goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 10:54:47 AM

Title: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 10:54:47 AM
Quote
@USATODAYsports: #CoachesPoll breakdown by conference: SEC (6) Big Ten (5) Pac-12 (5) Big 12 (4) ACC (2)
:don'tcare:

Pre-season:
1   Alabama (58)   0-0   1545
2   Ohio State (3)   0-0   1427
3   Oregon   0-0   1397
4   Stanford   0-0   1262
5   Georgia   0-0   1250
6   Texas A&M (1)   0-0   1215
7   South Carolina   0-0   1136
8   Clemson   0-0   1047
9   Louisville   0-0   1010
10   Florida   0-0   930
11   Notre Dame   0-0   872
12   Florida State   0-0   844
13   LSU   0-0   797
14   Oklahoma State   0-0   726
15   Texas   0-0   622
16   Oklahoma   0-0   620
17   Michigan   0-0   589
18   Nebraska   0-0   426
19   Boise State   0-0   420
20   TCU   0-0   400
21   UCLA   0-0   202
22   Northwestern   0-0   186
23   Wisconsin   0-0   172
24   USC   0-0   165
25   Oregon State   0-0   135
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Katpappy on August 01, 2013, 10:56:37 AM
Quote
@USATODAYsports: #CoachesPoll breakdown by conference: SEC (6) Big Ten (5) Pac-12 (5) Big 12 (4) ACC (2)
:don'tcare:
The eff. :shakesfist:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 10:58:22 AM
Us and Baylor have legitimate gripes about this. 

5 Big 10 teams?  5?  Really?  OK.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: steve dave on August 01, 2013, 10:59:20 AM
Us and Baylor have legitimate gripes about this. 

5 Big 10 teams?  5?  Really?  OK.

yeah, that's the lol one. ok big 10. ok.  :lol:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 11:06:22 AM
we're 26th.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: OK_Cat on August 01, 2013, 11:06:47 AM
we're #26, guys.    eat it baylor  :ksu:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: GoodForAnother on August 01, 2013, 11:14:53 AM
wgaf
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 11:18:28 AM
wgaf
We should.  Perception matters.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: AppleJack on August 01, 2013, 11:19:51 AM
Oh man. What will we be ranked the week of CTR/College Gameday?
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 11:24:57 AM
Oh man. What will we be ranked the week of CTR/College Gameday?
if we're undefeated?  yeah.

And looking at the schedule...there's a very good chance gameday will be at our game.  The only two games featuring two ranked teams will likely be KSU/UT and Notre Dame/Michigan State (on NBC).

Florida plays Tennessee, but Tennessee's hot garbage.  Unless Tennessee shocks Oregon the week before, then they'll be way outside the top 25.

Auburn plays LSU.  Auburn=sucks (sorry Chingon).

SMU at A&M?
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 11:28:19 AM
Start a thread about gameday Applejack.  Call your shot!
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: GoodForAnother on August 01, 2013, 11:38:47 AM
wgaf
We should.  Perception matters.

meh
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 11:40:45 AM
wgaf
We should.  Perception matters.

meh
meh to you, goodforyourmother!
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: cfbandyman on August 01, 2013, 12:10:14 PM
Thanks to Baylor, CTR last year would have been in MHK. Still another reason that Baylor game makes me  :frown:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: GoodForAnother on August 01, 2013, 12:26:23 PM
wgaf
We should.  Perception matters.

meh
meh to you, goodforyourmother!

whatever, dmeh12
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: kslim on August 01, 2013, 12:30:56 PM
wgaf
We should.  Perception matters.

meh
meh to you, goodforyourmother!

whatever, dmeh12

really enjoyed this banter
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: kslim on August 01, 2013, 12:32:47 PM
also dont see gameday happening, we own texas so that game is very meh nationally and as espn has shown in recent years if there isnt a big match up they will throw a dart on the east coast and go to a rando game
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on August 01, 2013, 12:53:18 PM
the pac-12 is super sucky.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: AbeFroman on August 01, 2013, 12:56:11 PM
Us and Baylor have legitimate gripes about this. 

5 Big 10 teams?  5?  Really?  OK.

yeah, that's the lol one. ok big 10. ok.  :lol:

By week 3 there will be 1 Big 10 team left and everyone on ESPN will be saying "We didn't see this coming, but the Big 10 is having a down year"
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: wetwillie on August 01, 2013, 12:59:03 PM
No respect.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: timhawk on August 01, 2013, 01:00:49 PM
Us and Baylor have legitimate gripes about this. 

5 Big 10 teams?  5?  Really?  OK.

yeah, that's the lol one. ok big 10. ok.  :lol:

By week 3 there will be 1 Big 10 team left and everyone on ESPN will be saying "We didn't see this coming, but the Big 10 is having a down year"

how does KSUA have a gripe? you lost Klein and everyone on D
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on August 01, 2013, 01:18:51 PM
northwestern  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Trogdor on August 01, 2013, 01:23:57 PM
Us and Baylor have legitimate gripes about this. 

5 Big 10 teams?  5?  Really?  OK.

yeah, that's the lol one. ok big 10. ok.  :lol:

lol more at the Pac
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: AbeFroman on August 01, 2013, 01:29:00 PM
Pac 12 is going to be better this season. Oregon, Stanford, UCLA are all good. Oregon State and Arizona St will be ok.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: timhawk on August 01, 2013, 01:30:52 PM
northwestern  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

10-3 last yr and the return alot, don't see your point.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Trogdor on August 01, 2013, 01:32:01 PM
Pac 12 is going to be better this season. Oregon, Stanford, UCLA are all good. Oregon State and Arizona St will be ok.

Pretty meh on oregon this season
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: catzacker on August 01, 2013, 01:32:12 PM
If there is a gripe it's putting 5 SEC teams in the top 10.  Self fulfilling  prophecy all year long.  They are not that good but will be ranked as though they are due to their scheduling. Alabama and A&M's conf schedules are embarassing.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Trogdor on August 01, 2013, 01:34:55 PM
If there is a gripe it's putting 5 SEC teams in the top 10.  Self fulfilling  prophecy all year long.  They are not that good but will be ranked as though they are due to their scheduling. Alabama and A&M's conf schedules are embarassing.

Is this the year they  :flush:?
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on August 01, 2013, 01:35:38 PM
northwestern  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

10-3 last yr and the return alot, don't see your point.

ya ok
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 01:48:02 PM
If there is a gripe it's putting 5 SEC teams in the top 10.  Self fulfilling  prophecy all year long.  They are not that good but will be ranked as though they are due to their scheduling. Alabama and A&M's conf schedules are embarassing.
Agreed, Zacker.  The winner of the Bama A&M game basically has a cakewalk to a number one ranking and a date with Georgia/Florida in the SEC championship game where the winner gets to go to the NC.

But wow, yeah, that tough SEC schedule.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: scottwildcat on August 01, 2013, 01:51:14 PM
is this the rankings thread for the year?
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 01:51:52 PM
is this the rankings thread for the year?
yeah. grab a drink. make yourself comfortable.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: catzacker on August 01, 2013, 01:59:43 PM
If there is a gripe it's putting 5 SEC teams in the top 10.  Self fulfilling  prophecy all year long.  They are not that good but will be ranked as though they are due to their scheduling. Alabama and A&M's conf schedules are embarassing.
Agreed, Zacker.  The winner of the Bama A&M game basically has a cakewalk to a number one ranking and a date with Georgia/Florida in the SEC championship game where the winner gets to go to the NC.

But wow, yeah, that tough SEC schedule.

Alabama plays @A&M and LSU (a month and a half apart). 

A&M plays Alabama and @LSU (a month and a half apart). 

South Carolina plays @ UGA and Florida (at the beginning end of the season).

Florida plays @LSU, UGA (neutral), and @ an overrated So. Carolina (all two weeks apart from each other)

Georgia plays overrated So. Carolina, LSU, Florida (neutral).

 

Even if they split their “tough” games, they’ll still hang around the top 10.  If they lose both their tough games, they hang around the top 12.  For no other reason than they were (a) ranked high to begin with and (b) the remaining 8 teams in the SEC are horrible.

LSU on the other hand, has @UGA, Florida, @Alabama, and A&M.  they will have deserved it.
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: scottwildcat on August 01, 2013, 02:03:16 PM
is this the rankings thread for the year?
yeah. grab a drink. make yourself comfortable.

sounds good,  :cheers:
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2013, 02:07:32 PM
Would smash at least half that list.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: OregonSmock on August 01, 2013, 02:13:54 PM
K-State's defense this year is a pretty big question mark.  Otherwise, K-State would easily be top 25. 
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2013, 02:19:01 PM
Even with a questionable D, our O is going to be unbelievable.  Would smash two thirds of that list.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: timhawk on August 01, 2013, 02:33:10 PM
they do this every year with SEC teams. I already know what is going to happen, Alabama will lose at some point and drop to 3-5 range. then the teams ranked ahead of them will lose late in the season and Bama will wiggle their way into the title game again.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: eastcat on August 01, 2013, 02:37:44 PM
Oregon won't be as good this year as last. Lost a lot on defense and Kelly called all plays/ran offense. New former OC hasn't done much of anything other than watch Kelly work his magic.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: Trogdor on August 01, 2013, 02:51:33 PM
This list sucks
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: Stevesie60 on August 01, 2013, 03:08:45 PM
What was the SEC's record in bowl games last year?
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: HerrSonntag on August 01, 2013, 03:12:26 PM
Northwestern and Wiscy pre-season ranked?   :jerk:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on August 01, 2013, 03:17:02 PM
If there is a gripe it's putting 5 SEC teams in the top 10.  Self fulfilling  prophecy all year long.  They are not that good but will be ranked as though they are due to their scheduling. Alabama and A&M's conf schedules are embarassing.
Agreed, Zacker.  The winner of the Bama A&M game basically has a cakewalk to a number one ranking and a date with Georgia/Florida in the SEC championship game where the winner gets to go to the NC.

But wow, yeah, that tough SEC schedule.

Alabama plays @A&M and LSU (a month and a half apart).

A&M plays Alabama and @LSU (a month and a half apart).

South Carolina plays @ UGA and Florida (at the beginning end of the season).

Florida plays @LSU, UGA (neutral), and @ an overrated So. Carolina (all two weeks apart from each other)

Georgia plays overrated So. Carolina, LSU, Florida (neutral).

 

Even if they split their “tough” games, they’ll still hang around the top 10.  If they lose both their tough games, they hang around the top 12.  For no other reason than they were (a) ranked high to begin with and (b) the remaining 8 teams in the SEC are horrible.

LSU on the other hand, has @UGA, Florida, @Alabama, and A&M.  they will have deserved it.
I am positive the SEC conference run analytics on schedules to give their elite teams the best chance to play in the NCG.
Their schedules are designed to be easy and have stretches of puds to stay healthy.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: timhawk on August 01, 2013, 03:17:13 PM
Northwestern and Wiscy pre-season ranked?   :jerk:

like I said, NW went 10-3 last year and they return alot. why shouldn't they be ranked?
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: DQ12 on August 01, 2013, 03:19:29 PM
Northwestern and Wiscy pre-season ranked?   :jerk:
i have no beef with NW being ranked. 
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: Trogdor on August 01, 2013, 03:19:52 PM
Northwestern and Wiscy pre-season ranked?   :jerk:

Miami receiving votes  :jerk:
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Emo EMAW on August 01, 2013, 03:21:02 PM
If there is a gripe it's putting 5 SEC teams in the top 10.  Self fulfilling  prophecy all year long.  They are not that good but will be ranked as though they are due to their scheduling. Alabama and A&M's conf schedules are embarassing.
Agreed, Zacker.  The winner of the Bama A&M game basically has a cakewalk to a number one ranking and a date with Georgia/Florida in the SEC championship game where the winner gets to go to the NC.

But wow, yeah, that tough SEC schedule.

Alabama plays @A&M and LSU (a month and a half apart).

A&M plays Alabama and @LSU (a month and a half apart).

South Carolina plays @ UGA and Florida (at the beginning end of the season).

Florida plays @LSU, UGA (neutral), and @ an overrated So. Carolina (all two weeks apart from each other)

Georgia plays overrated So. Carolina, LSU, Florida (neutral).

 

Even if they split their “tough” games, they’ll still hang around the top 10.  If they lose both their tough games, they hang around the top 12.  For no other reason than they were (a) ranked high to begin with and (b) the remaining 8 teams in the SEC are horrible.

LSU on the other hand, has @UGA, Florida, @Alabama, and A&M.  they will have deserved it.
I am positive the SEC conference run analytics on schedules to give their elite teams the best chance to play in the NCG.
Their schedules are designed to be easy and have stretches of puds to stay healthy.

As they should, and as should every other major conference.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: MadCat on August 01, 2013, 03:26:29 PM
Hi, guys!  Is this the rankings thread or the chip on shoulder thread?  I didn't check before I clicked on the link.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: kslim on August 01, 2013, 03:26:37 PM
where are we (opinions of the great minds here) going to be ranked by the media?

gonna say 21
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: OK_Cat on August 01, 2013, 03:27:37 PM
every rankings thread turns into a chip on the shoulder thread when kstate fans are involved
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: Spaces on August 01, 2013, 03:35:51 PM
I'm doing that thingy that Harp did where he ate soup out of his imaginary bowl except they're chips that are on my shoulder.  :curse:
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: CNS on August 01, 2013, 03:37:48 PM
where are we (opinions of the great minds here) going to be ranked by the media?

gonna say 21

"also receiving votes"
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: OregonSmock on August 01, 2013, 03:38:53 PM
Oregon won't be as good this year as last. Lost a lot on defense and Kelly called all plays/ran offense. New former OC hasn't done much of anything other than watch Kelly work his magic.


oregon state beavs tho
Title: Re: Rankings
Post by: Skipper44 on August 01, 2013, 03:41:41 PM

I am positive the SEC conference run analytics on schedules to give their elite teams the best chance to play in the NCG.
Their schedules are designed to be easy and have stretches of puds to stay healthy.
LSU may be the only thing that can stop another All SEC title game in the national title game - there are almost no other losable games on A&M or Bama's schedule
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: Skipper44 on August 01, 2013, 03:42:32 PM
Oregon won't be as good this year as last. Lost a lot on defense and Kelly called all plays/ran offense. New former OC hasn't done much of anything other than watch Kelly work his magic.


oregon state beavs tho
Did they finish the year with the backup QB last year and the starter will be back?
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: PowercatPat on August 01, 2013, 03:43:23 PM
Northwestern and Wiscy pre-season ranked?   :jerk:

Add USC to that list.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: scottwildcat on August 01, 2013, 04:28:16 PM
I'm doing that thingy that Harp did where he ate soup out of his imaginary bowl except they're chips that are on my shoulder.  :curse:

He wasn't eating soup  :facepalm:
Title: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: puniraptor on August 01, 2013, 09:33:13 PM
I'm doing that thingy that Harp did where he ate soup out of his imaginary bowl except they're chips that are on my shoulder.  :curse:

He wasn't eating soup  :facepalm:

Obviously biscuits and sausage gravy.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: cas4ksu on August 01, 2013, 10:09:01 PM
is it absolute bullshit that we aren't ranked in the top 10? indubitably, I feel.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep on August 02, 2013, 09:03:28 AM
is it absolute bullshit that we aren't ranked in the top 10? indubitably, I feel.

biggest snub job since we got left out in 2006.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: DQ12 on August 02, 2013, 10:36:37 AM
One of my favorite writers, Drew Magary from Deadspin, wrote this yesterday about preseason rankings. I think he does a good job of concisely explaining why perception matters. The first part is a question from a reader:


Quote
Q: Is there anything worse in the entirety of sports than college football's preseason rankings? It's an excuse for writers to jack off high profile teams without having to justify it with what those teams have actually done on the field, and it becomes it's own weird circular logic. Teams get ranked highly because they're perceived as good, and being ranked highly causes them to be perceived as good. Also there are no consequences for them being wrong. When Michigan lost to Appalachian State, the story was "WHAT AN INCREDIBLE UPSET", not "Wow, Michigan kind of sucks, maybe we shouldn't have put them in the top 5"

eff preseason rankings
Quote
A:  The worst part is that, if you're ranked too low, you basically have to dig out of them. Being perceived as good means you basically get a head start in the race for the title, and any losses are more likely to be forgiven. But you happen to be an awesome football team NOT named Alabama and you're ranked #25, you have to pray that everyone else loses, and you can't lose yourself because a #1 team losing is a fluke, and a #25 team losing is a form of validation.

The playoff that CFB is planning is perfect because it'll have a compelling playoff and an undisputed champ, but it'll be exclusive enough that we can all still complain about the thing in CFB that we like complaining about.    Yesterday 3:31pm
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: AbeFroman on August 02, 2013, 10:39:48 AM
Northwestern and Wiscy pre-season ranked?   :jerk:

Add USC to that list.

And Nebraska. Lost 70-0 in your championship game last year, then go BLOWN THE eff OUT against Georgia? Top 20 team next season!
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: CNS on August 02, 2013, 10:50:43 AM
I don't get why there even are rankings before like game 4 or 5 of the season.

I mean, other than hype, story lines, etc.  It is stupid to me that teams gain advantage in the actual outcome of the season due to the hype machine that has been created to increase rev.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: OregonSmock on August 02, 2013, 11:09:48 AM
Oregon won't be as good this year as last. Lost a lot on defense and Kelly called all plays/ran offense. New former OC hasn't done much of anything other than watch Kelly work his magic.


oregon state beavs tho
Did they finish the year with the backup QB last year and the starter will be back?


Yep, both guys will be back next year.  Their best player is on the d-line, though. 
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: eastcat on August 02, 2013, 12:08:49 PM
Oregon won't be as good this year as last. Lost a lot on defense and Kelly called all plays/ran offense. New former OC hasn't done much of anything other than watch Kelly work his magic.


oregon state beavs tho
Did they finish the year with the backup QB last year and the starter will be back?


Yep, both guys will be back next year.  Their best player is on the d-line, though.

Jordan Poyer is gone, Will hurt in the P12 with the west coast pass happy offenses.
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: Skipper44 on August 02, 2013, 12:21:00 PM
Oregon won't be as good this year as last. Lost a lot on defense and Kelly called all plays/ran offense. New former OC hasn't done much of anything other than watch Kelly work his magic.


oregon state beavs tho
Did they finish the year with the backup QB last year and the starter will be back?


Yep, both guys will be back next year.  Their best player is on the d-line, though.
Riley is to DITR Pro style QBs what OB is to Dual Threat QBs
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on August 05, 2013, 09:16:53 AM
Missed this before I started my thread.  TCU will take care of LSU for the Big IIX
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: ben ji on August 05, 2013, 09:28:44 AM
Missed this before I started my thread.  TCU will take care of LSU for the Big IIX

I sure hope so...is fields out for this game?
Title: Re: Rankings Thread ft. SEC bias
Post by: TCUHornedFrog on August 05, 2013, 09:35:06 AM
Missed this before I started my thread.  TCU will take care of LSU for the Big IIX

I sure hope so...is fields out for this game?

Yes, team rules violation.  That sucks, but the defense isn't what I'm worried about with going into that game.  We have to score points to win that game and that's where the difficulty is when you play LSU.