they had their starter that's a better win and they might have deserved the high ranking when they played
it matters when you played the team how good they were at the time
like if a team loses a starting quarterback but you beat them when they had their starter that's a better win and they might have deserved the high ranking when they played
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:27 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
matters when you played the team how good they were at the time
No this doesn’t matter at all
quote:
like if a team loses a starting quarterback but you beat them when they had their starter that's a better win and they might have deserved the high ranking when they played
Possibly. But these two aren’t the same
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:29 am to Madking
quote:
Makes no sense to you because you’re an ignorant nerd
Nah it’s just an asinine way of looking at things. You’re basing your whole argument on something that’s not fully based on reality.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News