https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... -back-no-1

App in at #39.

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I don't know if it's bias. SP+ is a predictive measure. UNC played better and better as the season went on, and I think they got a pretty good recruiting class. 17 seems a bit high, but they will definitely be better next season. I was a little surprised at how low App was, but strength of schedule is a big part of SP+ and I think our schedule is a bit weaker next season than last.

MrCraig wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:05 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I don't know if it's bias. SP+ is a predictive measure. UNC played better and better as the season went on, and I think they got a pretty good recruiting class. 17 seems a bit high, but they will definitely be better next season. I was a little surprised at how low App was, but strength of schedule is a big part of SP+ and I think our schedule is a bit weaker next season than last.

It’s a waste of time and energy to fret or to get excited about any random poll, especially in February but to rank any team that wasn’t even in the final top 30 from the prior year is ridiculous. Personally I think that there should be no rankings until after the 6th game. If there must be an initial ranking it should mirror the prior final poll from the previous season. If you win it all you are number one until you get knocked off. If a team is noticeably better or worse due to personnel changes then they will rise or fall. Just my opinion

I agree UNC is too high given where they ended up in the final 2019-2020 season ranking. I think we are a little too low by the same measure. On the other hand it's nice to see all the traditional "big time football teams" ranked below us. I also agree these polls mean nothing but it's fun to have something to talk about in the off season.

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

You clearly need to read into what SP+ actually is.

bigdaddyg wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:57 pm

MrCraig wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:05 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I don't know if it's bias. SP+ is a predictive measure. UNC played better and better as the season went on, and I think they got a pretty good recruiting class. 17 seems a bit high, but they will definitely be better next season. I was a little surprised at how low App was, but strength of schedule is a big part of SP+ and I think our schedule is a bit weaker next season than last.

It’s a waste of time and energy to fret or to get excited about any random poll, especially in February but to rank any team that wasn’t even in the final top 30 from the prior year is ridiculous. Personally I think that there should be no rankings until after the 6th game. If there must be an initial ranking it should mirror the prior final poll from the previous season. If you win it all you are number one until you get knocked off. If a team is noticeably better or worse due to personnel changes then they will rise or fall. Just my opinion

This ranking is NOT a poll. The SP+ is a statistical ranking based on a variety of statistics and how they are weighted. The weighting is what really drives the results and either makes or breaks the quality of the ranking. The SP+ has historically shown some credibility although as we know there are many intangible factors that are hard to statistically quantify that also play a role in the actual outcome. As we discussed with the "returning productivity" numbers, there is some value but it all has to been taken in with appropriate context. The good news is we are now landing in the upper tier of FBS on many of these performance related statistics.

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I'm not a UNC fan in any way, shape, or form but they didn't lose a game in 2019 by more than one score and lost two OT games. Flip two of those games and they finish 9-4 rather than 7-6. If they managed to beat Clemson they could've been sitting at 10-4. That's a big swing based on games in OT & a failed 2-PT conversion.

ericsaid wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:22 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I'm not a UNC fan in any way, shape, or form but they didn't lose a game in 2019 by more than one score and lost two OT games. Flip two of those games and they finish 9-4 rather than 7-6. If they managed to beat Clemson they could've been sitting at 10-4. That's a big swing based on games in OT & a failed 2-PT conversion.

That is certainly true but you can probably look at lots of teams and close games they won or lost and the records they had or could have had. We were a missed FG and possibly one TD pass from 3 losses or a few plays from being unbeaten. Numbers can be funny

I think Wake and Wisconsin this year are tougher than UNC and SC last season. MSU and UMass However .....

MrCraig wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:05 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I don't know if it's bias. SP+ is a predictive measure. UNC played better and better as the season went on, and I think they got a pretty good recruiting class. 17 seems a bit high, but they will definitely be better next season. I was a little surprised at how low App was, but strength of schedule is a big part of SP+ and I think our schedule is a bit weaker next season than last.

#NeverUNC

I will not be rational about this

bigdaddyg wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:40 pm

ericsaid wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:22 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I'm not a UNC fan in any way, shape, or form but they didn't lose a game in 2019 by more than one score and lost two OT games. Flip two of those games and they finish 9-4 rather than 7-6. If they managed to beat Clemson they could've been sitting at 10-4. That's a big swing based on games in OT & a failed 2-PT conversion.

That is certainly true but you can probably look at lots of teams and close games they won or lost and the records they had or could have had. We were a missed FG and possibly one TD pass from 3 losses or a few plays from being unbeaten. Numbers can be funny

Yep...#NeverUNC

ericsaid wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:22 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I'm not a UNC fan in any way, shape, or form but they didn't lose a game in 2019 by more than one score and lost two OT games. Flip two of those games and they finish 9-4 rather than 7-6. If they managed to beat Clemson they could've been sitting at 10-4. That's a big swing based on games in OT & a failed 2-PT conversion.

They came within a field goal of taking the #19 team in the nation to overtime too.

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:12 pm

MrCraig wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:05 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I don't know if it's bias. SP+ is a predictive measure. UNC played better and better as the season went on, and I think they got a pretty good recruiting class. 17 seems a bit high, but they will definitely be better next season. I was a little surprised at how low App was, but strength of schedule is a big part of SP+ and I think our schedule is a bit weaker next season than last.

#NeverUNC

I will not be rational about this

I wish I could like this twice.

mike87 wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 5:25 pm

ericsaid wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:22 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I'm not a UNC fan in any way, shape, or form but they didn't lose a game in 2019 by more than one score and lost two OT games. Flip two of those games and they finish 9-4 rather than 7-6. If they managed to beat Clemson they could've been sitting at 10-4. That's a big swing based on games in OT & a failed 2-PT conversion.

They came within a field goal of taking the #19 team in the nation to overtime too.

We came within one play of going undefeated and a NY6 bowl too!

Here's last year's preseason SP+ rankings. There are certainly outliers (they have Tennessee and South Carolina ranked pretty high, SMU ranked very low), but this isn't THAT far away from how things shook out. SP+ had App at 29 preseason; UNC at 66.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... ps-clemson

If at any time an SBC team is in the top 50 they are having a great year.

The last two years were simply amazing, 18/19th, and 26th in 2018. If we finish 40th I'm certainly going to celebrate that as another very good year.

Is North Dakota State ahead of us again?

Black Saturday wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 14, 2020 10:44 am

Is North Dakota State ahead of us again?

This ranking only has FBS teams.

bigdaddyg wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:40 pm

ericsaid wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:22 pm

kornegaylw wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:13 pm

5th G5 team

We all know these polls mean nothing but its nice to see we are where we are.

The bias for UNC at 17 is ridiculously nauseating

I'm not a UNC fan in any way, shape, or form but they didn't lose a game in 2019 by more than one score and lost two OT games. Flip two of those games and they finish 9-4 rather than 7-6. If they managed to beat Clemson they could've been sitting at 10-4. That's a big swing based on games in OT & a failed 2-PT conversion.

That is certainly true but you can probably look at lots of teams and close games they won or lost and the records they had or could have had. We were a missed FG and possibly one TD pass from 3 losses or a few plays from being unbeaten. Numbers can be funny

I don't know of another team in FBS with 6 losses by one score or less. So no, out of 130 times, you can find one instance of what I described here. It's common in the NFL but not this level of play.

Point is that UNC was better than their record suggested, and App was better than they got credit for. For some reason, in all of the talk about Memphis and the AAC with the Access Bowl, not once did I hear someone mention how App beat UNC the week before UNC should've beat Clemson. Of course the transistive property doesn't work in football, and i'm not suggesting App would've beat or come close to beating Clemson, but you know ESPN would've used such a situation with Memphis or Cincinnati as a method of building them up.