Polls

[nolasilver]

Very frustrating nationally and locally. Not only was it Gillian but I believe another local reporter also didn’t have us.

[1401973]

I really can't argue with the local guys voting and not including us.
While we have a top 10 defense, our offense has looked pretty poor the last two weeks.
Let's win the next three and see where we are.

[WaveProf]

I really can't argue with the local guys voting and not including us.
While we have a top 10 defense, our offense has looked pretty poor the last two weeks.
Let's win the next three and see where we are.

With a backup QB, and in one game playing a mid to high level SEC team that we still looked like we should have beat even with the backup QB. There's no non-biased excuse for this team to be unranked.

[tulaneoutlaw]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

[WaveProf]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

I don't think anyone in this conversation is naive, nor surprised, by how polls work. Doesn't mean we have to make excuses for them either. Bama had a not up to par year last year, lost to an as-yet unproven Texas team, and underperformed against USF, and is still top 15. This isn't *just* about loss column. And, again, I'm not surprised at all, and agree with your analysis, but what started this particular conversation (not you) sounded almost like justifying the ranking. It isn't justifiable.

[tulaneoutlaw]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

I don't think anyone in this conversation is naive, nor surprised, by how polls work. Doesn't mean we have to make excuses for them either. Bama had a not up to par year last year, lost to an as-yet unproven Texas team, and underperformed against USF, and is still top 15. This isn't *just* about loss column. And, again, I'm not surprised at all, and agree with your analysis, but what started this particular conversation (not you) sounded almost like justifying the ranking. It isn't justifiable.

No doubt. We should not have fallen any farther after a three score win on the road with a backup qb and a defense that gave up 3. I'm just not real fired up about tracking the polls because I think we either win the next 9 in which case we are in for sure or else we drop one and are pretty much out the rest of the way. Even then a conference title and bowl win at 12-2 would probably have us back in the end of season polls.

[1401973]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

I don't think anyone in this conversation is naive, nor surprised, by how polls work. Doesn't mean we have to make excuses for them either. Bama had a not up to par year last year, lost to an as-yet unproven Texas team, and underperformed against USF, and is still top 15. This isn't *just* about loss column. And, again, I'm not surprised at all, and agree with your analysis, but what started this particular conversation (not you) sounded almost like justifying the ranking. It isn't justifiable.

The sober truth is TU with our backup would be underdogs to every team from 20th to 29th in the AP poll on a neutral field. This is who TU is at the moment. A top 10 D and a top 100 O.
Like I said let's win the next 3 and get Pratt back and see who we are.

[Marathon Wave]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

I don't think anyone in this conversation is naive, nor surprised, by how polls work. Doesn't mean we have to make excuses for them either. Bama had a not up to par year last year, lost to an as-yet unproven Texas team, and underperformed against USF, and is still top 15. This isn't *just* about loss column. And, again, I'm not surprised at all, and agree with your analysis, but what started this particular conversation (not you) sounded almost like justifying the ranking. It isn't justifiable.

The sober truth is TU with our backup would be underdogs to every team from 20th to 29th in the AP poll on a neutral field. This is who TU is at the moment. A top 10 D and a top 100 O.
Like I said let's win the next 3 and get Pratt back and see who we are.

True. But most teams, with backup qb, aren't as good.

[waverider]

Some of the ranked teams that could drop below us with a loss and if we win convincingly.

19 Colorado
10 Oregon

22 UCLA
11 Utah

15 Ole Miss
13 Alabama

14 Oregon St
21 WSU

24 Iowa
7 Penn St

17 UNC
Pitt

[tulaneoutlaw]

Some of the ranked teams that could drop below us with a loss and if we win convincingly.

19 Colorado
10 Oregon

22 UCLA
11 Utah

15 Ole Miss
13 Alabama

14 Oregon St
21 WSU

24 Iowa
7 Penn St

17 UNC
Pitt

Colorado is about to get nuked

[PeteRasche]

Those ranked teams listed aren't likely to drop below us if they lose to another much-higher ranked team, unless it's by a whole lot. UNC playing unranked Pitt, obviously, is a possibility. Neither Ole Miss nor Alabama will fall out of the top 25 just on SEC-ness. Wazzu and Iowa may fall out if they're blown out, but we're playing FCS, we'd have to really do something notable to jump them.

[nolasilver]

I know it’s both beating a dead horse and preaching I still firmly believe we should be in the top 25. We had the slide from #9 to #24 during the off-season and yet Usc moved up after losing multiple guys highly in the draft and of course losing to us. Kansas state lost deuce Vaugn and also remained around #15. We of course magically moved down 15 spots.

The argument of course is: we lost tyjae, our leading wide outs and lost too many leaders on defense including our leading tacklers and multiple starters. We also have a new DC. I still don’t think that’s worth 15 spots after retaining the coach, Ol, DL, star Qb and reloading from the portal. Buts let’s see how the team responds and answers those questions.

Tulane proceeds to embarrass the sunbelt favorite who many experts picked to beat us outright. At that point with probably the 3rd biggest win of that weekend, in a rational fair world (aka if we had been a p5) we should have moved up into the top 20 as the answers from the off-season were emphatically answered minus tyjae.

Then In the ole Miss game we outplay them for 3.5 quarters without our star qb. We either match or outplay them in the trenches, shut down there all American rb and hold what is considered one of the most explosive offensives in all of CFB in check. We have ~ the same number of total yards and until the end of the 4th quarter are in a position to win. All of this despite a backup qb thrust into starting last minute who finished with a qbr of 18.

Our defense looks even better then last year, answering all off-season questions. Our wide receivers look faster and superior, Pratt and the OL look to have also taken a step forward. Our DC seems to be more aggressive, taking advantage of a fantastic DL. Of course Pratt has sustained a minor injury and we do not have a tyjae on the roster.

That ole miss team is ranked 15 in the country and USA just demolished OK state. After answering almost all of the off-season question minus 1 and looking superior to the #9 ranked previous iteration of the team, how does any unbiased rational writer not believe we should be ranked in the top 25 ?

Oh right, we’re not In the P5

Endrant

[ml wave]

Those ranked teams listed aren't likely to drop below us if they lose to another much-higher ranked team, unless it's by a whole lot. UNC playing unranked Pitt, obviously, is a possibility. Neither Ole Miss nor Alabama will fall out of the top 25 just on SEC-ness. Wazzu and Iowa may fall out if they're blown out, but we're playing FCS, we'd have to really do something notable to jump them.

I think Bama has a chance to be unranked if they look bad.

[PeteRasche]

I think Bama has a chance to be unranked if they look bad.

Yeah, if they look bad and lose by more than one score, I was wondering how many voters would purposely (and gleefully?) leave them out just because of dislike for Bama. They did not look good last week and frankly haven't looked great this season.

[wavedom]

He made a bad hire in Rees and Buchner is not a starting QB. It will be interesting to see if he silently demotes the OC.

[MattK]

Oh right, we’re not In the P5

In fairness, the issue right now is that we're not in the SEC, seeing as the rankings consist of 21 undefeated teams and 4 one-loss SEC teams. and only 1 of those 4 have lost to another SEC team.

[LondonWave]

I think Bama has a chance to be unranked if they look bad.

Yeah, if they look bad and lose by more than one score, I was wondering how many voters would purposely (and gleefully?) leave them out just because of dislike for Bama. They did not look good last week and frankly haven't looked great this season.

I caught some of the USF/Alabama game it brought back good memories hearing the announcers complementing Roydell Williams.

[PeteRasche]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

I think we're just bummed simply from the exposure side of it. When you are in the top 25, your name is on the ticker every week, your game gets picked by the pickers every week, you just get TONS more exposure and that subconscious beating-into-the-American-public's brains that we're a legit program. Being out of the poll, the casual observer already thinks last year was a flash in the pan.

I don't think anyone in this conversation is naive, nor surprised, by how polls work.

Maybe not in this current thread right now, but quite a few people on this board thought we'd be mid-teens in the preseason and that beating Ole Miss would move us into CFP striking range.
('dem people needed #pollsplainin')

The sober truth is TU with our backup would be underdogs to every team from 20th to 29th in the AP poll on a neutral field. This is who TU is at the moment.

True. We got a little leeway from some voters who noted that our QB was out against Ole Miss and we still did well, so they kept us in the poll, likely on the (subconscious?) trust that Pratt would be back and we'd be good. But a week later with no Pratt, that's all forgotten, and we're just a team who is stuck playing its backup QB because the starter is out. No AP voter is gonna do legwork to find out whether we expect Pratt back at all, so they're not going to keep giving us the benefit of the doubt. And frankly, if Pratt does not play this week, we don't deserve to move up either. We can't even argue about our defense if we shut out Nicholls, because a LOT of FBS teams shut out FCS teams (multiple already this year). The only way we get back to being in the rankings picture is if Pratt comes back and we start scoring in the 40s+ and winning huge.

[Marathon Wave]

A reminder to all that polls are largely a function of the loss column. Even with a crappy schedule, the longer that loss column stays a 1, the more likely we are to get ranked. The difference here is that unlike last year a second L absolutely sinks us while we have a much harder time climbing up into the mid to low teens. Given last year though, I think we would be somewhere between 16 and 25 if we are at 11-1 and headed to the aac title game. Now we just have to make that happen.

I think we're just bummed simply from the exposure side of it. When you are in the top 25, your name is on the ticker every week, your game gets picked by the pickers every week, you just get TONS more exposure and that subconscious beating-into-the-American-public's brains that we're a legit program. Being out of the poll, the casual observer already thinks last year was a flash in the pan.

I don't think anyone in this conversation is naive, nor surprised, by how polls work.

Maybe not in this current thread right now, but quite a few people on this board thought we'd be mid-teens in the preseason and that beating Ole Miss would move us into CFP striking range.
('dem people needed #pollsplainin')

The sober truth is TU with our backup would be underdogs to every team from 20th to 29th in the AP poll on a neutral field. This is who TU is at the moment.

True. We got a little leeway from some voters who noted that our QB was out against Ole Miss and we still did well, so they kept us in the poll, likely on the (subconscious?) trust that Pratt would be back and we'd be good. But a week later with no Pratt, that's all forgotten, and we're just a team who is stuck playing its backup QB because the starter is out. No AP voter is gonna do legwork to find out whether we expect Pratt back at all, so they're not going to keep giving us the benefit of the doubt. And frankly, if Pratt does not play this week, we don't deserve to move up either. We can't even argue about our defense if we shut out Nicholls, because a LOT of FBS teams shut out FCS teams (multiple already this year). The only way we get back to being in the rankings picture is if Pratt comes back and we start scoring in the 40s+ and winning huge.

Too bad Fritz doesn't seem to be one who cares much about winning huge. We may not see a ranking till November.

[Poseidon]

Talking Polls and Fresno St.

Their 29-0 over Arizona St. looks impressive on the surface. However they won the turnover battle 8-0. Yes ASU turned it over 8 times. Which begs the question how do you only score 29 points off of 8 turnovers with no turnovers of your own. On the other hand a shut out is rather easy when the other team turns it over 8 times.

[Sophandros]

Maybe Arizona State just isn't good.

https://twitter.com/PeteThamel/status/1 ... 05547?s=19

[1401973]

I saw the replay of that game (aforementioned YouTube TV feature of watching key plays) and the game was so outrageous I went back and watched most of it. Ariz St offense and QBs were really horrendous. I thought their D played admirably holding Fresno to 5 FGs.

[waverider]

Maybe Arizona State just isn't good.

https://twitter.com/PeteThamel/status/1 ... 05547?s=19

They are who we thought they were.

[PeteRasche]

Arizona State isn't good. Neither are a bunch of other P5s. That's not what matters to sportswriters from the other side of the country who certainly don't stay up to watch west coast games; they see "G5 beat P5" and they think "G5 must be good".

Which is why we had that discussion about how Fresno lucked into scheduling well, having bad P5s on their schedule, but how you never know because football is scheduled so far out that a team could completely change by the time you play them. When we scheduled this Ole Miss series, they were not good (if they were as good this year as when we scheduled them but we were this year's team, we'd have thumped them even with Horton at QB). Have to think Houston and Duke were licking their chops in 2022 seeing that (previously 2-10) Kansas on their schedule and thinking them the same old cupcake...

[Marathon Wave]

Talking Polls and Fresno St.

Their 29-0 over Arizona St. looks impressive on the surface. However they won the turnover battle 8-0. Yes ASU turned it over 8 times. Which begs the question how do you only score 29 points off of 8 turnovers with no turnovers of your own. On the other hand a shut out is rather easy when the other team turns it over 8 times.

Curious (but not enough to look it up) how many possessions did ASU have?