Started By
Message
re: Living up to the hype - how teams finish compared to preseason rankings
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:34 pm to JustGetItRight
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:34 pm to JustGetItRight
It doesn't mean anything. You need to have a history of proven success to be ranked high in the preseason anyway. I would much rather be "overrated" like Florida, Georgia and LSU than be "underrated" like Mississippi State, South Carolina and Ole Mass.
1
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:35 pm to WG_Dawg
So we have 2 greatly underrated, and 1 somewhat underrated. What other SEC team has been underrated as much as that during that time span?
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:41 pm to WG_Dawg
I'm gonna add some context...
Unranked that year meant finishing with zero votes in the AP poll. The equivalent of #36 (best case) in the final poll, not #26 -- which is how their scheme weights "unranked".
Again Bama finished with zero votes in the AP poll -- the equivalent of #38. They started the season with 12 votes -- good enough for #37 presason. So yeah, it was a wash.
Bama was preseason #26, just barely missed being #25. Again, they finished with zero votes. But no penalty in this scheme for receiving 141 votes in the preseason and then zero after the season is finished.
Started the season with no votes. Ended the season with no votes. Expectations met.
I don't really give a shite but just pointing out one of the flaws with the way they calculated this. Likewise, their scheme would reward Team A the same for starting #26 and finishing #1 as it would Team B for starting out with zero votes and finishing #1 (unpossible in reality but you get my drift).
quote:
03- start 23, finish UR. Overrated slightly
Unranked that year meant finishing with zero votes in the AP poll. The equivalent of #36 (best case) in the final poll, not #26 -- which is how their scheme weights "unranked".
quote:
04- start UR, finish UR. Ranked correctly
Again Bama finished with zero votes in the AP poll -- the equivalent of #38. They started the season with 12 votes -- good enough for #37 presason. So yeah, it was a wash.
quote:
06- start UR, finish UR. Ranked correctly
Bama was preseason #26, just barely missed being #25. Again, they finished with zero votes. But no penalty in this scheme for receiving 141 votes in the preseason and then zero after the season is finished.
quote:
07- start UR, finish UR. Ranked correctly.
Started the season with no votes. Ended the season with no votes. Expectations met.
I don't really give a shite but just pointing out one of the flaws with the way they calculated this. Likewise, their scheme would reward Team A the same for starting #26 and finishing #1 as it would Team B for starting out with zero votes and finishing #1 (unpossible in reality but you get my drift).
This post was edited on 3/13/13 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:43 pm to Bench McElroy
quote:
You need to have a history of proven success to be ranked high in the preseason anyway. I would much rather be "overrated" like Florida, Georgia and LSU than be "underrated" like Mississippi State, South Carolina and Ole Mass.
Precisely.
LSU, Florida and Georgia are on top of that list because we've been rated ever preseason for 10 years (or more) running.
Overrated? Sure. But ranked for a reason.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:45 pm to JustGetItRight
Herp..... Derp.....
Preseason rankings are a joke. You should have used the 1st and last BCS rankings or something.
Preseason rankings are a joke. You should have used the 1st and last BCS rankings or something.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:49 pm to gatordmb89
quote:
Herp..... Derp.....
Preseason rankings are a joke. You should have used the 1st and last BCS rankings or something.
Not really for the purpose of this exercise, which is to roughly show whether teams meet preseason expectations. Part of the exercise is also to show that preseason rankings are a joke. I think you missed the whole point. Using first and last BCS rankings doesn't really test the scenario of meeting / failing preseason expectations.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:17 pm to elposter
I remember us consistently being horribly overrated early on, especially with fran. Looks like one year of JFF has balanced it 
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:42 pm to JustGetItRight
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:43 pm to JustGetItRight
I always knew that Ole Miss was underrated.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:53 pm to sorantable
quote:
I always knew that Ole Miss was underrated.
Speaking of underrated, just how long has it been since Ole Miss cracked the top 25?
Ole Miss sure does seems to underrated a lot since Eli flew the coop. 2 top 25 finishes since he left. 8 top 25 finishes in the 41 years since Archie left.
How much longer do your people have to wander the desert until the next Manning-siah delivers you?
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:54 pm to JustGetItRight
#1 
suck it
suck it
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News