(10-25-2014 07:38 AM)NothingButKnight Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 06:37 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-25-2014 01:01 AM)NothingButKnight Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 05:38 PM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 03:08 PM)NothingButKnight Wrote:  Impossible to say for sure if you end up running the table the rest of the way. Our "tough" opponents were definitely tougher though (final rankings listed):

#4 South Carolina (11-2), lose by 3 at home
#12 Baylor (11-2), won by 10 at neutral site
#15 Louisville (12-1), won by 3 on the road
Penn St (7-5), won by 3 on the road

ECU's four toughest opponents so far are 4-3 South Carolina, 4-4 VaTech, 3-4 UNC, and 3-4 USF.

At the time of the UCF victory over Baylor BU was ranked 5th, when UCF beat Louisville UL was ranked 6th.

No one cares about at the time of victory. Final rankings are the only ones that matter.

Totally incorrect...as almost every team lists their wins vs RANKED teams...and all use whatever rankings were at the time of game.

The only reason why Baylor and Louisville dropped in the polls because while heavily favored, they lost to UCF at home (UL's only loss of the season) and/or at a neutral site.

That doesn't change the fact that it's a BS metric, especially in the early weeks when preseason rankings are more guesswork than merit-based.

Every now and then you have a top-ranked team really be a bad team. USC in 2012 started out #1 and ended 7-6. Does Stanford, who beat them in the third week, get to claim victory over a ranked team? I'd say that is a dubious claim at best.

Ok, according to you...but not to the rest that follow college football.

I will give you that early in the season, ranking fluctuate but the reason why Baylor was ranked in the Top 5-6 at the end of the regular season...is because they were Big 12 Champs with a 11-1 record...and not some Top 5 ranking with a 0-0 or 1-0 record in late August/early Sept.