Week 9 Irrelevant Rankings

Lol Pitt above Penn State, maybe then our program finally gets off their arrogant ass and start scheduling a rivalry worth playing instead of shitgers and shitland
 
rmilia1 said:
Every team would be ranked if they never lost

Thats not the point

The point is should we be rewarding teams who lose to ranked teans who would be unranked othetwise

Philosophically its the same question as do you count a ranked win from when the game was played

If Bama beats number 20 this week and they drop out of the rankings they only dropped out due to Bama beating them so should we not count it as a ranked win ?

Etc etc
Click to expand...

So your problem is Alabama ranked at #3 rather than Texas A&M being 13. I can understand that. I had a problem with Iowa moving from #18 to #5 on the strength of beating two teams that were no longer ranked.

Same with Penn State...#19 to #4 for beating a Wisconsin team that is now 4-3 and an Auburn team that most think will finish 4th in the SEC West.

Same with Michigan and Michigan St...two teams with 14 wins and no losses. The also have 0 games between them against a team with a winning record vs P5 teams. Michigan State has played 7 teams that are a combined 4-24 versus P5 teams. Michigan slightly better at 9-21.

Should we still be rewarding teams for beating opponents that we once thought were good, but really aren't?
 
Rolltide94 said:
So your problem is Alabama ranked at #3 rather than Texas A&M being 13. I can understand that. I had a problem with Iowa moving from #18 to #5 on the strength of beating two teams that were no longer ranked.

Same with Penn State...#19 to #4 for beating a Wisconsin team that is now 4-3 and an Auburn team that most think will finish 4th in the SEC West.

Same with Michigan and Michigan St...two teams with 14 wins and no losses. The also have 0 games between them against a team with a winning record vs P5 teams. Michigan State has played 7 teams that are a combined 4-24 versus P5 teams. Michigan slightly better at 9-21.

Should we still be rewarding teams for beating opponents that we once thought were good, but really aren't?
Click to expand...
I have no problem with eother if thats someones opinion . Personally imo Bama being 3rd is a far more deserving position than A&M being where they are but i wouldnt have credit that to Bama based on them losing. Id credit them based on housing Ole Miss more than anything
 
Rolltide94 said:
So your problem is Alabama ranked at #3 rather than Texas A&M being 13. I can understand that. I had a problem with Iowa moving from #18 to #5 on the strength of beating two teams that were no longer ranked.

Same with Penn State...#19 to #4 for beating a Wisconsin team that is now 4-3 and an Auburn team that most think will finish 4th in the SEC West.

Same with Michigan and Michigan St...two teams with 14 wins and no losses. The also have 0 games between them against a team with a winning record vs P5 teams. Michigan State has played 7 teams that are a combined 4-24 versus P5 teams. Michigan slightly better at 9-21.

Should we still be rewarding teams for beating opponents that we once thought were good, but really aren't?
Click to expand...
What’s funny is everyone defending the ranking of Michigan and Michigan State are not their fans. Everyone I’ve talked to are like “yeah we are over ranked”.
 
7samurai13 said:
What’s funny is everyone defending the ranking of Michigan and Michigan State are not their fans. Everyone I’ve talked to are like “yeah we are over ranked”.
Click to expand...
If you guys take care of business this weekend I will change my avatar to Captain Underboobs or some similarly attractive MSU coed until you guys lose a game.

Go Sparty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top