forums

But but but USCe was ranked 9th in preseason..

Advertisement
Always overrated. Can't wait for Finebaum Friday now as he picked them to win the East
 
This game made me so happy. Im a noted hater of anything USCe. They are always ranked high for no reason snd then blow it big time, but they get a pass because it's losses to other sec teams which is supposed to be ok because its the "mighty SEC"
 
Advertisement
One of the biggest problems with CFB. Dumbass preseason rankings especially with the clear SEC bias these days.
 
We were ranked pretty high heading into Shannon's last season and we all know how that went. It happens, but it really seems to happen to SC a lot.
 
Ukcanes1 said:
One of the biggest problems with CFB. Dumbass preseason rankings especially with the clear SEC bias these days.
Click to expand...

692.gif
 
Advertisement
CaneAlmighty said:
GTFOH with preseason rankings.

wish I can ***** slap these ***ing pollsters..
680 total yards LOLOLOLOLOL
Click to expand...

I don't think the pollsters knew Ono was moonlighting as USCe DC in his spare time. That defense resembled our very own in so many ways. USCe defenses were very good in years past, but this new version **** it self out the gate. The 3-4 with no pressure and DB sitting back 15 yards of the LOS. Seems like that is a recipe for making prognosticators look bad.
 
Preseason ratings are remarkably accurate. I can't imagine betting college football or basketball without using them. It often feels like stealing. But this type of situation is very familiar. Instead of looking at the totality, the tendency is to fixate on a handful of high profile exceptions to the rule and use them to overreact. That's how you get the nonsense that rankings shouldn't exist for the first month, and similar garbage. It's like there is an annual desperation to wait for the first highly ranked team to lose so we can mock preseason ratings. This site should be better than that.

I only wish the betting lines were made by bar stool fans instead of oddsmakers using power ratings. The fans would comically adjust based on early results. South Carolina would be absurdly demoted. Bargains galore. I always love it when some sportscaster out there announces his personal rankings after a couple of games. Invariably he'll place a stiff team very high, simply because they happened to win impressively out of the gate.

Results generally mean nothing compared to preseason ratings. Nobody likes that version but I'll continue to use it and wager by it. When our basketball team was seeded second two years ago, and some screamed for a number one seed, we were virtually guaranteed to be an overrated fraud since our preseason rating was so comparatively low. Likewise last season I remember posting that our 7-0 start and Top 10 ranking meant very little since our average power ranking was mid 30s in preseason. We played back to that level. Big surprise.

I always want to be ranked as high as possible in preseason. That means the talent level is supreme. The results will take care of themselves. Is anybody really concerned about South Carolina based on one game? Besides, I seem to remember that Texas A&M has recruited very well in recent years. Similar to Auburn, which was understated entering last season despite a string of great recruiting classes. If the preseason raters make one mistake it's to overreact to one or two players departing and ignore the overall personnel strength of the team. That's what happened to the Canes entering 1987, after we lost Testaverde and Jerome Brown, among others, from 1986.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
Preseason ratings are remarkably accurate. I can't imagine betting college football or basketball without using them. It often feels like stealing. But this type of situation is very familiar. Instead of looking at the totality, the tendency is to fixate on a handful of high profile exceptions to the rule and use them to overreact. That's how you get the nonsense that rankings shouldn't exist for the first month, and similar garbage. It's like there is an annual desperation to wait for the first highly ranked team to lose so we can mock preseason ratings. This site should be better than that.

I only wish the betting lines were made by bar stool fans instead of oddsmakers using power ratings. The fans would comically adjust based on early results. South Carolina would be absurdly demoted. Bargains galore. I always love it when some sportscaster out there announces his personal rankings after a couple of games. Invariably he'll place a stiff team very high, simply because they happened to win impressively out of the gate.

Results generally mean nothing compared to preseason ratings. Nobody likes that version but I'll continue to use it and wager by it. When our basketball team was seeded second two years ago, and some screamed for a number one seed, we were virtually guaranteed to be an overrated fraud since our preseason rating was so comparatively low. Likewise last season I remember posting that our 7-0 start and Top 10 ranking meant very little since our average power ranking was mid 30s in preseason. We played back to that level. Big surprise.

I always want to be ranked as high as possible in preseason. That means the talent level is supreme. The results will take care of themselves. Is anybody really concerned about South Carolina based on one game? Besides, I seem to remember that Texas A&M has recruited very well in recent years. Similar to Auburn, which was understated entering last season despite a string of great recruiting classes. If the preseason raters make one mistake it's to overreact to one or two players departing and ignore the overall personnel strength of the team. That's what happened to the Canes entering 1987, after we lost Testaverde and Jerome Brown, among others, from 1986.
Click to expand...

Good stuff Awsi.
 
Advertisement
What this tells is that the SEC East is up for grabs. South Carolina, UGA, and UF all have a legit shot.
 
Advertisement
SEC overhype. That's a weak team, yet the SEC bathwater guzzlers had them in the top ten.

Preseason polls are for retards. Said it before, and I'll say it again.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top