Yes, you should be ranked higher than what you were previously ranked. Anywhere from 10-13 seems likely and reasonable to me. Anything higher seems unlikely, anything above 8 seems unreasonable. Top 5 is ridiculous.
Official UofU homer thread
- Thread starter ♪alt13
- Start date
Yes, you should be ranked higher than what you were previously ranked. Anywhere from 10-13 seems likely and reasonable to me. Anything higher seems unlikely, anything above 8 seems unreasonable. Top 5 is ridiculous.
Nobody has any idea? Really? These teams aren't largely made up of the same players and coaches from previous years? Of course it's not perfect, but to say "nobody has any idea" is ridiculous. I know it's hard to be objective when your team is playing well and you want to get hyped, but I'm just being realistic and reasonable. No way in hell Utah should be ranked in the top 5.
I haven't said anything trolley or inflammatory about this subject and have only been reasonable given what the current system acts like. Utah fans want to create their own polling formula? Go for it.
UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
If this dude actually thinks Utah is #1, why would he drop Oregon all the way out of the top 25?
UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
You're either joking or been asleep the last decade of you really think early season polls are accurate.
Just about every major college football voice has said that early season rankings are stupid, but somewhat necessary.
This is the reason they don't do any playoff rankings until mid season.
I'm not saying any of this because of Utah and have no problem with where we are ranked right now.
I also would rather have pre season rankings than not have them, just think some of the "old guard" voters need to stop being so rigid with their voting.
UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
I'll ask him next time I swing by Knoxville.
Never said they were accurate, just said they aren't completely inaccurate.
If you didnt have them, people would still act like they existed. A week 1 win over Oregon would still be more impressive than a week 1 win over Oregon State. Know what I'm saying?
https://collegefootball.ap.org/poll
And look at that, the two teams I said that Utah could jump from the Coaches to AP poll, it was those two teams they jumped. Very fair and accurate ranking for Utah imo.
And look at that, the two teams I said that Utah could jump from the Coaches to AP poll, it was those two teams they jumped. Very fair and accurate ranking for Utah imo.
I saw the Coaches poll, first time seeing the AP.
How long did it take you to find the 1 voter who put Utah at #1?
UGLI baby
Well-Known Member
I think I jumped into an argument and now it's unclear what each of us are saying.
All that I'm getting at is that voters should vote with more freedom instead of having to keep a team highly rated if they had them there last week.
Looks Like tons of voters did just that with Utah this week in the AP, and I'm not complaining at all.
Rankings should be a fresh week by week thing, not just a marginal update from week to week.
All that I'm getting at is that voters should vote with more freedom instead of having to keep a team highly rated if they had them there last week.
Looks Like tons of voters did just that with Utah this week in the AP, and I'm not complaining at all.
Rankings should be a fresh week by week thing, not just a marginal update from week to week.
I know what you are saying and I know you aren't one of the ones complaining about how it is, even though you disagree with the way it's done.
The problem with the "fresh" theory is how "fresh" do you want it? What would you rank Ohio State with the "fresh" ranking approach?