0
- 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
re: Why do people use rankings at the time a game was played vs current/final season ranking?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:30 am to Madking
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:30 am to Madking
quote:
How many times has that happened?
A team going 3-9? Idk.
If you're asking how many times a preseason top 10 team has done far worse and finished barely ranked, or even unranked, I'd say "a shite ton".
I mean it's just beyond all rational thinking that where a team was ranked in September (at game time) shoudl matter one iota compared to where they ranked in December once we have a full accounting of how good they actually are. It defies all common sense.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:33 am to Flaming Meons
You don't think a team is a better football team when they have the full contingent of players especially a starting quarterback
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:33 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
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
The inverse is also true. If you're out a couple of starters and lose a close game, it is still a loss on your schedule, but you probably would have won at full strength. I'm talking like a 3 point road loss where you held the lead in the 4th, but your star QB, linebacker, DT, or WR went out with an injury during the game and the play of the backups at that position cost you the win. The college season for most teams is a tough one to get through without losing starters or depth. It isn't like it was 10 years ago where you could stack talent at all positions. I think Ohio State loses 1-2 more games, but if Sayin is back for the last couple of games and they look like a top 5 team again, their record might not reflect that.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:37 am to Flaming Meons
You project a lot and make a lot of false claims. You also have no idea day you’re talking about
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:41 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
You don't think a team is a better football team when they have the full contingent of players especially a starting quarterback
Man I’ve seen your posts on here. You’re often confused and rambling. Either you’re not making any sense or you’re just not following what I’m saying.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:42 am to TU Rob
Yea there’s nuances when it comes to major injuries.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:44 am to Madking
Should Oregon get credit for beating the #2 ranked team last year by beating penn state?
This is a simple yes or no answer.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 11:46 am to Flaming Meons
Of course. The fact that you don’t know this answer says everything.
This post was edited on 10/22/26 at 11:47 am
Posted on 10/22/26 at 12:18 pm to Flaming Meons
The hype and spotlight around a week 1 top 5 matchup makes it a harder game then if you beat a team on a normal Saturday who becomes top 5 at the end of the season
And if a team starts losing after you beat them, that’s not really your fault. You beat a top 5 team when you played
And if a team starts losing after you beat them, that’s not really your fault. You beat a top 5 team when you played
Posted on 10/22/26 at 12:29 pm to Marlboro Smooth
quote:
You use whatever makes your team look better
Exactly, I can remember folks referencing beating No. 8 Miami all year long in 2018 even the Canes ended up 7-6 and nowhere near the top 25.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 12:29 pm to Flaming Meons
I think it’s best to use records of P4 opponents outside of their games against you.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 12:36 pm to Flaming Meons
Ranking at the time the game was played is completely meaningless if we're talking about evaluating teams after the regular season is over and all the data is in.
Lets say Team A and Team B both finish 10-2 and are on the bubble for the final playoff spot. Team C started the season #5 but finished 6-6 unranked. Team A and Team B both beat Team C but Team A beat them when they were number 5 and Team B beat them when they were unranked. Should Team A get credit for a top 5 win and get the playoff spot over Team B, even though they both beat Team C?
Lets say Team A and Team B both finish 10-2 and are on the bubble for the final playoff spot. Team C started the season #5 but finished 6-6 unranked. Team A and Team B both beat Team C but Team A beat them when they were number 5 and Team B beat them when they were unranked. Should Team A get credit for a top 5 win and get the playoff spot over Team B, even though they both beat Team C?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 12:42 pm to BuckeyeGoon
Which goes back to a few things:
1. pre-season rankings are r3+@rd3d
2. rankings are completely arbitrary and made up
1. pre-season rankings are r3+@rd3d
2. rankings are completely arbitrary and made up
Posted on 10/22/26 at 1:19 pm to Flaming Meons
Cause Dey dumb
Posted on 10/22/26 at 1:29 pm to Flaming Meons
Because the team you beat in September might have been a top team to start the season and then had a QB get hurt and lost games down the stretch. By using the ranking at the time, you have a better idea of how good the team was perceived at the time of the game.
The best way to list it for historical records would be to have the ranking and records of the teams entering the game and then the final rankings and records off to the side. That would provide the most context on how good the team was when they met and how good they were for the rest of the season after the game.
The best way to list it for historical records would be to have the ranking and records of the teams entering the game and then the final rankings and records off to the side. That would provide the most context on how good the team was when they met and how good they were for the rest of the season after the game.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 1:38 pm to mikesliveisacheater
quote:
how good the team was perceived at the time of the game
Why does that matter though? At the end of the year we know who was actually good and who wasn't. If the preseason rankings ended up being wrong about a team, why wouldn't you correct that instead of giving a team credit for beating a team we were wrong about?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 1:43 pm to Flaming Meons
Ohio State with Sayin
Ohio State without Sayin
It changes how good a team they are at the time
which affects the ranking
do you disagree?
Ohio State without Sayin
It changes how good a team they are at the time
which affects the ranking
do you disagree?
Posted on 10/22/26 at 1:59 pm to OWLFAN86
Here is a link spanning 30 years of how teams ended the season compared to their preseason rank. Any issues with the numbers take it up with the website, I didn't compile it.
LINK
Pick a random year. I'll use 2015. In that year we see the following teams end the season [X many] spots lower than they began in the preseason rankings:
Oregon- 14
Auburn- 19
UGA- 18
UCLA- 14
USC- 17
If you were to play one of those teams in the first month of the season when they were ranked decently high, why ON EARTH should you "get credit" for it considering all of those teams ended up not even being good? The best of the bunch was oregon who slipped in at #20 with 4 losses. Yet if you played them early you'd have a "top 5" win. It's nonsensical.
LINK
Pick a random year. I'll use 2015. In that year we see the following teams end the season [X many] spots lower than they began in the preseason rankings:
Oregon- 14
Auburn- 19
UGA- 18
UCLA- 14
USC- 17
If you were to play one of those teams in the first month of the season when they were ranked decently high, why ON EARTH should you "get credit" for it considering all of those teams ended up not even being good? The best of the bunch was oregon who slipped in at #20 with 4 losses. Yet if you played them early you'd have a "top 5" win. It's nonsensical.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 2:07 pm to Madking
quote:
Of course. The fact that you don’t know this answer says everything.
Ok
This certainly settles this lol
You’ve proven how ignorant you really are. At least when it comes to college football.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 2:08 pm to chalmetteowl
quote:
And if a team starts losing after you beat them, that’s not really your fault. You beat a top 5 team when you played
Why are we assigning blame? Nobody is at fault. You just should be honest about what you actually achieved.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News