ESPN power rankings are out and Texas A&M is ranked above UCLA

[Ranger Dan]

This is remarkable because UCLA apparently beat Texas A&M last night. So, with only one real data point to go by, they somehow believe that the team that lost is better than the team that won. I guess this is just another example of the looks test.

Sorry about no link, but I haven't figured out how to do this on my iPad.

 

[AWS1022]

This is remarkable because UCLA apparently beat Texas A&M last night. So, with only one real data point to go by, they somehow believe that the team that lost is better than the team that won. I guess this is just another example of the looks test.

Sorry about no link, but I haven't figured out how to do this on my iPad.

I don't see A&M in the top 20, so I'm not sure where you get that. But I do see OSU #1 and Bama #2....what?

 

[nits74]

I don't see A&M in the top 20, so I'm not sure where you get that. But I do see OSU #1 and Bama #2....what?

This is just ESPN's. So, really doesn't mean much.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

I don't see A&M in the top 20, so I'm not sure where you get that. But I do see OSU #1 and Bama #2....what?

ABC is carrying the Oklahoma at Ohio State game Saturday night. That is your answer.

 

[PSU_l]

This is remarkable because UCLA apparently beat Texas A&M last night. So, with only one real data point to go by, they somehow believe that the team that lost is better than the team that won. I guess this is just another example of the looks test.

Sorry about no link, but I haven't figured out how to do this on my iPad.

Don't you realize that ESPN babbling-bozos' "Eye Test" is far more important than on-field results? Geesh, and you call yourself a "College Football Fan" and you don't even realize how preeminent the legendary "Eye Test" is to all other measures especially relative to on-field results which are extremely misleading....

 

[papa_ed]

Makes sense to me (sarcasm)

 

[fairfaxlion2]

Maybe Nate Silver programmed the power ranking for them. Seems like it works great.

 

[Mister Magoo]

This is just ESPN's. So, really doesn't mean much.

Back in January of 2004, I subscribed to ESPN Insider for a year or so. The Pats won at Indy,
beat the Colts in the AFCCG and went on to win The Super Bowl and their last 15 games that year.
A week after the Super Bowl an article comes out saying they still had the Colts ranked first. I called
to cancel and the girl asks why. I explained to her. Don't think she got it.

 

[BobPSU92]

I assume Penn State dropped in the polls just because.

 

[Mister Magoo]

I assume Penn State dropped in the polls just because.

Culture issues. No top recruits will ever go there.

 

[BobPSU92]

Culture issues. No top recruits will ever go there.

We're just lucky to be playing football.

 

[PSU_l]

Maybe Nate Silver programmed the power ranking for them. Seems like it works great.

I think Herbie's been doing their programming....anybody who knows anything about football knows how important his legendary "Eye Test" system is, especially it's importance relative to untrustworthy "on-field results", "championships won on the field of play", etc...

 

[Erial_Lion]

Maybe Nate Silver programmed the power ranking for them. Seems like it works great.

Honestly, any accurate power ranking should give a bump for a one point road loss against an equivalent team.

 

[PSU_l]

Honestly, any accurate power ranking should give a bump for a one point road loss against an equivalent team.

Comical, let me get this straight, you think it's basic statistical "logic" that would rate a team that is 0-1 over a team that is 1-0 before even factoring in that the team you believe should be given huge "ranking" points for a "moral victory" road loss was to the team they are ranked over? Clearly you aren't familiar with how "Playoff Standings" work in leagues and sports that have "Actual Playoffs" rather than biased, subjective "invitationals" fraudulently labeled as real "Playoff Structures", LMFAO.

 

[N&B4PSU]

Well, in their defense I think they are looking at how TAMU dismantled ucla (up 44-10 and destroying them) until they were left playing a half with a QB who can't throw.. at all. Then tamu's coaches lost their collective minds, josh rosen caught fire and... boom. So in the minds of the rankers, if both teams played again at even strength on a neutral field, tamu is the better team.

aside from that.. i got nuttin. lol.

 

[Art]

aTm was winning for most of the of the game so it makes sense to me.

 

[Erial_Lion]

Comical, let me get this straight, you think it's basic statistical "logic" that would rate a team that is 0-1 over a team that is 1-0 before even factoring in that the team you believe should be given huge "ranking" points for a "moral victory" road loss was to the team they are ranked over? Clearly you aren't familiar with how "Playoff Standings" work in leagues and sports that have "Actual Playoffs" rather than biased, subjective "invitationals" fraudulently labeled as real "Playoff Structures", LMFAO.

I said a good "power ranking", not standings.

 

[Option Bob]

Well, in their defense I think they are looking at how TAMU dismantled ucla (up 44-10 and destroying them) until they were left playing a half with a QB who can't throw.. at all. Then tamu's coaches lost their collective minds, josh rosen caught fire and... boom. So in the minds of the rankers, if both teams played again at even strength on a neutral field, tamu is the better team.

aside from that.. i got nuttin. lol.

My Aggie friends are in total despair; they wanted Sumlin gone before he boarded the plane in LA. What they found troubling for Sumlin and/or his OC was that he didn't have the true frosh QB Mond (a local boy from the high school where my wife teaches - well, then he transferred to that factory in FL) milk the clock before snapping the ball throughout the 4th quarter.

And they went ballistic when Mond threw an incomplete pass with UCLA having only 1 TO remaining. The kid can run, as he showed often, so calling a pass in that situation was really incomprehensible. The mood is that if A&M doesn't defeat Alabama and/or LSU, Sumlin is gone.

 

[AWS1022]

Well, in their defense I think they are looking at how TAMU dismantled ucla (up 44-10 and destroying them) until they were left playing a half with a QB who can't throw.. at all. Then tamu's coaches lost their collective minds, josh rosen caught fire and... boom. So in the minds of the rankers, if both teams played again at even strength on a neutral field, tamu is the better team.

aside from that.. i got nuttin. lol.

1. Ohio State
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma
4. Clemson
5. Stanford
6. Penn State
7. Wisconsin
8. Auburn
9. Florida State
10. LSU
11. Washington
12. USC
13. Georgia
14. Notre Dame
15. Michigan
16. Oklahoma State
17. Oregon
18. TCU
19. UCLA
20. Tennessee

So where is A&M ahead of UCLA?

 

[PSU_l]

Well, in their defense I think they are looking at how TAMU dismantled ucla (up 44-10 and destroying them) until they were left playing a half with a QB who can't throw.. at all. Then tamu's coaches lost their collective minds, josh rosen caught fire and... boom. So in the minds of the rankers, if both teams played again at even strength on a neutral field, tamu is the better team.

aside from that.. i got nuttin. lol.

In other words, if UCLA ended up being the Pac12 Champion and aTm the SEC Champion and only one of them could make the playoff, you believe aTm should get the nod over UCLA despite losing head-to-head to UCLA because even though they OBJECTIVELY and ABSOLUTELY lost the game, they were the "road team", so it really doesn't count as a loss, it actually counts as a win and "vice versa" for UCLA whose OBJECTIVE and ABSOLUTE win, actually counts as a loss in your book because it didn't pass your subjective "Eye Test" and wasn't impressive enough to actually be counted as a win....blah, blah, blah...??? LMAO, yea, your grasp of theoretical "statistical logic" is astounding......

 

[LaJolla Lion]

This is remarkable because UCLA apparently beat Texas A&M last night. So, with only one real data point to go by, they somehow believe that the team that lost is better than the team that won. I guess this is just another example of the looks test.

Sorry about no link, but I haven't figured out how to do this on my iPad.

Wonder if some emailed this in ahead of the final outcomes? Lets not forget week 1 is different with Sunday and even Monday night games. Hell there is still a game tonight for UT and GT.

 

[N&B4PSU]

In other words, if UCLA ended up being the Pac12 Champion and aTm the SEC Champion and only one of them could make the playoff, you believe aTm should get the nod over UCLA despite losing head-to-head to UCLA because even though they OBJECTIVELY and ABSOLUTELY lost the game, they were the "road team", so it really doesn't count as a loss, it actually counts as a win and "vice versa" for UCLA whose OBJECTIVE and ABSOLUTE win, actually counts as a loss in your book because it didn't pass your subjective "Eye Test" and wasn't impressive enough to actually be counted as a win....blah, blah, blah...??? LMAO, yea, your grasp of theoretical "statistical logic" is astounding......

Relax.. I was being funny (note the lol).. and (kinda) seriously, you mean you don't think the tools in that committee are stupid enough to think that way?

 

[N&B4PSU]

1. Ohio State
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma
4. Clemson
5. Stanford
6. Penn State
7. Wisconsin
8. Auburn
9. Florida State
10. LSU
11. Washington
12. USC
13. Georgia
14. Notre Dame
15. Michigan
16. Oklahoma State
17. Oregon
18. TCU
19. UCLA
20. Tennessee

So where is A&M ahead of UCLA?

That's a damned good question! Looks like i'm gonna have to actually start looking at the links rather than assuming those before me actually did.. and didn't mistake TAMU for TCU..... lol

 

[fairfaxlion2]

Honestly, any accurate power ranking should give a bump for a one point road loss against an equivalent team.

I think it's more like -
If(team = Ohio State or team =USC or conference = SEC) then index_score =index_score * 25 end if

 

[N&B4PSU]

This is remarkable because UCLA apparently beat Texas A&M last night. So, with only one real data point to go by, they somehow believe that the team that lost is better than the team that won. I guess this is just another example of the looks test.

Sorry about no link, but I haven't figured out how to do this on my iPad.

some might want to know how maryland is 51 and texas is 33. just saying... lol. but again, it's espn...

btw, while our sos is in the 50s, does anyone see a "lock" game on our schedule... aside from game 3?

perhaps rutgers won't hold up and maybe umd was a fluke (or texas sux) etc... but i look at our schedule and i don't see one breather in gthe bunch (after week 3). anyone see it differently?

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

Why the hell would they release a power ranking when week 1 still isn't over? The Vols - a ranked team - play tonight.

 

[michnittlion]

Honestly, any accurate power ranking should give a bump for a one point road loss against an equivalent team.

Good post.

If Texas A&M and UCLA played again in Week 2 on a neutral field, and I had to bet $100 on who would win --- given the very limited empirical data points we currently have (we'll get a lot more empirical data points in future weeks, of course), I'd take Texas A&M.

 

[Mack_Daddy]

This is remarkable because UCLA apparently beat Texas A&M last night. So, with only one real data point to go by, they somehow believe that the team that lost is better than the team that won. I guess this is just another example of the looks test.

Sorry about no link, but I haven't figured out how to do this on my iPad.

STACY ALERT...

Some people just don't get it. They're mental.

 

[Grant Green]

Comical, let me get this straight, you think it's basic statistical "logic" that would rate a team that is 0-1 over a team that is 1-0 before even factoring in that the team you believe should be given huge "ranking" points for a "moral victory" road loss was to the team they are ranked over? Clearly you aren't familiar with how "Playoff Standings" work in leagues and sports that have "Actual Playoffs" rather than biased, subjective "invitationals" fraudulently labeled as real "Playoff Structures", LMFAO.

He said power rankings and he is right. Erial understands handicapping.

 

[AWS1022]

Why the hell would they release a power ranking when week 1 still isn't over? The Vols - a ranked team - play tonight.

Yeah, but they saw the Vols last year...this year is same sh!t different day.

 

[nittany119]

1. Ohio State
2. Alabama
3. Oklahoma
4. Clemson
5. Stanford
6. Penn State
7. Wisconsin
8. Auburn
9. Florida State
10. LSU
11. Washington
12. USC
13. Georgia
14. Notre Dame
15. Michigan
16. Oklahoma State
17. Oregon
18. TCU
19. UCLA
20. Tennessee

So where is A&M ahead of UCLA?

How is Stanford ahead of us?

 

[Chickenman Testa]

How is Stanford ahead of us?

The "acorn" test