SEC Power Rankings Week3

[rolltidefan2]

This is gonna be hard at the bottom.  A lot of teams are bad at this point

1. Bama
2. MSU
3. Georgia
4. Kentucky
5. Florida
6. Vanderbilt
7. LSU
8. Auburn
9. S Carolina
10. Tamu
11. Tennessee
12. Arkansas
13. Ole Miss
14. Mizzou

[HighCountry3]

Not saying they don't deserve it, but kind of strange to see Kentucky in the top 4. In a way LSU is the bigger surprise. I didn't expect the thrashing by MSU. My Vols are probably where they deserve to be.

[MikeDeTiger]

What is your definition of a power ranking?  I define it as team quality regardless of record.  I can't figure out why you'd put UT so far below UF. 

Just based week 3, or maybe even cumulatively, I'd swap UT and LSU.  

[Drew4UTk]

vandy should be above UF and UT directly below UF, would be my suggestion.  It's not like UF whooped UT- it was obviously an evenly matched game with one BIG break- and neither team demonstrated 'power' if you want to come down to it.  

[847badgerfan]

The definition of power ranking, at least in my mind, is which team would win on a neutral field, today, without regard to record.

[Drew4UTk]

I agree, Badge... 

[847badgerfan]

so, in that spirit alone, one would presume that Tennessee would beat Florida on a neutral field.

But with Tennessee there is a Butch Factor to consider, which makes things extremely difficult to forecast with that team.

[Drew4UTk]

I don't think UT beats UF on a neutral field, though.  I think despite the final play and all that drama, that UT caught just as many breaks- punching the ball out as the runner broke the goal line, for instance.  I think these two teams are about as evenly matched as can be.  yeah, one is stronger on D (the pick 6 from the secondary, and those starting front four are monsters), but the other is better on O.. both have dangerous special teams in their own rights.  the butch factor is present and real- and without it and instead a Les Miles or a riverboat gambler (tubberville) even a Spurrier'esqu, UT wins the east handily.  

[MikeDeTiger]

The definition of power ranking, at least in my mind, is which team would win on a neutral field, today, without regard to record.

That is almost the same thing as "team quality" ranking, except it introduces an element that renders any such poll meaningless.  Namely, cfb can't be easily quantified in terms of which team would win, in a neat, step-ladder list.  You get a lot of Team A > Team B, and Team B > Team C, but Team C > Team A in terms of who I or any pollster thinks would win.  Matchups, and all that.  I find it easier and more poll-friendly to think in more static terms, like "team quality."  Yeah, it's a bit nebulous, but then so is college football.  

[MikeDeTiger]

Apropos of nothing, when I quote text, it's introducing the smiley faces into the quoted text, when there weren't any originally.  I'm having to edit them out when I quote people.  

[Drew4UTk]

those smiley's won't follow the quote when you hit post... i can disable the thing, though... i just haven't gotten around to it (which is to say i keep forgetting about it)

[gymvol]

From what I have seen you have Florida way over rated,  SC a little under rated with MSU and Georgia as question marks at this point.

LSU has a ton of talent but like Tennessee they are poorly coached and they won't play to their talent level.

[OrangeAfroMan]

so, in that spirit alone, one would presume that Tennessee would beat Florida on a neutral field.

But with Tennessee there is a Butch Factor to consider, which makes things extremely difficult to forecast with that team.

If home field gives 3 points, and Florida won by 6......then Florida should win on a neutral field tomorrow.

[OrangeAfroMan]

Oh, and as the resident hater of power rankings, all of you are being idiotic to rolltidefan.  Instead of bitching about his rankings, POST YOUR OWN.  God knows I've heard that once or twice.