Team Ratings
Why are teams that lost 3, 4 games still have high ratings?? Are these going to get adjusted??? 🤔 they shouldn't have a offense in the 90s when clearly it shows, Oregon is the biggest one not even ...
Forum Discussion
Agreed that there need to be major adjustments to team ratings. It feels like too much of the current evaluation is based off of preseason hype and "potential" rather than actual on-field production.
If roster updates are supposed to mimic real-world play, the numbers currently don’t add up. Take a look at some stark contrasts using official NCAA stats:
Total Offense: all rankings are taken from the NCAA website.
* Oregon: #42
* Alabama: #53
* Texas: #85
* BYU: #49
Meanwhile...
* UCLA: Tied for #26
* SMU: #13
Total Defense Discrepancies
* Oregon: #39
* Alabama: #43
* Tennessee: #16 in total defense
Ratings should be built on real-world results, not program brand bias or projected potential. For instance, Oregon has struggled significantly on the field this season, yet they are rated virtually identical to Ole Miss (who managed to avoid bad losses like Oklahoma State or the one they had this past weekend which led to the firing of their offensive coordinator).
I could go on and on as there are multiple teams that need corrected in my opinion, but all of these stats are straight from the official NCAA website.
Go Vols!
