I can't stand how rankings change from week to week so much. For example lets the #24 hosts #25 team and the #24 team wins by a field goal in overtime. To me, the next time the rankings come out, the losing team shouldn't be penalized. They proved the rankings...to actually be correct....teams are closely matched, but 24 is slightly better than 25. To me that means there is no need to change them around.
I also don't get how Rutgers is recieving a vote in a poll...if someone voted for Rutgers than they should vote two for UCONN. Rutgers lost at home in week 1 to Cincinatti 47-15. They beat a lousy team and two mediocre teams to get to three wins.
UCONN has three wins...vs Rhose Island, Ohio and at Baylor...and barely lost to a ranked North Carolina team at home...the wins...against a bad team and two mediocre...at best...teams. Played a ranked team at home and were in the game...perhaps should have one it...yet they don't recieve votes...and Rutgers does.
I hate rankings in general because they have nothing to do with individual games. They are marketing tools and for journalists. They can actually and sadly effect players when players start thinking about a team in terms of their rankings. They are not ranked so they must suck...or they are ranked so they are unbeatable. Neither of those two options are what you want your players to think of before a game.
No comments:
Post a Comment