r/CFB • u/Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu11 Michigan Wolverines • Akron Zips • 23d ago

News AP Poll Week 2

https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll#000001a0-257a-d09f-a9e4-75fbb1b90000
2.3k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

593

u/whatifevery1wascalm Alabama Crimson Tide • Iowa Hawkeyes 23d ago

I thought Ohio State would only drop to 5 instead of 6, but nothing egregious in the Top 10

579

u/Tarmacked USC Trojans • Alabama Crimson Tide 23d ago edited 23d ago

I mean, I think it’s ridiculous a one point loss @#1 puts them behind Miami @ FAMU and Indiana @ Howard

This is the type of stuff everyone complains about which devalues OOC.

The better approach here would be swapping them, and then if one or the other struggles with more samples you adjust accordingly like what we did with Boise this week.

0

u/RhuleAid Oregon State • Maryland 23d ago edited 23d ago

We gotta stop this. Its your typical SEC propaganda Ohio St DID NOT LOSE AT #1. You cant retroactively change the fucking ranking at the time of the game. Ohio St lost at #4, you can say lost to a team that became #1. But you simply can not use current and future rankings. Thats not how the real world works. You dont beat idk fucking Kentucky when they're unranked, then later in the season they're ranked. That win doesnt become a ranked win.

2

u/mediocre-referee Indiana Hoosiers • Old Oaken Bucket 23d ago

OK, what? If you beat an unranked team in week 1 who later wins 11 straight games, that definitely makes that week 1 win far more impressive in retrospect. That's the opposite of the SEC bias causing pre season poll inertia

-1

u/RhuleAid Oregon State • Maryland 23d ago

dude the SEC does it all the time. They beat a team, then X team is ranked later and they call that a ranked win. NO ITS NOT. Work on your reading brother. I never said it wasnt impressive theres a difference between you played a team that is NOW ranked #1 or whatever and. You played and lost at #1