Kansas is similar to Cincy and WVU. I dont care that they had a ranking in front of their name when it was played. Cincy/WVU is much better than Central Michigan. That was easy.
Explain #24 Illinois
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
Kansas is similar to Cincy and WVU. I dont care that they had a ranking in front of their name when it was played. Cincy/WVU is much better than Central Michigan. That was easy.
No one knowingly says "hey, Illinois is in the Big Ten so they must be good." Its unconscious bias. The Big Ten is thought to be a top-tier conference when in reality it was always OSU, PSU, Michigan and a bunch of Big East-level teams. So when someone sees Iowa or Illinois or Wisconsin with a good record, they get ranked higher than an ACC team with the same record.
Boston College got ranked after playing okay in what most people by that point thought was a bad to average FSU team.
Was that just northeast bias?
BIG. This is why teams like the Nits get overrated. Beating overrated teams all the time.
BC being ranked like this is a one off. BIG teams being ranked when they don't deserve it is all the time.
Did you not see how the CFP ranked Florida State last year? That was the exact opposite of ranking the teams based on resumes.
Well, they got ranked after beating a top 10 team. In fact, BC has played two top 10 teams. Beat one, lost to the other by 6 points. They won against their cupcake 56-0. If Iowa had the same results, they would be ranked in the top 20. Yet, BC is only at number 30, and are even ranked worse in the coaches poll.
Somehow Indiana isn't getting the Big Ten bump. I don't think it counts for the bottom feeders. Just those mid lever performers.
And look at ND. 2-1 with a loss to Northern Illinois. Yet ranked #17 will BC is #30 with the same record. Ridiculous.
Last edited:
Preseason Top 25 teams that did not deserve their ranking:
Iowa
Kansas
Arizona
NC State
These aren’t based on what this year has shown. But what they really didn’t do last year, and what they lost, to deserve the hype.
Iowa is maybe even a stretch because they did win 10 games and returned a lot of the defense.
I don’t see much of a Big Ten bias.
Michigan was the defending national champion. And they returned enough. There’s no way they shouldn’t have been in the Top 25 preseason.
USC had enough going for it that it was defensible.
FSU should have been ranked without hindsight.
What I’m looking for is bias? Teams that, not with the benefit of hindsight, but instead at the time had no reason to be ranked but for bias.
FSU is not one of those teams.
If you ranked them in July of 2024, that made sense. No bias needed.
Ranking them on September 17th of 2024, is indefensible and could only be due to bias.
Connelly at ESPN has Pitt as only the 33rd best unbeaten team out of 43. Illinois is 28.
Texas, Tennessee, Georgia, Bama or Ohio State as CFB's top team? Connelly ranks all 43 unbeatens
How do the best teams stack up? We look at every team that still has a perfect record.
I don't agree. They lost their QB, top RB, top WR, the entire offensive line, top 2 tacklers, sack leader, int leader, tackles for loss leader......and the coaching staff. Michigan lost a ton
NC State was 9-4 (finished #21) last season and finished with a 5-game regular season winning streak, which included wins against four bowl teams. Finishing like that has always infatuated pollsters, and they were supposed to have a good roster this season, which included a hot name at QB.
Arizona was 10-3 (finished #11) and won its last 7 games last season, which included 5 wins over teams ranked in the top 20 at the time. They also have like 3 or 4 potential first round picks they returned, as well as their QB. Until last week, I believe they had the longest P4 winning streak in the nation.
Kansas (9-4) and Iowa (10-4) both finished in the top 25 last season and returned their QBs, etc.
Can you tell me the last national champion to start the year unranked?
What you’re saying might be true. But we’re looking for Big Ten bias. Not laziness and a lack of balls.
And they returned enough
I have to differ with you on this one. They lost 17 of 22 starters including 10 on offense, their head coach, DC and 2/3 of their coaching staff. They have a 38 year old 1st time HC who ran the offense last year but delegated that to a new OC this year. New DC is an aging NFL re-tread and the dropoff there from having Jesse Minter the past few years is enormous. Their 3 year starting QB who was 27-1 as a starter went in the first round, leaving a QB room that contained only a walk on and a guy (Orji) who only got spot reps in run situations and can't throw.
Their struggles this year were inevitable. No way in hell they should have been ranked preseason top 10 like they were. The bottom of the top 25--maybe--and that would be a stretch but coming off a natty and having some unproven talent I guess I can see it.
USC still has plenty going for it. They are 2-0 with a win over LSU and a blowout win over a patsy. They have an elite head coach and a lot of experience in their 2 deep. Why are we already including them in this preseason overrated discussion?
What’s the lowest a defending national champion has ever ranked the following season?
My point was trying to look for bias. Teams that had a ranking they didn’t deserve, and the only reason they could have had that ranking is a Big Ten bias.
And I don’t see it. There were some teams I would not have had in the Top 25 preseason. But I think they were defensible for whatever reasons.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Shake Up Needed. Deep Thoughts from a Reasonable Monkey.- Latest: pittmonkey
-
-
