Somebody Must Have Listened

Because College Football News recently published a preseason top 119 teams list based not on expected finish, but "how good" each team is.

Bravo.

See here.

There's one very important distinction in the CFN preseason rankings: these are based on how good the teams are going into the season and NOT how they're going to finish. Some teams have easier schedules than others, some get tougher road games and some will need a little bit of time to jell meaning they might be better than their final record might indicate. Going into the year, these are how good the teams appear to be from No. 1 through 119

Remember my discussion quite recently with BON?  Well CFN's taking a stab at trying it my way, even if it's just for the preseason.  This is a good turn, whether you agree with my method or not.  Something's not quite right with annual poll results and we should be seeking different ways to improve them.

Comments

[Peter Bean]

I think, after sorting through everything, it's probably best to do BOTH, as Phil Steele does. For example, Bruce Feldman, who you don't mention, does it the opposite way - just based on who has the best chance to get to the title game. That leaves open questions, too.

Anyway, I'm not sure we can - certainly not based on what we've discussed so far - trumpet one as "right" and the other as "wrong". It seems to me there's a place for both, and the strengths and weaknesses of each should be noted.

This post doesn't take note of any of the nuance in the issue.

Again, I thought it was a good starter discussion between us.

[Peter Bean]

Just to elaborate/clarify: I think you do a disservice to the very good conversation that we started when you put up a post like this that pretty much reads, "Look! Validation for MY point!"

It makes it more like the excessively one-sided yelling matches that you hear on television about sports/politics/whatever these days. There's room for nuance in conversation, CFR. And while we were both, I thought, very tempered in our discussion at BON, this seems oddly out of place.

'Tis all!

Thanks again for the AP data - 'twas most useful.

Cheers,
Peter

[CFR]

Peter,

I think I did the conversation justice. I leave it open that my option could be "right or wrong", I'm just excited to see someone try it my way (and am a touch sarcastic, it wasn't meant to be "a-ha! I'm right, losers".

It's definitely in the minority right now and it's been hard to point to examples to get an idea of what I'm talking about other than my weekly rankings last year and my preseason list this year. So yeh, I thought I'd add that it was something I'd noticed.

I continue to invite plenty of discussion such as you're doing here (I did link to our discussion to show there are plenty of sides to the issue), I don't mind the criticism and critique one bit. Maybe I'm wrong, in which case the court of public opinion will do me in quite happily ;o).

[Calfan]

Actually, CFN always does that. They definitely did it last year. In fact, I think of ranking teams by how good they are, regardless of schedule, as the "CFN method."

[CFR]

Noted.

I don't spend much if any time over there most days, so I didn't realize they had done that as well.

[Peter Bean]

I didn't pick up on the sarcasm, CFR> no worries. I think there's value in both sides, for certain. There's something about each side that feels slightly incomplete, so the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to have some sort of Power Rankings (BEST teams, CFR style) and Poll Rankings (Schedule considerations, B. Feldman style).

Anyway, glad the dialogue is open.

[Ltrain]

Isn't one of the benefits of the B.Feldman style the fact that prognosticators are searching for pre-season rankings that will be "proven right" once the season is complete? Ironic nuance...

[USCLink]

Calfan over on BON posted a really good and interesting idea about ranking the season rather than the team. Ie. USC 2k5 may have been better than 2k4, and according to the talent, probably was. However, 2k4 went undefeated with a pasting of OU in the orange bowl, while 2k5 dropped a heartbreaker to UT int he Rose Bowl. Therefore, regardless of which team was better, it is more or less clear that 2k4 had a better season.

Its an interesting idea, and if I could find his post i'd link to it. Know where it is PB?