ADVERTISEMENT

Pollsters doing all they can to boost the B1G

Dec 29, 2005
1,404
1,030
113
NW loses to a dreadful MSU team and falls 4-5 spots. Oregon loses to Oregon St. and falls 9 spots? NW couldn’t muster 300 yards of offense against a maligned MSU defense which in its 3 losses has given up an average of 37 points a game.

Wisconsin remains at #18 despite the fact they’ve played 3 games! In fact they went up in the rankings even though their last game played was a loss.

OSU remains #3/4 despite not playing again and having won their last game against IU by a TD and giving up 500 yards passing.

IU’s victories are over teams with a combined record of 8-17, but the hype to make them a top 10 team is such a joke. I think IU is a solid team but they’re not a top 10 team.

No B1G teams should be considered for a playoff spot. It’s extremely unfair as they’ll play 4-6 less games then Bama, ND, Clemson, A&M, UF, Miami, UC, BYU, etc..

I would take any of those teams with just one loss over OSU, IU, NW, or Wisconsin.

I read an article about the probability of a loss with each game played. For instance OSU had a 40% chance of going undefeated based on their original 12 game schedule, but after their reduced B1G only schedule that number went up to 57%.

Upsets happen and the more games you play the more likely you are to lose a game, it’s pretty simple. Since the inception of the BCS an average of 1.71 team go undefeated each season. It’s extremely difficult to go undefeated with a full schedule regardless of how good a team is.

Conversely and average of 13.2 teams make it to 6-0, and 9.1 make it to 7-0. This alone shows that just going from 6-0 to 7-0 is difficult statistically.

I think this is greatly overlooked, thoughts? Am I wrong on this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TOMMY_23
The big ten has and will continue to be a trash conference in my opinion. If Ohio State wasn’t in that conference it would be on the same level as the AAC.
 
Justin Fields is a freak out there but I think it’s pretty clear who the five best teams in the country are. Bama, ND, Clemson, A&M and Florida have proven themselves and will have played a full schedule.

It was the big ten’s decision to cancel their season in August. So many coaches threw hissy fits in the past when talk came up of ND being allowed in the CFP with “only” 12 games played. Now the Buckeyes get in with six games?
 
Who cares? The committee determines the four teams who will be in the playoffs, not the polls. Much ado about nothing.
 

False, I’ve heard the previous committee Director Bill Hancock say that the coaches poll does matter because it’s what peers think of the teams they see every week but he also understood their could be built in biases.

To think a poll doesn’t have some effect on committee members is silly, they see the polls every week too and they’ve been following them for decades like the rest of us. Polls are flawed but it’s difficult psychologically to shake the practice, it’s such an ingrained part of CFB and it’s history.
 
False, I’ve heard the previous committee Director Bill Hancock say that the coaches poll does matter because it’s what peers think of the teams they see every week but he also understood their could be built in biases.

To think a poll doesn’t have some effect on committee members is silly, they see the polls every week too and they’ve been following them for decades like the rest of us. Polls are flawed but it’s difficult psychologically to shake the practice, it’s such an ingrained part of CFB and it’s history.


Virtually every time the committee makes its ratings, there are significant variances with the polls. Your claim is pure speculation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bumpdaddy
Virtually every time the committee makes its ratings, there are significant variances with the polls. Your claim is pure speculation.

I just went back and looked at the past two years of CFB rankings compared with the AP/Coaches poll, they’re very very similar each week, with teams virtually the same or just one spot different from the CFB PO poll to the AP/Coaches.
 
I just went back and looked at the past two years of CFB rankings compared with the AP/Coaches poll, they’re very very similar each week, with teams virtually the same or just one spot different from the CFB PO poll to the AP/Coaches.


Generally, when the committee starts putting out its rankings, the polls follow suit, rather than the other way around. But go on thinking what you are thinking. Go on thinking that the polls are going to do the Big 10 a big favor, facts be damned.
 
Why play the season? Just put Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Oklahoma in the playoff every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbonesays
Generally, when the committee starts putting out its rankings, the polls follow suit, rather than the other way around. But go on thinking what you are thinking. Go on thinking that the polls are going to do the Big 10 a big favor, facts be damned.

78, I think you just like to argue or gripe with everyone, and you’re wrong so there’s that.

The AP/Coaches poll are released Sunday every week, the CFB PO poll is released two days later on Tuesday.
 
78, I think you just like to argue or gripe with everyone, and you’re wrong so there’s that.

The AP/Coaches poll are released Sunday every week, the CFB PO poll is released two days later on Tuesday.


Go on thinking what you want to think. Yeah, the selection committee relies on the AP and Coaches polls. Right.
 
Have you seen the ESPN Power Football Index? How many B10 monkeys in a cage came up with that? OSU and Wisconsin in the top five.
 
if they just expanded the playoffs, then most of these discussions wouldn't matter.
 
Who cares? The committee determines the four teams who will be in the playoffs, not the polls. Much ado about nothing.

I think the committee might actually be more biased towards P5 teams (and against G5) than the polls are. Look where they had BYU last week - #14, while they were #8 in the AP Poll. And they had Northwestern at #8, which was #11 in the AP Poll.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbonesays
I think the committee might actually be more biased towards P5 teams (and against G5) than the polls are. Look where they had BYU last week - #14, while they were #8 in the AP Poll. And they had Northwestern at #8, which was #11 in the AP Poll.


I was trying to tell the other poster about the real differences between the polls and the selection committee, such as you have pointed out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbd11
NW loses to a dreadful MSU team and falls 4-5 spots. Oregon loses to Oregon St. and falls 9 spots? NW couldn’t muster 300 yards of offense against a maligned MSU defense which in its 3 losses has given up an average of 37 points a game.

Wisconsin remains at #18 despite the fact they’ve played 3 games! In fact they went up in the rankings even though their last game played was a loss.

OSU remains #3/4 despite not playing again and having won their last game against IU by a TD and giving up 500 yards passing.

IU’s victories are over teams with a combined record of 8-17, but the hype to make them a top 10 team is such a joke. I think IU is a solid team but they’re not a top 10 team.

No B1G teams should be considered for a playoff spot. It’s extremely unfair as they’ll play 4-6 less games then Bama, ND, Clemson, A&M, UF, Miami, UC, BYU, etc..

I would take any of those teams with just one loss over OSU, IU, NW, or Wisconsin.

I read an article about the probability of a loss with each game played. For instance OSU had a 40% chance of going undefeated based on their original 12 game schedule, but after their reduced B1G only schedule that number went up to 57%.

Upsets happen and the more games you play the more likely you are to lose a game, it’s pretty simple. Since the inception of the BCS an average of 1.71 team go undefeated each season. It’s extremely difficult to go undefeated with a full schedule regardless of how good a team is.

Conversely and average of 13.2 teams make it to 6-0, and 9.1 make it to 7-0. This alone shows that just going from 6-0 to 7-0 is difficult statistically.

I think this is greatly overlooked, thoughts? Am I wrong on this?
Northwestern is one of the better coached teams out there. Talent doesn’t match up to the coaching needs. The problem with teams that lack talent is when they have a bad day they cannot rebound from it
 
It dilutes the season even more than it already is. We have 1 team [Bama] that can sleepwalk through their CCG and one other that is 50:50 to do the same.

I see your point. But maybe it helps with parity?
 
ADVERTISEMENT