Here is why rankings don't mean a thing until you get 1/2 way into a season

Forget about the pre season junk- all hype
But this week I finally got around into looking at Sargain’s ratings:

BYU is at #61
Wisc #14
Wash. #6 (basically where Wisc. used to be)
BSU #21
USU #51
Utah #28
McN St #160
Hawaii #101

another perspective:
https://www.heraldextra.com/sports/college/byu/football/byu-football-opponent-power-rankings-cougars-travel-to-no-wisconsin/article_f0a7effd-15a1-5afe-8db4-31707d6ec16d.html

All these teams ahead of BYU, Hmmmmmmmm.

1 Like

https://www.heraldextra.com/sports/college/byu/football/football-opponent-power-rankings-byu-upset-shakes-up-top/article_a578ee53-f69a-5091-8afd-ee0a77630483.html#tncms-source=article-nav-next

Cal-#2 baloney

My ranking:
Wash- top ten
BSU - playing at home on the smurf turf
BYU
Utah- No O, no go.
USU-scoring a million against the little people.

Well, the eye-test from last year is going to take some sustained quality from us to overcome. People need to be reassured that Wisconsin wasn’t just a one-off.

Time will tell. If we have a good season this year (a really good, solid one), it will bear fruit in later years. But last year was so bad, especially the offense, that we’re not going to shoot up in rankings just because of a major upset.

And what if Wisconsin turns out to be not that good this year? It’s too early to tell about a lot of things.

McKay, Seriously; You need to enjoy the moment…Wallow in the afterglow of big win.

In the big picture, this win was historic, I did not grasp what had happened for a day or two just because I was to worried about the wheels falling off. It could be that Iowa knocks off Wisc and they end up having a poor season in the same way that Az looked like a big win but they were pozers.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/game?gameId=401012865
Wisc is a 48% underdog at Iowa so they have their work cut out for them.

BYU can catapult this win into big seasons in the way Detmer and co did it with the Miami win. Those were some heady days. I was a young man back then.

I’m as happy about the Wisconsin win as anyone, but I’m a little surprised at how giddy and “bullish” (stock market term) some people have instantly become — people who have historically been rational and logical.

We’re probably about the same age. I remember watching Detmer games in the stake center in Naperville, Illinois (and sometimes on ESPN). Even when behind by several touchdowns, we always had a chance (remember the Washington St. game up in Pullman?). With our new “methodical” (that’s being euphemistic; we can sometimes run and sometimes not, and we can’t pass) offense, we don’t have that chance. We’re toast if we’re behind.

And, we have a suspect secondary. Granted, not as suspect as the one Detmer played with. That one resulted in some of his Tecmo Bowl games.

It’s interesting to me to see some normally-grounded people jumping on the “we’re winning out from here!” bandwagon. Are you guys delusional?

The DB’s are mostly freshman and sophomores. And, they are doing a pretty good job.
Agreed that from game to game, without a passing attack of more than 4 yards a completion, if there is a completion, we will struggle as we did with Cal. Had we a real QB that could manage a game (whatever that really means) we would be 3-0.

Our “suspect” secondary was pretty good in the Wisc. game They may have ironed out their deficiencies.
As for Tanner. NO WAY would we be sitting here having a discussion and talking about being ranked and knocking off Wisc. with a true Fr at the helm. He has to get better to even have a chance at Ut, BSU and Wash. But Tanner is the reason why we should be 3-0. He didn’t lose that Cal game-Coaches did.

I don’t know. With better 3rd down efficiency (and 4th down efficiency; before railing against Sitake for going for it, it might be a good idea to also consider the fact that if we had converted we also might have won) and more first downs with better yards per attempt, I think we also would have won. Oh, and without the two interceptions, too . . . :slightly_smiling_face:

You can’t say that. Maybe we would have, maybe we wouldn’t have. Maybe we would have beaten them by more. All we can discuss without speculating is Tanner’s actual performance.

In the somewhat counter-intuitive stat of the day, Tanner Mangum’s pass efficiency in wins and losses in 2018:

Wins =115.4
Losses = 115.4