#4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls? I didn't really see anything happen today to indicate that, say, Ohio State is necessarily a better team than Penn State, but watch OSU end up #6 and PSU #7 tomorrow.

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:10:23 PM UTC-5, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> #4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls? I didn't really see anything happen today to indicate that, say, Ohio State is necessarily a better team than Penn State, but watch OSU end up #6 and PSU #7 tomorrow.

They may not drop in some of the computer rankings, especially ones that focus on victory margin and account for HFA.

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 8:43:49 PM UTC-4, Johnny RSFCootball wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:10:23 PM UTC-5, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > #4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls? I didn't really see anything happen today to indicate that, say, Ohio State is necessarily a better team than Penn State, but watch OSU end up #6 and PSU #7 tomorrow.
> They may not drop in some of the computer rankings, especially ones that focus on victory margin and account for HFA.

They also weren't ranked quite as high in those computer rankings, because unlike people that just move you up as long as you don't lose, the computers basically re-evaluate every win & loss again every week, and they actually recognized that the Wisconsin and Auburn wins weren't quite as good as thought to be when they happened.

Going by the Massey composite, the game was #6 at #3.

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:00:52 PM UTC-4, JGibson wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 8:43:49 PM UTC-4, Johnny RSFCootball wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:10:23 PM UTC-5, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > #4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls? I didn't really see anything happen today to indicate that, say, Ohio State is necessarily a better team than Penn State, but watch OSU end up #6 and PSU #7 tomorrow.
> > They may not drop in some of the computer rankings, especially ones that focus on victory margin and account for HFA.
> They also weren't ranked quite as high in those computer rankings, because unlike people that just move you up as long as you don't lose, the computers basically re-evaluate every win & loss again every week, and they actually recognized that the Wisconsin and Auburn wins weren't quite as good as thought to be when they happened.
>
> Going by the Massey composite, the game was #6 at #3.

If I followed it correctly, Penn State actually improved in the Dolphin predictive rankings while dropping in the Dolphin standard rankings.

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:10:23 PM UTC-5, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> #4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls?

because results(in terms of W/L) have to matter than rankings when the ranking is based on such a limited set of data.(as any college football season is, even at the end).

Nobody 'knows' if Iowa is truly 3 and Penn State 4. Honestly, Penn State is probably anywhere from top 5 to top 35.....I'd feel confident saying they are definately one of the top 35 teams in the country, but I don't know if I could be more precise than that. Same for Iowa....I don't really 'know' whether they are 2 or 22.

So that's why you don't 'keep' a team at 4 after a close loss to 3. Because an actual tangible hard result/data point that measures something(a win vs a loss) trumps any sort of fixed idea about "where they were"....

I've explained this to Gibson a number of times as well. If the college football season was 220 games for each team and we truly could tell whether Penn State was actually 4 or 24 or Iowa 3 or 23 for example, your idea may make some sense. But if you do it your way now, your passing on an actual result due to reinforcing a rating system that doesn't have enough data to be anywhere close to accurate.

On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 9:00:52 PM UTC-4, JGibson wrote:
> On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 8:43:49 PM UTC-4, Johnny RSFCootball wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 7:10:23 PM UTC-5, The NOTBCS Guy wrote:
> > > #4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls? I didn't really see anything happen today to indicate that, say, Ohio State is necessarily a better team than Penn State, but watch OSU end up #6 and PSU #7 tomorrow.
> > They may not drop in some of the computer rankings, especially ones that focus on victory margin and account for HFA.
> They also weren't ranked quite as high in those computer rankings, because unlike people that just move you up as long as you don't lose, the computers basically re-evaluate every win & loss again every week, and they actually recognized that the Wisconsin and Auburn wins weren't quite as good as thought to be when they happened.
>
> Going by the Massey composite, the game was #6 at #3.

After the game, the Massey composite, now has it as #8 at #2.

> > #4 Penn State was supposed to lose to #3 Iowa, right, especially given that Iowa was (a) the higher seed and (b) the home team? So why is it that when a team loses to a higher ranked team, it drops a few spots in the polls?
> because results(in terms of W/L) have to matter than rankings when the ranking is based on such a limited set of data.(as any college football season is, even at the end).

....says the guy who pretty much insists that an 11-2 Alabama should get into the playoffs ahead of, say, a 11-1 Penn State or 12-1 Cincinnati.
By that measure, Central Florida should have been ranked #1 at the end of the 2017 regular season.