Tomorrow’s polls

[djorange1989]

Not a single voter is using a criterion like "did they give up 300 yards rushing to Boston College" as voting rationale.

Exactly. BC gave SMU all that they could handle yesterday too. I understand not ranking us but that is not a reason why

 

[djorange1989]

Okay, how’s this, “do I think this is a good team?” “No”.

what the hell? We are 7-3 and on the brink of only our third 8 plus win regular season since McNabb left. With a first time head coach. Totally legit not to rank us but what’s with the bile, especially after yesterday?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Okay, how’s this, “do I think this is a good team?” “No”. That’s their criteria. Where do you think their data points come from? I suppose if they just saw that we lost to BC, that is enough. If they happen to look at a box score, well, that’s even more reason. And, if they happen to be knowledgeable, then they certainly have reason not to rank us.

Ok, but what you're glossing over having this super specific criteria for Syracuse is that they're having to do the same assessment for like 40 teams. So yes, I agree with you, baseline question is "are they good" but they're not scrutinizing box scores and reverse engineering selection criteria based on statistical oddities. They're going off of "are they good" and "how good did I think they were when the season started."

Your statement is similar to when fans say things like "if we can't beat Wake at home we don't deserve to make the tournament."

 

[SU91]

what the hell? We are 7-3 and on the brink of only our third 8 plus win regular season since McNabb left. With a first time head coach. Totally legit not to rank us but what’s with the bile, especially after yesterday?

No bile. Love our win yesterday. Probably the best win of the year considering it’s following the BC game. But, some voters actually do look at more than results. They know we’re not all that good. They’ve seen us get pummeled on the ground. Teams that should be ranked don’t get run on like that. There are a lot of 7-3 teams. Not everyone deserves to be ranked. Just because we beat a, honestly, not very good Cal team (which I’m ecstatic we did), doesn’t mean much.

If we finish 8-4 I doubt we’re ranked. If we finish with 9-10 wins (which may or may not include a bowl win) I think we could end the season ranked. But, yes, getting punked by a team like BC does have reverberations.

BC did play SMU tough. Personally, I don’t think SMU is all that great. They are a further demonstration of how awful the ACC is. Which is still a positive because it gives SU a chance in this conference.

 

[SU91]

Ok, but what you're glossing over having this super specific criteria for Syracuse is that they're having to do the same assessment for like 40 teams. So yes, I agree with you, baseline question is "are they good" but they're not scrutinizing box scores and reverse engineering selection criteria based on statistical oddities. They're going off of "are they good" and "how good did I think they were when the season started."

Your statement is similar to when fans say things like "if we can't beat Wake at home we don't deserve to make the tournament."

Yeah, it’s all subjective. I’m just saying there are some variables that people use in their subjectivity. Macro data points like “they lost to Stanford” are used, but I think more micro variables like, “they just got run all over” are also used. When it’s all people’s opinions anyway, it could also be because they hate the color orange. Who knows? However, knowledgeable voters know about our defense etc etc.

 

[djorange1989]

No bile. Love our win yesterday. Probably the best win of the year considering it’s following the BC game. But, some voters actually do look at more than results. They know we’re not all that good. They’ve seen us get pummeled on the ground. Teams that should be ranked don’t get run on like that. There are a lot of 7-3 teams. Not everyone deserves to be ranked. Just because we beat a, honestly, not very good Cal team (which I’m ecstatic we did), doesn’t mean much.

If we finish 8-4 I doubt we’re ranked. If we finish with 9-10 wins (which may or may not include a bowl win) I think we could end the season ranked. But, yes, getting punked by a team like BC does have reverberations.

BC did play SMU tough. Personally, I don’t think SMU is all that great. They are a further demonstration of how awful the ACC is. Which is still a positive because it gives SU a chance in this conference.

I agree that 8-4 won’t do it, 9-3 definitely will. At the end of the day we lost to BC on the road by 6. The Stanford loss was way more damaging, doesn’t matter if BC ran for 300 yards or threw for 400, it was a frustrating loss to say the least but we didn’t lose to Purdue or anything