The problem with using the ranking at the end of the season is this...if you played them and beat them, that's the reason they aren't ranked as high at the end...ie last year with Arkansas and Tennessee. We didn't blow either of those teams out, but they had to drop in the polls because we beat them. Think about Arkansas...they lost to what would eventually be the #3 team on the last regular season game, then to the eventual #1 team a week later. They dropped like a rock, yet barely lost to 2 top 3 teams. That doesn't mean Arkansas was suddenly a terrible team, but if you consider their FINAL ranking as their true ranking, it's as if they really weren't a big time win for us, or UF for that matter. I haven't offered any solution, but just throwing this out for someone to chew on and spit out the REAL answer to us.:thumb:
I certainly am not an expert on the rankings systems, but I just wanted to show how so many college football fans get wrapped up in that but the debate is not uniform.....we're often talking about very subjective things in the course of this discusion. I'm just going to use your comments to elaborate cause the cut to the core of the problem, imo. In light of what Fishhead so eloquently pointed out- let’s use LSU as an example of judging "How good a team was" or "How hard our schedule was". Last year, LSU was ranked #8 in the preseason poll and moved to #6 after the second week. Then fell to #10 after week three and the AU loss. The following week, we moved to #9 and stayed there for two weeks before falling to #14 for the next three. The ensuing two weeks we were ranked at #13 and #12 before moving BACK to #9 for two weeks, finishing up #5, #4 and ultimately, #3. So, in playing LSU, did our opponents play an LSU team that was a #3, #4, #5, #6, #8, #9, #10, #12, #13 or #14 ranked team? .......heck, we held 10 different rankings last year?
Conference stregnth plays a part as well. This is why the SEC vs PAC-10 argument is so interesting. Swap USC for LSU or Florida or UGA or Arky or Bama or Auburn, and suddenly USC isn't looking so dominant anymore. Because even though the SEC teams above may be ranked outside the top 10, they're touger than your average PAC-10 team. Everyone with a sense for NCAA football knows that's true. End of the day, I think the only way to look at it objectively is by comparing final poll standings. The price we pay for being in the SEC is the disadvantage of having to play our very tough neighbors.
If Arkansas would've closed their end of the deal and beat Wisconsin, they probably would've finished top ten. Wisconsin wasn't well respected b/c the one big game they played vs. Michigan they got blown out, and they avoided Ohio St. too
LOL I would like to see USC play Vandy's Schedule and see if they would win all of the games . or even go to a bowl Game .
I disagree, sully. USC is indeed a very good team. I would, however, like to see them play an SEC schedule. I think they would win most of the time, but they would be no better, IMHO, than us, UF, AU, Tenn, Jawga, and even Bama...in the long run. Of course, they would contend for SEC titles as often as any of the aforementioned teams...but they wouldn't automatically be considered the class of the field. I said I think they would win most of the time...just like the teams I mentioned above.:thumb:
