I want your help in starting a movement to change college football

[HumbleP1e]

We have to eliminate preseason polls that "carry weight". Iowa is 2-0 and has defensively dominated two teams (to the tune of second nationally in team defense) that are projected to be near the top of their leagues. Meanwhile, Michigan State has been less than dominant in their two games. There probably is a difference in opponent quality to some degree, but MSU is still ranked ahead of Iowa.

I fully admit I may be making a bigger deal out of this than needed, but if you start "ahead", you can stay ahead. Gotta enter a given week with an even footing and rank on body of evidence.

Let mags come out with rankings that are unofficial, but do away with coaches and AP polls till "x" date. With me?

 

[HumbleP1e]

I'm not sure how to do it if you agree, but if we keep building the fire, someone will report it, ask questions, and drive the need to pour water on it.

 

[HaydenHawk8]

No matter what there will always be some sort of rankings.

I mean FSU barely got by Sanford last night and they are still ranked top 30.

I don’t understand it, but just keep winning and the rankings will take care of themselves.

 

[iowa12]

We have to eliminate preseason polls that "carry weight". Iowa is 2-0 and has defensively dominated two teams (to the tune of second nationally in team defense) that are projected to be near the top of their leagues. Meanwhile, Michigan State has been less than dominant in their two games. There probably is a difference in opponent quality to some degree, but MSU is still ranked ahead of Iowa.

I fully admit I may be making a bigger deal out of this than needed, but if you start "ahead", you can stay ahead. Gotta enter a given week with an even footing and rank on body of evidence.

Let mags come out with rankings that are unofficial, but do away with coaches and AP polls till "x" date. With me?

Two teams projected at the top of their leagues? First. Lol. Second, do you watch any other games at all? The hosts were full on laughing at our game on Saturday

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

Iowa’s 2015 team wasn’t ranked until week 5. The talking heads, for the most part, gave Iowa absolutely no credit. The “fake ID of college football.” It didn’t matter one iota. They were one defensive stand away from the CFP. Take care of business and the sky’s the limit.

 

[Kinnick.At.Night]

Keep me juiced up and I’ll follow you from here to eternity.

 

[ChiHawk1985]

I don't want to be "that guy" as a huge Iowa fan. But as a fan of college football I have an issue with a lot of our fans thinking that the rest of the football world pays attention to Iowa aside from nationally televised games (i.e. an OSU game like last year, or maybe ISU this season).

This is the equivalent of fans of a Boise State or an Ole' Miss to assume Iowa fans pay any attention to their teams or get upset about where they are ranked in their respective conferences (just as an example.)

The fact is that our offense was really rough for this Fox game. If you compared our offense to some other upper echelon offenses it is absolutely night and day. I do understand that it is really hard to be an objective judge of a team's talent when die hard fandom is involved, been there many-a-time, but Iowa doesn't have the kind of talent other teams have. Our defense is stout and that's something to hang a hat on... for now. There hasn't been a large sample size or the kind of competition to compare objectively only 2 games in.

Rankings are based a lot on name and reputation from the past which is what it is. However, to think that Iowa is on a national championship caliber level... I just don't have words for when people say that kind of stuff. There's fandom and then there's a totally different level.

 

[win1forthe]

I love college football but there are some major flaws within the sport and I agree that preseason polls are worthless. I have a real issue ranking teams, and these rankings do matter, before a game is even played. I’ve asked on other message boards what value preseason rankings bring, other than bringing hype and something to talk about, to the table and have yet to hear a reasonable explanation.

I would be fine starting the rankings the first week of October.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

We have to eliminate preseason polls that "carry weight". Iowa is 2-0 and has defensively dominated two teams (to the tune of second nationally in team defense) that are projected to be near the top of their leagues. Meanwhile, Michigan State has been less than dominant in their two games. There probably is a difference in opponent quality to some degree, but MSU is still ranked ahead of Iowa.

I fully admit I may be making a bigger deal out of this than needed, but if you start "ahead", you can stay ahead. Gotta enter a given week with an even footing and rank on body of evidence.

Let mags come out with rankings that are unofficial, but do away with coaches and AP polls till "x" date. With me?

Let's make college football great again by eliminating Alabama, Ohio State and USC from the FBS level of play.

 

[LaQuintaHawkeye]

Two teams projected at the top of their leagues? First. Lol.

 

[The_Joker13]

The actual rankings used to determine playoff isn’t implemented until week 5 so.....who gives a shit?

 

[rufus-hawk]

They will never stop with preseason rankings because people, especially casual fans, will tune in to see #3 so-and-so vs #20 so-and-so but won’t care at all about two unranked teams playing each other unless they already have a rooting interest.

I don’t like it either, but rankings = $$$

 

[win1forthe]

The actual rankings used to determine playoff isn’t implemented until week 5 so.....who gives a shit?

But if a team is #1 in the preseason, unless they lose they most likely won’t leave that spot. The #10 team might have more impressive wins, yet won’t get the top spot because #1 hasn’t lost.

 

[grayhair81]

If Iowa runs the table and wins the B1G championship, they will be ranked in the top 5 and in the playoff. Until then, it doesn't matter. If they don't win the B1G, their bowl assignment will not be set by their ranking but where their big standing. So why is anyone worried about rankings? The BCS rankings are the only ones that have any meaning.

 

[iowa12]

Iowa’s 2015 team wasn’t ranked until week 5. The talking heads, for the most part, gave Iowa absolutely no credit. The “fake ID of college football.” It didn’t matter one iota. They were one defensive stand away from the CFP. Take care of business and the sky’s the limit.

That fantasy was exposed against Stanford. We were about the 45 th best team that year. Had a joke of a schedule

 

[iowa12]

But if a team is #1 in the preseason, unless they lose they most likely won’t leave that spot. The #10 team might have more impressive wins, yet won’t get the top spot because #1 hasn’t lost.

There are a few teams that should worry about that. We and our opponents aren’t one of them

 

[TheTruthTheWholeTruth]

That fantasy was exposed against Stanford. We were about the 45 th best team that year. Had a joke of a schedule

Iowa would have likely been dismantled by Alabama as well in the CFP, just like MSU was, but that’s not the point. The point is the rankings at the beginning of the season don’t mean a thing. If a major conference team goes undefeated then they are likely headed for the CFP or, at worst, a New Year’s 6 matchup. From there let the cards fall where they may.

 

[sultanofsuede]

I do agree with the idea. Seems like, the n order to be thought of as a top 5 team of in mid November, you have to start the season with a top 20 ranking, and chip away to move up all season.

If the Hawkeyes are undefeated by Nov 1, then we will still be behind a few one and two loss teams. I know in 2015, we got exposed in the Rose Bow, but I don’t put the same wxpections on this team just because we have a weak schedule.

If this team can have a special season, they are not going to be considered for the playoff because we won’t be in the voters radar until it’s too late.

 

[thefan92]

I don't want to be "that guy" as a huge Iowa fan. But as a fan of college football I have an issue with a lot of our fans thinking that the rest of the football world pays attention to Iowa aside from nationally games (i.e. an OSU game like last year, or may

This is the equivalent of fans of a Boise State or an Ole' Miss to assume Iowa fans pay any attention to their teams or get upset about where they are ranked in their respective conferences (just as an example.)

The fact is that our offense was really rough for this Fox game. If you compared our offense to some other upper echelon offenses it is absolutely night and day. I do understand that it is really hard to be an objective judge of a team's talent when die hard fandom is involved, been there many-a-time, but Iowa doesn't have the kind of talent other teams have. Our defense is stout and that's something to hang a hat on... for now. There hasn't been a large sample size or the kind of competition to compare objectively only 2 games in.

Rankings are based a lot on name and reputation from the past which is what it is. However, to think that Iowa is on a national championship caliber level... I just don't have words for when people say that kind of stuff. There's fandom and then there's a totally different level.

Nobody thinks or said Iowa is national championship level. The fact is its a pretty flawed system when Michigan State is still ahead of Arizona State and Texas is somehow ranked preseason. Michigan has done nothing to warrant their continually high rankings either. These are the things people are talking about. Maryland’s win against Texas should carry no more weight than ours against ISU.

 

[Hans81]

Two teams projected at the top of their leagues? First. Lol. Second, do you watch any other games at all? The hosts were full on laughing at our game on Saturday

Why do you say "our" game? You're a troll and certainly not an Iowa fan.

 

[HumbleP1e]

I guess by top of their leagues (didn't realize you would miss the point of the entire message and pull one loosely considered part of an example for a derail...but okay...) I just meant Northern Illinois was a pick to win the MAC by some, and ISU finished top half last year with reason to hope for the same this year. Prior to Saturday, you knew ISU was going to be that bad? Sure.

I also didn't say Iowa was NC worthy. I used it as a way to recognize the flaw of not letting the work place the pecking order. MSU and a few others should not be ranked. Neither should Iowa. That has nothing to do with the point. Polls do give a footing for the "4". It worked out well for Iowa in '15. But, teams have been nudged out, too. If I remember correctly, and I may not, tOSU got in as a 4 one year where many thought they shouldn't have. They won it. Regardles of score v. Stanford (again not the point of the post), preseason rankings skew the scenario at least to some degree. Why? Change it. Again, let the preseason rags post them, but no AP, Coaches, or anything that is used to determine anything of value. I hope that is clearer. Maybe I am the only one who is bothered by it.

 

[tidhawk]

Can someone with more tech abilities que the dumpster fire gif. Thanks.

 

[wolve1972]

But if a team is #1 in the preseason, unless they lose they most likely won’t leave that spot. The #10 team might have more impressive wins, yet won’t get the top spot because #1 hasn’t lost.

My question: how many recent NCs have been undefeated in the last 10 to 15 years ? Almost impossible these days to go through a CF season undefeated. Example: Iowa's beatdown of OSU last year - still a stunner and the one that kept BIG champ OSU out of the playoffs. There's a ton of parity today. Just keep winning and everything else will fall into place.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Preseason and early season rankings are imperfect, but it still gives fans a general idea of how good certain teams are expected to be.

At the end of the day, college football is an entertainment business. While the "purity" of rankings may be improved by avoiding preseason rankings, it would detract from the entertainment aspect.

Yes, the polls are often skewed in favor of programs with the most brand recognition, but there's nothing preventing Iowa from building its own recognition with repeated success. We saw this in the seasons that followed our 3 straight top-10 finishes from 02-04. In 2005, we began the season near the top 10 and continued to be ranked following a really bad loss to Iowa State in week 2. Despite a lackluster 2005 season, we began the 2006 season ranked near the top 15. We turned out to be over ranked in 2010 and 2016 as well.

 

[myteamcanbeatupyourteam]

There are a few teams that should worry about that. We and our opponents aren’t one of them

Seriously, Dude. Why the AF do you even watch Iowa games?

 

[Hwk-I-St8]

I'd like to say I don't care about rankings until December, but the fact is that it does make a difference. The blue blood programs are blessed with high pre-season rankings even when previous season performance and returning players make a strong case to the contrary.

Even worse, the high initial rankings mean prime time TV spots which helps recruiting.

Finally, the high initial rankings make for a much easier path to the playoffs. When a highly ranked team loses, the usual response (especially if their a blue blood) is that the team that beat them is better than expected and they up that teams rating while dropping the blue blood's only slightly. This leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy effect where those teams are much more likely to end up in the top ten and playoffs. Think of the teams that have gotten in with 1 or 2 losses. Do you think Iowa would ever even get a look with one loss?

The bottom line I guess isn't the early rankings, it's more the bias in the rankings that's a problem. I think the rankings should be done with no names on the teams.....just look at the records. This, of course, is best done by computers which can look at all the inter-relationships between games (2nd and 3rd levels of who's played whom). I know the transitive property doesn't apply to sports, but it's better than "Well, they're Michigan so....".

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

If Iowa runs the table and wins the B1G championship, they will be ranked in the top 5 and in the playoff. Until then, it doesn't matter. If they don't win the B1G, their bowl assignment will not be set by their ranking but where their big standing. So why is anyone worried about rankings? The BCS rankings are the only ones that have any meaning.

Yeah, that's right, and the BCS rankings haven't even been used in 5 years.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

That fantasy was exposed against Stanford. We were about the 45 th best team that year. Had a joke of a schedule

Iowa > your team

 

[AuroraHawk]

But if a team is #1 in the preseason, unless they lose they most likely won’t leave that spot. The #10 team might have more impressive wins, yet won’t get the top spot because #1 hasn’t lost.

I'll take "Things That, as an Iowa Fan, I'm not Particularly Concerned About" for $500, Alex.

 

[Hawktagonapus]

I don't want to be "that guy" as a huge Iowa fan. But as a fan of college football I have an issue with a lot of our fans thinking that the rest of the football world pays attention to Iowa aside from nationally televised games (i.e. an OSU game like last year, or maybe ISU this season).

This is the equivalent of fans of a Boise State or an Ole' Miss to assume Iowa fans pay any attention to their teams or get upset about where they are ranked in their respective conferences (just as an example.)

The fact is that our offense was really rough for this Fox game. If you compared our offense to some other upper echelon offenses it is absolutely night and day. I do understand that it is really hard to be an objective judge of a team's talent when die hard fandom is involved, been there many-a-time, but Iowa doesn't have the kind of talent other teams have. Our defense is stout and that's something to hang a hat on... for now. There hasn't been a large sample size or the kind of competition to compare objectively only 2 games in.

Rankings are based a lot on name and reputation from the past which is what it is. However, to think that Iowa is on a national championship caliber level... I just don't have words for when people say that kind of stuff. There's fandom and then there's a totally different level.

Most fans don’t give a crap about Alabama either. They watch their own team and that’s it.

 

[Hawkeye_4_Life]

Yes we are 2-0 to start the season and aren't ranked yet.

We could be more pissed like Wisconsin who is 2-0 and started the season ranked 4th and lost a spot after each win.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

Pretty sure that's why the CFP rankings don't come out until mid-season, and those are the only rankings that matter anymore as far as the national championship goes.

Like them or not, preseason and early season rankings are highly anticipated and widely discussed; they are a part of college football, which we all love, so just enjoy it.

 

[markfromj]

First Amendment says no!

 

[HumbleP1e]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...ms-college-football-playoff-field/1267967002/

If you think the rankings don't matter...

 

[chiphawk59]

Hypothetical question here. Let's just say Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Stanford, and Iowa go undefeated, who gets left out of the playoffs? I think the Hawks would be left out because they started out not rated in the top twenty-five.

 

[michael.nelson311]

Preseason polls or rankings sell magazines and get click bait aka $$$$$.

 

[HumbleP1e]

Hypothetical question here. Let's just say Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Stanford, and Iowa go undefeated, who gets left out of the playoffs? I think the Hawks would be left out because they started out not rated in the top twenty-five.

Not sure. But, this is the point: there is no reason to have an official poll yet. Even if it's not Iowa, if that scenario exists, it's not best for the 5th place team.

 

[chiphawk59]

Not sure. But, this is the point: there is no reason to have an official poll yet. Even if it's not Iowa, if that scenario exists, it's not best for the 5th place team.

Substitute an undefeated Wisconsin for Iowa and Stanford gets left out. Pretty tough for a non blueblood program to crash the party so to speak.

 

[mrF6n6]

I have the opinion that the NCAA should have a 16 team playoff and that they should eliminate polls for determining who makes the playoffs.
they could have simple 'standings' based on wins/losses/win streaks/losing streaks.... and only count wins against power 5 teams... and all losses...
Conference Champions get the first 5 seeds
Runner ups get 6-10 seeds
11-16 seeds based on end of season standings

then do the same for the Group of 5 and have a 16 team playoff with the same set of rules... only counting wins against G5 or higher... and losses against G5 or lower.

1. Ohio State 2-0 W7
2. Georgia 1-0 W1
3. Oklahoma 1-0 W1
4. Clemson 1-0 W1
5. Stanford 1-0 W2
6. Auburn 1-0 W1
7. Arizona State 1-0 W1
8. Wisconsin 0-0 W1
9. TCU 0-0 W1
10. Miami (FL) 0-1 L4
11. Penn State 1-0 W5
12. Duke 1-0 W3
13. Alabama 1-0 W3
14. Iowa 1-0 W3
15. Notre Dame 1-0 W2
16. Mississippi State 1-0 W2
--------------------------------
Ole Miss 1-0 W2
Virginia Tech 1-0 W2
LSU 1-0 W1
West Virginia 1-0 W1
Kentucky 1-0 W1
Indiana 1-0 W1
California 1-0 W1
Colorado 1-0 W1
Maryland 1-0 W1
Oklahoma State 0-0 W2
NC State 0-0 W2
Utah 0-0 W2
Wake Forest 0-0 W1
Vanderbilt 0-0 W1
Missouri 0-0 L1
Boston College 0-0 L1
Oregon 0-0 L1
Washington State 0-0 L2
Minnesota 0-0 L2
Baylor 0-0 L3
Syracuse 0-0 L5
Illinois 0-0 L13
Northwestern 1-1 L1
Michigan State 0-1 L1
Kansas State 0-1 L1
South Carolina 0-1 L1
Pittsburgh 0-1 L1
Florida State 0-1 L1
Texas 0-1 L1
USC 0-1 L2
Iowa State 0-1 L2
Washington 0-1 L2
Louisville 0-1 L2
Texas Tech 0-1 L2
Texas A&M 0-1 L3
Georgia Tech 0-1 L3
Arkansas 0-1 L4
Rutgers 0-1 L4
Michigan 0-1 L4
Tennessee 0-1 L4
Virgina 0-1 L5
Nebraska 0-1 L5
Florida 0-1 L7
Oregon State 0-1 L12
Kansas 0-1 L13
Purdue 0-2 L2
UCLA 0-2 L3
North Carolina 0-2 L3
Arizona 0-2 L5

 

[mlee3553]

That fantasy was exposed against Stanford. We were about the 45 th best team that year. Had a joke of a schedule

So did we "expose" OSU last year.....? No it was one game and things like that can happen. Was Stanford better than Iowa, I'd def say yes were they 30pts better? Hard to say but you can't define a team by one game.