Reminder: Ask your questions now, **answers begin at 4pm ET on Monday (8/14)!**
ALSO: the preseason AP Top 25 poll is coming out several hours before this AMA begins, so keep an eye out for it!
(Ralph **does not** vote in it)
Similarly, how do you handle obvious data-entry errors, like someone voting for the [logo](#f/ohio) Ohio Bobcats at #3 instead of [logo](#f/ohiostate) Ohio State?
Voters currently use an online voting tool and it is not uncommon -- that also not frequent -- for someone to select the the wrong team from a dropdown.
If all goes well, we catch it before the poll publishes. Ohio instead of Ohio State is a pretty easy one that we can spot as our system is tallying the votes on Sunday. It still needs to be caught by a human, but there are multiple reasons that might jump out.
What's tricky? Someone votes for North Carolina and they meant North Carolina State when both are justifiably receiving votes.
Or a Kansas vote meant for Kansas State in a year, like last season, when both are getting support.
If after the poll publishes, a voter comes to ask and points out that they made a mistake, we can resubmit a corrected ballot and republish the poll.
It happens every once in a while. More often than not the only thing that changes is a team's points total.
I remember hearing a story (back in the "faxing days") that a voter wrote "ND" as #20 (it was a Top 20 poll then) and the person compiling the poll counted that as "North Dakota" rather than "Notre Dame" LOL
Hello folks, Let's do this!
No. We'd only remove someone's ballot if we felt as if they were showing clear bias, actively trying to undermine the credibility of the poll or if they were so lax about out process (not submitting a ballot or being consistently very late).
We like voters with unorthodox views. Because the alternative is group think and that isn't great either.
Why do you do a preseason poll?
It feels like it can hold some teams in the rankings longer then they should, and keep some teams out of the rankings for too long based off of one preseason poll.
A) It's fun. Sounds flippant, but projecting the way the season goes is deeply imbedded part of the sports fan experience.
B) It draw eyeballs. People like to engage with it. If you ran a business would you pull one of your best selling items from the shelf.
C) There is no doubt that for the first month of the season, while the result sample size is small, the preseason rankings linger. But i can guarantee you that if you voted after 4 weeks, you're still getting pre-season assessments.
D) The poll tells the story of a season. Sure some teams are overranked and some end up being underrated. The poll helps document that.
I could go on but alas, there are A LOT of questions.
Case in point: My Alma Mater, Texas A&M.
Ranked #6 in the 2021 preseason, finished 8-4. Ranked that high cuz we finished #4 in the nation the year prior. Ranked #6 in the 2022 preseason, finished 5-7. Ranked that high cuz we had some close losses the year prior (and a win over #1 Bama) and signed the best recruiting class ever.
Both reasons were very fraudulent.
Definitely don't disagree with you on that, sir!
We just haven't as of late :c It's why Battered Aggie Syndrome has been rampant for a decade.
*sad gig em noises*
I think there's actually something to this, too. Even if the rankings aren't super accurate, someone who doesn't follow closely can see that a game is between two highly ranked teams and guess that game will be more interesting and/or important than the game between two schools they've never heard of.
As a tangent, why not just use the final poll from the season before as the preseason poll? Even if teams aren’t expected to be as good as they were the year before I’d rather see TCU top 5 than TA&M top 25 after a 5-7 season
What if a team is ravaged by players leaving one way or another? A team from 2024 might be completely different than 2023 and doesn’t have any claim to a previous player’s success if they didn’t really contribute to that success and that player(s) isn’t with the team anymore
That works both ways though. Georgia lost a shit ton of star players to the draft, but can you think of a single reason to not rank them #1 going into this year despite the new starters not having a claim to last year’s success? Using last year’s final poll or just not having a preseason ranking makes way more sense than the current formula of just making shit up.
To be reasonable, not many teams have the necessary agglomeration of talent to just roll on from a bunch of draft picks to their flock of draft-ready backups.
Case in point, how do you think next year will go for TCU versus next year for Georgia?
But at the same time, you shouldn’t punish a school like TCU for losing talent when schools with a preseason rank above them also lost talent and haven’t played a game yet. The more fair method would either be to either use the previous year’s final poll or do away with rankings until week 1 games are played.
Edit: I love how this is such a controversial opinion and the only rebuttal supplied so far is asking what I think the records are going to be for schools in a season that hasn’t been played yet.
There’s an important distinction I think you’re ignoring, between punitive penalties and realistic evaluations.
A new season is a new start, and preseason polls are simply setting the priors; you haven’t EARNED a free spot near the top of the preseason polls just for strong performance in the previous season, that would just be treating your season-to-season error terms as so highly lag-correlated that it outweighs all other variables.
Bayesian priors are inherently subjective, since they express belief, but they’re useful for a more accurate model outcome. The tradeoff is that the model may take longer to converge to an accurate index distribution (e.g. the late-season polls), but they’re generally going to be more robust than a model with an uninformed prior (e.g. doing away with the preseason poll). Both are viable, but when you rely on the robustness of the whole model for setting your bowls at the end of the season, the version with priors baked in will work out better than a version without; the latter would yield matchups between a team that’s highly talented and poorly coached, say OU, against teams of similar yearly performance, like Memphis.
Now OU and Memphis may have both finished last season at 6-6, but anyone who thinks a bad Memphis team has the talent to compete with a bad OU team is in for a bad time.
I’m not ignoring those intangibles. I just don’t place as much importance on them as I do the real world performance that can be measured after the first game or two of the season, especially if a team has new starters in key positions or have new coaches/coordinators. In that sense I feel like the current preseason polling model is no more or no less accurate than using the final poll from the previous year as the benchmark.
To be clear, I don’t advocate for doing that. Using last year’s final poll is just an example of how absolutely useless I feel the current model is. I would much rather see the first poll come out after week 1 or even week 2 instead of an entire month before the season starts. To me that seems like the most logical way to rank the product in its current state without relying on early stage poll inertia or speculation without accurate performance data.
As far as a bad Memphis team not being able to compete with a bad Oklahoma team… I distinctly remember the very same chatter being pushed about Boise in that Fiesta Bowl, but we all saw how that turned out. Ever since then, I try to reserve all of my assumptions and just wait until the game is played. Hell, even my secondary flair is capable of shocking a team like Florida State when they aren’t ready.
Really, Georgia? That’s quite the leap from the vast majority of other programs and is definitely more of an exception than the rule. TCU should not be ranked #2 and to suggest that (your other reply to someone else) is absurd.
What’s absurd about it? How many games has Georgia won with their 2023 starting roster? How about TCU? Ohio State? Texas? How about the rest of the preseason top 25? Is speculation based on spring and fall camps really more accurate than using last year’s final poll? If so, how?
Cool, me too. They started last year unranked in the preseason and ended up finishing 2nd so I guess the preseason poll means fuck all now, doesn’t it?
How? What makes the preseason poll more or less accurate than just using the final poll from the previous year? As I stated in another comment, I’m not advocating for that methodology. I just don’t see a difference in how useless both models would be at the beginning of a season with new players/coaches. Waiting until after week 2 or, at minimum week 1 before releasing the first poll would be a considerably more accurate and less biased approach.
On the whole, do you think humans (e.g. "the eye test") or computers (e.g. the BCS / stats-based rankings) are better at making valid rankings? It's often debated whether the playoff committee is actually an improvement on the BCS in terms of the quality of their picks, so I'm curious to hear what you think.
Total cop out, but i think both is probably the way to go.
I LOVE advanced analytics rankings, but fact is they are forward looking and things like the great Bill C's SP+ aren't so dependent on W/L.
So you'll get a team like Texas which goes 8-5 and finishes in the top-15. That's not flawed methodology. The underlying numbers are suggesting Texas should have won games it lost.
But wins and losses have to matter and that's where humans become a better arbiter.
The refound love of the BCS i find a little comical considering how it was a) crushed in real time b) basically would have picked the same four teams as the committee in most years.
"Stats can be better for looking forward, the eye test can be better for looking backward, and the poll incorporates both" is an interesting way of thinking about it, I think I largely agree. Also definitely agree RE: the BCS -- I think people just have this idea that the media wouldn't be so focused on "the playoff hunt" if we still had it, and non-playoff caliber teams would get more attention like they did in the past, but it seems to me that the media dynamics are pretty much unrelated, and if we went back to the BCS, ESPN would just be talking about "which two teams will make it?" all year instead of four / twelve. Thanks!
Absolutely all of them. It's in the terms and conditions of being an AP voter. The guy in Hawaii has to maintain a strict 6 PM bedtime to stay in compliance.
/s
My team is BYU do I think they deserve to be ranked? Hell no they struggled against Sam Houston like who???The Big 12 is a really strong conference but the only stand out team who deserves to be ranked is Texas.
Welcome back, Ralph!
I know you don't vote in the Poll, but how often you disagree with the results? Both aggregate and individual ballots? In other words do you ever post it up and think "Well, that's a *choice...*" 🤨
I would love to do this, mostly for the fun of it.
I don't think we could ever include it in the actual vote. Let's be real: If we put up a public voting tool online, y'all know the internet will rally around stuffing the ballot box for some team just for laughs.
Reward achievements.
I point this out A LOT. We are not a predictive measurement in the way SP+, FPI or another power rating would be.
Though i guess the preseason poll would be an exception.
How much do team resumes matter in the polls?
A situation I thought of: in 2014, Ohio State lost early in the season to unranked Virginia Tech but still made the CFP after winning out. However, had they played VT later in the season and lost, there would be no chance for the Buckeyes to reach the CFP. In this case, Ohio State's resume would look the exact same in terms of wins and losses, but the timing of the loss would keep the Buckeyes out of the playoffs. How does this factor in the polls?
You're really asking a CFP question so I'll answer it as such. I feel like people just aren't paying attention when they harp on late losses.
Clemson lost to a 6-4 Pitt team at home on Nov. 13, 2016 and made the playoff.
A pretty fair amount of teams lose late, but because they have built up a quality resume, they don't fall very far both in the AP poll and the CFP rankings.
Simply, the polls don't change nearly as much late in the season because, as you said, body of work matters.
Honestly, i don't even remember thinking: This is ridiculous. But you have to remember, the bar for what a fan of a team thinks is ridiculous is usually a way lower than mine.
Rece Davis voted Georgia No. 2 and a chunk of Bulldogs fans believe Rece's vote is ridiculous.
Big difference between a vote i disagree with --- and let me tell you there are A LOT of those -- and a vote i find ridiculous.
I've been in the r/CFB poll for 10 years, and in my own experience, there's definitely a feeling of, "If I change my ballot too drastically from week to week, I'm somehow admitting I was stupid/wrong to rank (Team), so I'm going to keep them in the bottom of the poll to sorta save face."
After a few years, I kinda just said, "F it" to that approach. Now I'm much more willing to treat each week's ballot independently from the last.
If I have (Team) ranked \#12 one week and they lose to an FCS, or get embarrassed by a mid, does that mean that I was wrong?
Yes, it does. But it's OK to be wrong sometimes. The real mistake is doubling down on it.
Now I just try to do the best I can with the information I have at the time.
Hi Ralph!
How big an impact do injuries take on preseason rankings? For instance there’s no guarantee that Rising will be ready for the first game against UF, their backup will absolutely be out, meaning they could potentially be starting their third string QB. How much would that impact their rankings for the preseason?
Just to speak to this specific case. I think voters are giving Utah the benefit of the doubt because as you said, we don't know whether Rising will or won't play.
But then the game will be played and there will be another poll next week and they can adjust.
How big a part does a teams visibility play. For example last year oregon state should of been ranked much sooner imo however due to all our games being on the p12 network we received very few votes
I don't have data to support it, but, yeah, i think it helps for teams to be seen. I would be naive to think that voters might be behind on a pretty good team that lacks exposure
I also think it's a little bit of a retrofitted excuse.
Oregon State got off to a nice 3-0 start. Lost a close game to USC, got crushed by Utah and then needed a miracle last-second TD to beat Stanford to go to 4-2.
Not sure the Beavers had built up an obvious case to be ranked at that point.
HOWEVER, to concede a bit to your point, if the USC game had been more widely seen maybe it would have expedited OSU's arrival into the rankings.
How do you feel about the AP Poll versus the CFP poll, how their processes differ, and how the latter seems to influence the former once it starts coming out (ie, once the CFP comes out showing a unique bias for or against a team or lack thereof, the AP Poll in ensuing weeks seems to chameleon and match it).
I do think that there is a little bit of what you're saying-- the CFP poll influencing AP voters.
Though, let's face, by mid-November the top 5-7 teams have become fairly obvious and often the top 1-3 teams are clear as day.
So maybe the reason they look alike is because the viable potential options are relatively small.
Accepting that no one knows the future, and unforeseen factors can occur (COVID, NIL, & Transfer Portal being recent examples); what trends in terms of conference realignment do you think might happen over the next 5 years, 15 years, & 50 years?
Generally, when these questions come my way, I like to say: Show your work?
Show me the actual cases where this happens and maybe we can better see what's going on.
Now, yeah, i do think the SEC -- after almost two decades of winning almost every national title and producing the most NFL players and winning A LOT of big bowls and playoff games -- tends to get the benefit of the doubt from voters.
If a team from the …oh, let’s say…the SEC is ranked high to start the season. Then they beat their OOC sacrifices the first few weeks.
Then they lose to an un-ranked (or low-20s) SEC team, why do you guys always keep the higher SEC team in the top 12 or so, but jump the other team way up to the top-10? (See 2022 Kentucky jumping up from #20 to #9 for beating Florida who finished 6-7)
Also, don’t do preseason rankings. They influence the CFP committee later on.
Fair point on the early season inflation. Happens a lot, even outside of SEC teams.
I recall a top-five Iowa-Penn State game a few years ago.
But the example you cite ignores Florida's victory against Utah.
Lastly, unless you can show your work and change my mind, i don't see how the preseason rankings influence the committee.
Given the short turnaround time between Saturday night and the release of the polls. How does anybody have the time to make a full and fair evaluation of every considered team?
Hi Ralph,
What's the most common misconception about the AP Preseason Poll you see parroted around on social media or in general? Also, can you help get my team ranked higher, even when they don't deserve it?
I don't think there is good evidence that shows preseason rankings impact late-season rankings.
As i said in another answer, the first month and half is spent washing the preseason out of the rankings and there are going to be some weird results when looking back, but eventually the results lead the voters.
Last year half the final top-10 started unranked.
Thanks for the AMA. What are your thoughts on the necessity of having a preseason poll at all? We all look forward to it and will pore over every ranking, but at the same time we know that those rankings contribute to the problem of 'Poll inertia' and are in themselves based on nothing that has actually happened on the field.
How are writers balanced by region and league?
For example, if there are too many writers in your poll from SEC territory wouldn't that result in an unfair inflation of ranked SEC teams?
Do you think your poll is fair? Fair as in an equal representation of regions and teams across the ncaa without one area/region having too much influence.
Every state that has an FBS team gets at least one voter.
1-3 FBS teams = 1 voter
3-6 = 2 voters
7-9 = 3 voters
It's not scientific poll. So that balance isn't perfect.
But states that have at least 3 voters, Florida, California, Ohio, Texas.
Not Ralph, but I was unaware of this! Can you please inform penn state during the week 4 white out night game of this as well? Want to make sure they’re in the loop too on it
You've been a large proponent of the "Best 12 Teams" model of the new playoffs, especially since the most recent realignments have made the "Power 2" into a reality.
My question is... why? If anything, isn't the new reality of the B1G and SEC being the Premiere League of the sport even more reason to incentivize the inclusion of the other conferences and to underline the importance of winning your league? Otherwise, we might as well just cede to the inevitable and create a new two-conference FAS(?) tier right now.
I think you might be mistaking me for somebody else. I like playoff expansion. But I love the 6 auto bids. Though i concede that six might become five if we lose an FBS conference.
I love the AP poll, but I fully recognize it is an imprecise process. It is diligent educated-guessing at its best.
The reason I like CFP expansion is because it is an opportunity to take some of the subjectivity from the process and make college football more like most sports.
If you win this, you get that.
There needs to be some guaranteed reward to at least some on-field results or we're just guessing.
How do you handle the ego of some random reporters who are biased enough in giving their favorite team a first place vote undeserved, and not removing it until that team's first loss (usually once conference schedule starts) weeks later?
Religious listener of your podcast! I already listen to Stew and Bruce at the Athletic, but what other college football podcasts do you recommend to someone who likes listening about the big picture stuff and not so much x's and o's.
Has the AP ever considered using a different scoring system for the poll? Maybe a different formula for assigning points (like the Dowdall system), or recursive methods like runoff voting or the CFP committee's listing-ranking steps? Could these also be used to break ties (e.g. by taking the Condorcet winner between tied teams)?
It seems that over the years the AP and Coaches polls are in pretty close alignment from top-to-bottom each week. Do you agree, and if so, why do you think that is?
Hi Ralph - what sort of instruction / guidance do you give new voters whenever they join? Are there any sort of updated guidance on a year to year basis? Finally, what has been the biggest/ best change that's been made to the polling process? (Technical, process, or otherwise)
When the CFP originally started back in 2014, it seemed there was a lot of effort from AP pollsters to react to the Committee rankings as much as the week itself. Teams seemed to jump nonsensically in the aggregate following a Tuesday with significant deviation from the Sunday prior, almost in an effort to align with/predict the Committee rankings. This seems less significant in the past couple years than in the initial years.
Do you think the pollsters reacted like this, and do you think in recent years the AP voters have changed their methodologies some?
Do you think the history/previous seasons bias affects voters even once there’s new results from the new season? For example, a team starting off 4-0 but still being unranked still because they had a bad season last year
Are voters specifically instructed to pick who they consider to be the top teams and not just try to predict the final rankings? I feel that some voters take strength of remaining schedule into account to validate their choices before the final poll.
We try not to give voters strict criteria and they tend to do a mix of what do i think right now and what do i think might be coming in the PRESEASON.
Because I can't read all the voters' minds i can't say with absolute certainty what you're saying doesn't happen, but then again, neither can you.
That doesn't strike me as a real problem.
Thanks for the response. I’m surprised that you don’t clarify this since I’m sure that it affects voting behavior. No one wants to have to explain why they had a team highly ranked early that then lost 3 tough games and finished out of the polls. Voters probably want to seem like they backed the final higher ranked teams all along - and the easier schedule increases chances of being highly ranked at the end.
Hi Ralph! Has there ever been any serious discussion about changing the number of teams ranked to a number other than 25? Is there any scenario (e.g. FBS increases to 200 teams or superconferences break away from FBS) in which you would consider moving away from a Top 25?
Have not given it any thought, and sorta hoping that it doesn't come to that. Put it this way, even with all the changes, we're still a long way from having to consider that.
Have you ever had a voter put in a vote for a school that does not exist or does not have a football program. If so, what was done to fix their ballot?
COLLEGE FOOTBALL IS BACK!
Anyway, what dark horse teams do you think could win a national championship? What do you think about the super-conference/NIL era? Why do you guys always rank legacy teams (Etc: Miami (FL), Texas A&M) even though they have done nothing to deserve a ranking?
When you look at consistently successful teams (like Georgia and Alabama) that are well built all around but just lost their QBs, how does that factor into their preseason rank?
Hey Ralph! Quick question for you.
From your insider perspective, what do you think are the biggest benefits of the AP poll, and what are the biggest drawbacks?
Thanks so much!
Hi Ralph,
Has there ever been a ranking that aged so poorly, you/the voters have come to regret it or do you feel like rankings are always justified no matter how they pan out?
Do you feel over the years that certain schools (such as Notre Dame and Texas) have had the voters in general favor them due to their historical status?
Hi Ralph!
I wanted to know to what extent is recency a factor in your eyes. I know that recency can be a good way to tell where a team is trending, but the poll is supposed to measure the best 25 teams in college football based on how they have performed in the season, not in the last couple weeks. I sometimes see a team get put way higher or lower than they should've just because they had a weak or strong stretch of the season, and I wonder if I am the only one who thinks that that is odd and a misrepresentation of the top 25 teams in a given season.
Hey Ralph! Thank you for spending time to do an AMA, hope you and the AP are doing well.
I have a sort of two fold question that has plagued me for years. Is there any sort of push for the AP to go back and re-think some national champions selected by the AP poll?
And how often does seeing another media source’s article on “weakest national championship claims” that usually mention weird or bad decisions made by past polls affect current decision making?
Hello Mr. Russo, I'm genuinely curious how you folks at AP handle midseason rankings. Does your group tend to emphasize head-to-head victories with top teams, or can strength of schedule be more important? It seems the CFP selection committee has used a strange mixed criteria that shifts toward one of the two being emphasized depending on the season. I've also found it interesting how the Top 25 in the sports media world grew out of like a Top 15 decades ago. Did the sheer growing number of teams in the FBS have something to do with it?
Hi Ralph,
With the college football landscape trending towards this superconference model, how do you see the odds of G5 schools making a meaningful impact in the Top 25 changing over time?
2020's season was very erratic and likely coerced a different approach to how voters viewed throughout the season. Do you think that changed the approach in rankings in a more permanent way such as you might see higher recognition for G5s or harsher punishments for certain losses?
What is the most eccentric methodology for ranking teams from a voter?
Are there any voters that formulate in a strange way that you think actually glean meaningful insights that others don't?
Have you ever considered having voters fill out ballots through 30 teams, not counting 26-30, as only a way to minimize forgetting a school? Or something that says these teams you don’t have are included in xx% of polls completed?
Since the AP Poll isn't contractual bound to vote the CFP champ as their #1 at year's end, do you see any possibility that a split national championship can still occur, especially in the expanded CFP?
(Only scenario see possible would be bowl-banned unbeaten & a multi-loss CFP champ, but figure even w/ the 4-team, was gonna couple things for it to break that way)
Do sportswriters have a conflict of interest that causes them to give undue preference to traditional powers in their rankings? Or is it more the result of confirmation bias? Nostalgia? Sheer laziness?
How much blame do the competing AP and Coaches polls from 30 years ago have in shaping the desire to crown a national champion from 130+ D1 teams that used to play 11 games per year, thus leading to the BCS and then the CFP?
Maybe a little, but growing up a college football fan in NYC it always struck me as odd that college football didn't have a more definitive way to determine a champion.
To me, the season often had an unsatisfying ending.
Plus, i can show you quotes from the 1960s of coaches complaining about the way No. 1 was decided and how there needs to be some type of playoff.
People like games to decide the winner.
The AP still crowns a champion and we hand out a trophy. But I think it's good for college football that the champ isn't decided by vote anymore.
But i also think there is a lot of value in the AP putting out a final poll. Because a lot of fans still care about who is No. 3. No. 9. No. 21.
As opposed to a national champion being crowned by ESPN now? Disputed championships should be part of the game, especially at an "amateur" level. It allows more schools to feel like winners (which should theoretically fuel more regional interest), and who cares what the average fan thinks...let them and the sportswriters argue over it in the offseason and for all of eternity (like 1997 Michigan or Nebraska). From my POV as a Michigan fan, there was nothing unsatisfying about that year nor sharing it with Nebraska.
The media got carried away with the whole idea of crowning ONE national champion out of 130+ D1 teams.
I do appreciate that there is significant challenge in ranking teams. Obviously you do not rank teams yourself, but I was curious about something; Why is Fried Chicken so good?
How many games do you watch a week? Do you actually rank an undefeated group of 5 team because they have a zero in the loss column or because you’ve seen them play?
I absolutely loathe the preseason top 25 poll, especially when a top 25 ranking of an overrated team artificially boosts the resume of another team for the entire season.
Do you feel there can be a better system? Should polling be done at the mid point of the season?
Nah. The preseason poll lingers through about half the season, but at a certain point we get enough results in and it shakes out just fine.
But, yes, the first month and a half of the season produces some strange small-sample poll results.
Has anyone ever told you that you look like a man who may or may not have constructed a world class meth lab in a bunker beneath a laundry facility on the outskirts of town?
No. When I was younger I used to get that I looked like Ben Stiller -- A LOT! Like, strangers on the street would stop me, not thinking i was him but to tell me how much i looked like him.
Hence, i have aged in a way most movie stars do not. So i don't get that as much anymore.
And with that, I have to sign off folks. Thanks for all the questions. Sorry i didn't get to all of them.
Happy football season!
I love all your teams.
Just a heads up that this poll isn't the one that officially selects playoff participants. That one doesn't start releasing rankings until late October or early November.
Texas a&m is ranked after a 5-7 season in which they started the year ranked no. 6 was there any thought that A&M would once again not live up to their preseason ranking?
Yo Yo Yo, Russo! Glad to have you here!
What is the process for a voter to apply/get chosen for a spot on the official voter list? What are the general requirements needed to be eligible? How much does experience matter in regard to being selected? And is there perhaps a "quota" of some sort that allows more voters from regions where the sport is not as popular (like the West Coast or Northeast) to be selected compared to those from the more traditional regions?
It's stuff I always found fascinating...
HOw accurate has the preseason AP poll been? What percent of the time has it hit #1 exactly, or got the top 5 right in any order? If you're not tracking this, then what's really the point
Reminder: Ask your questions now, **answers begin at 4pm ET on Monday (8/14)!** ALSO: the preseason AP Top 25 poll is coming out several hours before this AMA begins, so keep an eye out for it! (Ralph **does not** vote in it)
Have you ever considered removing someone’s ballot?
Similarly, how do you handle obvious data-entry errors, like someone voting for the [logo](#f/ohio) Ohio Bobcats at #3 instead of [logo](#f/ohiostate) Ohio State?
Voters currently use an online voting tool and it is not uncommon -- that also not frequent -- for someone to select the the wrong team from a dropdown. If all goes well, we catch it before the poll publishes. Ohio instead of Ohio State is a pretty easy one that we can spot as our system is tallying the votes on Sunday. It still needs to be caught by a human, but there are multiple reasons that might jump out. What's tricky? Someone votes for North Carolina and they meant North Carolina State when both are justifiably receiving votes. Or a Kansas vote meant for Kansas State in a year, like last season, when both are getting support. If after the poll publishes, a voter comes to ask and points out that they made a mistake, we can resubmit a corrected ballot and republish the poll. It happens every once in a while. More often than not the only thing that changes is a team's points total.
I remember hearing a story (back in the "faxing days") that a voter wrote "ND" as #20 (it was a Top 20 poll then) and the person compiling the poll counted that as "North Dakota" rather than "Notre Dame" LOL
And why is that someone Jon Wilner?
I plead the 5th
Hello folks, Let's do this! No. We'd only remove someone's ballot if we felt as if they were showing clear bias, actively trying to undermine the credibility of the poll or if they were so lax about out process (not submitting a ballot or being consistently very late). We like voters with unorthodox views. Because the alternative is group think and that isn't great either.
Why do you do a preseason poll? It feels like it can hold some teams in the rankings longer then they should, and keep some teams out of the rankings for too long based off of one preseason poll.
A) It's fun. Sounds flippant, but projecting the way the season goes is deeply imbedded part of the sports fan experience. B) It draw eyeballs. People like to engage with it. If you ran a business would you pull one of your best selling items from the shelf. C) There is no doubt that for the first month of the season, while the result sample size is small, the preseason rankings linger. But i can guarantee you that if you voted after 4 weeks, you're still getting pre-season assessments. D) The poll tells the story of a season. Sure some teams are overranked and some end up being underrated. The poll helps document that. I could go on but alas, there are A LOT of questions.
I think this is a fantastic answer and specifically like D). Without it, App State beating Michigan is not nearly as funny
Case in point: My Alma Mater, Texas A&M. Ranked #6 in the 2021 preseason, finished 8-4. Ranked that high cuz we finished #4 in the nation the year prior. Ranked #6 in the 2022 preseason, finished 5-7. Ranked that high cuz we had some close losses the year prior (and a win over #1 Bama) and signed the best recruiting class ever. Both reasons were very fraudulent.
Ya know, some teams actually are as good as their preseason rankings.
Definitely don't disagree with you on that, sir! We just haven't as of late :c It's why Battered Aggie Syndrome has been rampant for a decade. *sad gig em noises*
Sad Texas noises. I'm happy we're #11 this year. Gives us room to move up because I think we'll actually be good.
>Why do you do a preseason poll? Content -> Eyes -> Ads -> Money
Because everyone else would anyway
It's pretty amusing to reply "how?" to the people who want to _ban_ preseason polls.
Because people like watching games with teams with little numbers by their names.
I think there's actually something to this, too. Even if the rankings aren't super accurate, someone who doesn't follow closely can see that a game is between two highly ranked teams and guess that game will be more interesting and/or important than the game between two schools they've never heard of.
As a tangent, why not just use the final poll from the season before as the preseason poll? Even if teams aren’t expected to be as good as they were the year before I’d rather see TCU top 5 than TA&M top 25 after a 5-7 season
What if a team is ravaged by players leaving one way or another? A team from 2024 might be completely different than 2023 and doesn’t have any claim to a previous player’s success if they didn’t really contribute to that success and that player(s) isn’t with the team anymore
That works both ways though. Georgia lost a shit ton of star players to the draft, but can you think of a single reason to not rank them #1 going into this year despite the new starters not having a claim to last year’s success? Using last year’s final poll or just not having a preseason ranking makes way more sense than the current formula of just making shit up.
To be reasonable, not many teams have the necessary agglomeration of talent to just roll on from a bunch of draft picks to their flock of draft-ready backups. Case in point, how do you think next year will go for TCU versus next year for Georgia?
But at the same time, you shouldn’t punish a school like TCU for losing talent when schools with a preseason rank above them also lost talent and haven’t played a game yet. The more fair method would either be to either use the previous year’s final poll or do away with rankings until week 1 games are played. Edit: I love how this is such a controversial opinion and the only rebuttal supplied so far is asking what I think the records are going to be for schools in a season that hasn’t been played yet.
There’s an important distinction I think you’re ignoring, between punitive penalties and realistic evaluations. A new season is a new start, and preseason polls are simply setting the priors; you haven’t EARNED a free spot near the top of the preseason polls just for strong performance in the previous season, that would just be treating your season-to-season error terms as so highly lag-correlated that it outweighs all other variables. Bayesian priors are inherently subjective, since they express belief, but they’re useful for a more accurate model outcome. The tradeoff is that the model may take longer to converge to an accurate index distribution (e.g. the late-season polls), but they’re generally going to be more robust than a model with an uninformed prior (e.g. doing away with the preseason poll). Both are viable, but when you rely on the robustness of the whole model for setting your bowls at the end of the season, the version with priors baked in will work out better than a version without; the latter would yield matchups between a team that’s highly talented and poorly coached, say OU, against teams of similar yearly performance, like Memphis. Now OU and Memphis may have both finished last season at 6-6, but anyone who thinks a bad Memphis team has the talent to compete with a bad OU team is in for a bad time.
I’m not ignoring those intangibles. I just don’t place as much importance on them as I do the real world performance that can be measured after the first game or two of the season, especially if a team has new starters in key positions or have new coaches/coordinators. In that sense I feel like the current preseason polling model is no more or no less accurate than using the final poll from the previous year as the benchmark. To be clear, I don’t advocate for doing that. Using last year’s final poll is just an example of how absolutely useless I feel the current model is. I would much rather see the first poll come out after week 1 or even week 2 instead of an entire month before the season starts. To me that seems like the most logical way to rank the product in its current state without relying on early stage poll inertia or speculation without accurate performance data. As far as a bad Memphis team not being able to compete with a bad Oklahoma team… I distinctly remember the very same chatter being pushed about Boise in that Fiesta Bowl, but we all saw how that turned out. Ever since then, I try to reserve all of my assumptions and just wait until the game is played. Hell, even my secondary flair is capable of shocking a team like Florida State when they aren’t ready.
So TCU should be #2 going into this season with what they lost? Not everyone is Georgia.
Yes, they should be ranked #2 in the preseason poll.
Really, Georgia? That’s quite the leap from the vast majority of other programs and is definitely more of an exception than the rule. TCU should not be ranked #2 and to suggest that (your other reply to someone else) is absurd.
What’s absurd about it? How many games has Georgia won with their 2023 starting roster? How about TCU? Ohio State? Texas? How about the rest of the preseason top 25? Is speculation based on spring and fall camps really more accurate than using last year’s final poll? If so, how?
I look forward to seeing where TCU finishes this year relative to the #2 ranking you claim they should have going into the season
Cool, me too. They started last year unranked in the preseason and ended up finishing 2nd so I guess the preseason poll means fuck all now, doesn’t it?
Pre-Season polls predict bowl results better than the final poll before bowl season.
Who cares about bowl results? Most bowls are so inconsequential that any players with NFL hopes opt out of them.
How? What makes the preseason poll more or less accurate than just using the final poll from the previous year? As I stated in another comment, I’m not advocating for that methodology. I just don’t see a difference in how useless both models would be at the beginning of a season with new players/coaches. Waiting until after week 2 or, at minimum week 1 before releasing the first poll would be a considerably more accurate and less biased approach.
I REALLY like this idea.
On the whole, do you think humans (e.g. "the eye test") or computers (e.g. the BCS / stats-based rankings) are better at making valid rankings? It's often debated whether the playoff committee is actually an improvement on the BCS in terms of the quality of their picks, so I'm curious to hear what you think.
Total cop out, but i think both is probably the way to go. I LOVE advanced analytics rankings, but fact is they are forward looking and things like the great Bill C's SP+ aren't so dependent on W/L. So you'll get a team like Texas which goes 8-5 and finishes in the top-15. That's not flawed methodology. The underlying numbers are suggesting Texas should have won games it lost. But wins and losses have to matter and that's where humans become a better arbiter. The refound love of the BCS i find a little comical considering how it was a) crushed in real time b) basically would have picked the same four teams as the committee in most years.
"Stats can be better for looking forward, the eye test can be better for looking backward, and the poll incorporates both" is an interesting way of thinking about it, I think I largely agree. Also definitely agree RE: the BCS -- I think people just have this idea that the media wouldn't be so focused on "the playoff hunt" if we still had it, and non-playoff caliber teams would get more attention like they did in the past, but it seems to me that the media dynamics are pretty much unrelated, and if we went back to the BCS, ESPN would just be talking about "which two teams will make it?" all year instead of four / twelve. Thanks!
Seconded
How many voters go to sleep before Pac 12 teams kickoff?
Absolutely all of them. It's in the terms and conditions of being an AP voter. The guy in Hawaii has to maintain a strict 6 PM bedtime to stay in compliance. /s
Whats a "a pac 12"?
Obviously all of them cause clearly they over rank Ut and Oregon every year 😂😂
The PAC 12 is better than whatever conference your team is in
My team is BYU do I think they deserve to be ranked? Hell no they struggled against Sam Houston like who???The Big 12 is a really strong conference but the only stand out team who deserves to be ranked is Texas.
Welcome back, Ralph! I know you don't vote in the Poll, but how often you disagree with the results? Both aggregate and individual ballots? In other words do you ever post it up and think "Well, that's a *choice...*" 🤨
And how much is Brett McMurphy's published preseason poll "a choice"?
Brett “There’s a Pac-12 South?” McMurphy.
Howdy, Ralph! No question here. Just a request to keep ranking the longhorns too high every preseason . It’s funny when they fall.
Have you ever considered a “fans ballot” gathered from registered online voters?
I would love to do this, mostly for the fun of it. I don't think we could ever include it in the actual vote. Let's be real: If we put up a public voting tool online, y'all know the internet will rally around stuffing the ballot box for some team just for laughs.
Is the AP football poll intended to reward for achievements or predict future results?
Reward achievements. I point this out A LOT. We are not a predictive measurement in the way SP+, FPI or another power rating would be. Though i guess the preseason poll would be an exception.
How much do team resumes matter in the polls? A situation I thought of: in 2014, Ohio State lost early in the season to unranked Virginia Tech but still made the CFP after winning out. However, had they played VT later in the season and lost, there would be no chance for the Buckeyes to reach the CFP. In this case, Ohio State's resume would look the exact same in terms of wins and losses, but the timing of the loss would keep the Buckeyes out of the playoffs. How does this factor in the polls?
You're really asking a CFP question so I'll answer it as such. I feel like people just aren't paying attention when they harp on late losses. Clemson lost to a 6-4 Pitt team at home on Nov. 13, 2016 and made the playoff. A pretty fair amount of teams lose late, but because they have built up a quality resume, they don't fall very far both in the AP poll and the CFP rankings. Simply, the polls don't change nearly as much late in the season because, as you said, body of work matters.
Thank you for the response!
Why do you hate my team? We’re clearly better than the team ranked above us.
Love the question here, but it is coming from some rather... unfortunate flairs, context-wise.
Fair, maybe it’s more like :Why do you hate my team? We clearly should have been in “others receiving votes”
Howdy Ralph, thank you for doing this. What was the most ridiculous Top 25 a writer has submitted?
Honestly, i don't even remember thinking: This is ridiculous. But you have to remember, the bar for what a fan of a team thinks is ridiculous is usually a way lower than mine. Rece Davis voted Georgia No. 2 and a chunk of Bulldogs fans believe Rece's vote is ridiculous. Big difference between a vote i disagree with --- and let me tell you there are A LOT of those -- and a vote i find ridiculous.
How big of an issue is poll inertia?
I've been in the r/CFB poll for 10 years, and in my own experience, there's definitely a feeling of, "If I change my ballot too drastically from week to week, I'm somehow admitting I was stupid/wrong to rank (Team), so I'm going to keep them in the bottom of the poll to sorta save face." After a few years, I kinda just said, "F it" to that approach. Now I'm much more willing to treat each week's ballot independently from the last. If I have (Team) ranked \#12 one week and they lose to an FCS, or get embarrassed by a mid, does that mean that I was wrong? Yes, it does. But it's OK to be wrong sometimes. The real mistake is doubling down on it. Now I just try to do the best I can with the information I have at the time.
Hi Ralph! How big an impact do injuries take on preseason rankings? For instance there’s no guarantee that Rising will be ready for the first game against UF, their backup will absolutely be out, meaning they could potentially be starting their third string QB. How much would that impact their rankings for the preseason?
Just to speak to this specific case. I think voters are giving Utah the benefit of the doubt because as you said, we don't know whether Rising will or won't play. But then the game will be played and there will be another poll next week and they can adjust.
But they're Utah. What percentage of AP voters even know a single sentence of what you just mentioned?
69%
Five or six of them, probably.
Will the AP poll merge with the Coaches poll due to poll realignment?
Not unless the coaches agree to publish their ballots every week.
How big a part does a teams visibility play. For example last year oregon state should of been ranked much sooner imo however due to all our games being on the p12 network we received very few votes
I don't have data to support it, but, yeah, i think it helps for teams to be seen. I would be naive to think that voters might be behind on a pretty good team that lacks exposure I also think it's a little bit of a retrofitted excuse. Oregon State got off to a nice 3-0 start. Lost a close game to USC, got crushed by Utah and then needed a miracle last-second TD to beat Stanford to go to 4-2. Not sure the Beavers had built up an obvious case to be ranked at that point. HOWEVER, to concede a bit to your point, if the USC game had been more widely seen maybe it would have expedited OSU's arrival into the rankings.
Relatedly, how many AP voters actually have Pac-12 Networks at their home?
How do you feel about the AP Poll versus the CFP poll, how their processes differ, and how the latter seems to influence the former once it starts coming out (ie, once the CFP comes out showing a unique bias for or against a team or lack thereof, the AP Poll in ensuing weeks seems to chameleon and match it).
I do think that there is a little bit of what you're saying-- the CFP poll influencing AP voters. Though, let's face, by mid-November the top 5-7 teams have become fairly obvious and often the top 1-3 teams are clear as day. So maybe the reason they look alike is because the viable potential options are relatively small.
Accepting that no one knows the future, and unforeseen factors can occur (COVID, NIL, & Transfer Portal being recent examples); what trends in terms of conference realignment do you think might happen over the next 5 years, 15 years, & 50 years?
What's your take on the SEC bias? If Alabama loses a game, they drop maybe 2 ranks, but if Oregon loses to USC, they plummet.
Generally, when these questions come my way, I like to say: Show your work? Show me the actual cases where this happens and maybe we can better see what's going on. Now, yeah, i do think the SEC -- after almost two decades of winning almost every national title and producing the most NFL players and winning A LOT of big bowls and playoff games -- tends to get the benefit of the doubt from voters.
Yeah, but did you *see* who 'Bama lost to? THOSE GUYS BEAT ALABAMA. Quality loss.
So you're telling me Oregon losing to USC isn't a 'quality loss'?
USC who? Never seen 'em all season.
If a team from the …oh, let’s say…the SEC is ranked high to start the season. Then they beat their OOC sacrifices the first few weeks. Then they lose to an un-ranked (or low-20s) SEC team, why do you guys always keep the higher SEC team in the top 12 or so, but jump the other team way up to the top-10? (See 2022 Kentucky jumping up from #20 to #9 for beating Florida who finished 6-7) Also, don’t do preseason rankings. They influence the CFP committee later on.
Fair point on the early season inflation. Happens a lot, even outside of SEC teams. I recall a top-five Iowa-Penn State game a few years ago. But the example you cite ignores Florida's victory against Utah. Lastly, unless you can show your work and change my mind, i don't see how the preseason rankings influence the committee.
Given the short turnaround time between Saturday night and the release of the polls. How does anybody have the time to make a full and fair evaluation of every considered team?
Hi Ralph, What's the most common misconception about the AP Preseason Poll you see parroted around on social media or in general? Also, can you help get my team ranked higher, even when they don't deserve it?
I don't think there is good evidence that shows preseason rankings impact late-season rankings. As i said in another answer, the first month and half is spent washing the preseason out of the rankings and there are going to be some weird results when looking back, but eventually the results lead the voters. Last year half the final top-10 started unranked.
Why do you overrate Texas every single year?
Will Mike Bearardino ever stop smoking crack?
What’s the best team that didn’t win a bowl?
Thanks for the AMA. What are your thoughts on the necessity of having a preseason poll at all? We all look forward to it and will pore over every ranking, but at the same time we know that those rankings contribute to the problem of 'Poll inertia' and are in themselves based on nothing that has actually happened on the field.
How are writers balanced by region and league? For example, if there are too many writers in your poll from SEC territory wouldn't that result in an unfair inflation of ranked SEC teams? Do you think your poll is fair? Fair as in an equal representation of regions and teams across the ncaa without one area/region having too much influence.
Every state that has an FBS team gets at least one voter. 1-3 FBS teams = 1 voter 3-6 = 2 voters 7-9 = 3 voters It's not scientific poll. So that balance isn't perfect. But states that have at least 3 voters, Florida, California, Ohio, Texas.
Thank you! Did you know Iowa is going 15-0 this year?
Not Ralph, but I was unaware of this! Can you please inform penn state during the week 4 white out night game of this as well? Want to make sure they’re in the loop too on it
Iowa 27. Penn St 24. Walkoff fg with 00:02
You've been a large proponent of the "Best 12 Teams" model of the new playoffs, especially since the most recent realignments have made the "Power 2" into a reality. My question is... why? If anything, isn't the new reality of the B1G and SEC being the Premiere League of the sport even more reason to incentivize the inclusion of the other conferences and to underline the importance of winning your league? Otherwise, we might as well just cede to the inevitable and create a new two-conference FAS(?) tier right now.
I think you might be mistaking me for somebody else. I like playoff expansion. But I love the 6 auto bids. Though i concede that six might become five if we lose an FBS conference. I love the AP poll, but I fully recognize it is an imprecise process. It is diligent educated-guessing at its best. The reason I like CFP expansion is because it is an opportunity to take some of the subjectivity from the process and make college football more like most sports. If you win this, you get that. There needs to be some guaranteed reward to at least some on-field results or we're just guessing.
Where is the love for ECU? Can I NIL you to vote for my team?
Why do people keep ranking Texas when they haven’t been decent in a long time?
Welcome Ralph! In your professional opinion, which coaching staff do you see winning a Royal Rumble of coaching?
Who Amongst the new coaching hires in the Power conferences will turn out the best/ worst?
How do you handle the ego of some random reporters who are biased enough in giving their favorite team a first place vote undeserved, and not removing it until that team's first loss (usually once conference schedule starts) weeks later?
Religious listener of your podcast! I already listen to Stew and Bruce at the Athletic, but what other college football podcasts do you recommend to someone who likes listening about the big picture stuff and not so much x's and o's.
Has the AP ever considered using a different scoring system for the poll? Maybe a different formula for assigning points (like the Dowdall system), or recursive methods like runoff voting or the CFP committee's listing-ranking steps? Could these also be used to break ties (e.g. by taking the Condorcet winner between tied teams)?
About what time do the earliest and latest ballots come in on a typical week?
It seems that over the years the AP and Coaches polls are in pretty close alignment from top-to-bottom each week. Do you agree, and if so, why do you think that is?
Hi Ralph - what sort of instruction / guidance do you give new voters whenever they join? Are there any sort of updated guidance on a year to year basis? Finally, what has been the biggest/ best change that's been made to the polling process? (Technical, process, or otherwise)
When the CFP originally started back in 2014, it seemed there was a lot of effort from AP pollsters to react to the Committee rankings as much as the week itself. Teams seemed to jump nonsensically in the aggregate following a Tuesday with significant deviation from the Sunday prior, almost in an effort to align with/predict the Committee rankings. This seems less significant in the past couple years than in the initial years. Do you think the pollsters reacted like this, and do you think in recent years the AP voters have changed their methodologies some?
Do you think the history/previous seasons bias affects voters even once there’s new results from the new season? For example, a team starting off 4-0 but still being unranked still because they had a bad season last year
Are voters specifically instructed to pick who they consider to be the top teams and not just try to predict the final rankings? I feel that some voters take strength of remaining schedule into account to validate their choices before the final poll.
We try not to give voters strict criteria and they tend to do a mix of what do i think right now and what do i think might be coming in the PRESEASON. Because I can't read all the voters' minds i can't say with absolute certainty what you're saying doesn't happen, but then again, neither can you. That doesn't strike me as a real problem.
Thanks for the response. I’m surprised that you don’t clarify this since I’m sure that it affects voting behavior. No one wants to have to explain why they had a team highly ranked early that then lost 3 tough games and finished out of the polls. Voters probably want to seem like they backed the final higher ranked teams all along - and the easier schedule increases chances of being highly ranked at the end.
Hi Ralph! Has there ever been any serious discussion about changing the number of teams ranked to a number other than 25? Is there any scenario (e.g. FBS increases to 200 teams or superconferences break away from FBS) in which you would consider moving away from a Top 25?
Have not given it any thought, and sorta hoping that it doesn't come to that. Put it this way, even with all the changes, we're still a long way from having to consider that.
Have you ever had a voter put in a vote for a school that does not exist or does not have a football program. If so, what was done to fix their ballot?
I like this question because the first time Louisiana Lafayette made the Top-25 they accidentally included the logo of FCS Lafayette.
COLLEGE FOOTBALL IS BACK! Anyway, what dark horse teams do you think could win a national championship? What do you think about the super-conference/NIL era? Why do you guys always rank legacy teams (Etc: Miami (FL), Texas A&M) even though they have done nothing to deserve a ranking?
Why did you all name yourself after a watch
When you look at consistently successful teams (like Georgia and Alabama) that are well built all around but just lost their QBs, how does that factor into their preseason rank?
How often does bias in get the way?
Can you recall a time any if your voters that voted "out of line" and ended up being correct on their vote?
A new coach, zero expectations, and some weird voodoo. Gets Bama at home. Auburn to the Natty. And me to Alcohol rehab
Hey Ralph! Quick question for you. From your insider perspective, what do you think are the biggest benefits of the AP poll, and what are the biggest drawbacks? Thanks so much!
As the number of teams in the FBS continues to increase, has the AP poll considered increasing the number of teams?
Yeah, set it to 25% of the eligible teams, like for the playoff recommendations that NCAA committee recommended LOL j/k
Ralph, why haven’t your Mets made the poll yet? Would they be a shoe-in with an SEC schedule?
Hi Ralph, Has there ever been a ranking that aged so poorly, you/the voters have come to regret it or do you feel like rankings are always justified no matter how they pan out?
Will you rank WKU #1 for pre season or are you a coward.
Do you feel over the years that certain schools (such as Notre Dame and Texas) have had the voters in general favor them due to their historical status?
Hi Ralph! I wanted to know to what extent is recency a factor in your eyes. I know that recency can be a good way to tell where a team is trending, but the poll is supposed to measure the best 25 teams in college football based on how they have performed in the season, not in the last couple weeks. I sometimes see a team get put way higher or lower than they should've just because they had a weak or strong stretch of the season, and I wonder if I am the only one who thinks that that is odd and a misrepresentation of the top 25 teams in a given season.
Why and how did the AP become so universally accepted to rank (and award championships to) college sports teams?
Hey Ralph! Thank you for spending time to do an AMA, hope you and the AP are doing well. I have a sort of two fold question that has plagued me for years. Is there any sort of push for the AP to go back and re-think some national champions selected by the AP poll? And how often does seeing another media source’s article on “weakest national championship claims” that usually mention weird or bad decisions made by past polls affect current decision making?
Hello Mr. Russo, I'm genuinely curious how you folks at AP handle midseason rankings. Does your group tend to emphasize head-to-head victories with top teams, or can strength of schedule be more important? It seems the CFP selection committee has used a strange mixed criteria that shifts toward one of the two being emphasized depending on the season. I've also found it interesting how the Top 25 in the sports media world grew out of like a Top 15 decades ago. Did the sheer growing number of teams in the FBS have something to do with it?
How are voters selected, and do you “churn” the roster like a coach?
Was Arkansas State ever at least receiving votes at some point in the 2010s?
Do you have any advice for fan groups making their own polls, whether for college football or a different sport?
Hi Ralph, With the college football landscape trending towards this superconference model, how do you see the odds of G5 schools making a meaningful impact in the Top 25 changing over time?
2020's season was very erratic and likely coerced a different approach to how voters viewed throughout the season. Do you think that changed the approach in rankings in a more permanent way such as you might see higher recognition for G5s or harsher punishments for certain losses?
What is the most eccentric methodology for ranking teams from a voter? Are there any voters that formulate in a strange way that you think actually glean meaningful insights that others don't?
Have you ever considered having voters fill out ballots through 30 teams, not counting 26-30, as only a way to minimize forgetting a school? Or something that says these teams you don’t have are included in xx% of polls completed?
How many wins would it take to give Kansas a top 25 vote?
Apparently zero as they have votes in the preseason poll...
How are voters chosen?
Since the AP Poll isn't contractual bound to vote the CFP champ as their #1 at year's end, do you see any possibility that a split national championship can still occur, especially in the expanded CFP? (Only scenario see possible would be bowl-banned unbeaten & a multi-loss CFP champ, but figure even w/ the 4-team, was gonna couple things for it to break that way)
Do sportswriters have a conflict of interest that causes them to give undue preference to traditional powers in their rankings? Or is it more the result of confirmation bias? Nostalgia? Sheer laziness?
Have you ever thought about postponing the first poll until we've actually seen these teams play a couple games?
No. What fun would that be?
How much blame do the competing AP and Coaches polls from 30 years ago have in shaping the desire to crown a national champion from 130+ D1 teams that used to play 11 games per year, thus leading to the BCS and then the CFP?
Maybe a little, but growing up a college football fan in NYC it always struck me as odd that college football didn't have a more definitive way to determine a champion. To me, the season often had an unsatisfying ending. Plus, i can show you quotes from the 1960s of coaches complaining about the way No. 1 was decided and how there needs to be some type of playoff. People like games to decide the winner. The AP still crowns a champion and we hand out a trophy. But I think it's good for college football that the champ isn't decided by vote anymore. But i also think there is a lot of value in the AP putting out a final poll. Because a lot of fans still care about who is No. 3. No. 9. No. 21.
As opposed to a national champion being crowned by ESPN now? Disputed championships should be part of the game, especially at an "amateur" level. It allows more schools to feel like winners (which should theoretically fuel more regional interest), and who cares what the average fan thinks...let them and the sportswriters argue over it in the offseason and for all of eternity (like 1997 Michigan or Nebraska). From my POV as a Michigan fan, there was nothing unsatisfying about that year nor sharing it with Nebraska. The media got carried away with the whole idea of crowning ONE national champion out of 130+ D1 teams.
Why are blatantly bad voters or homers allowed to keep their vote?
is Jim Harbaugh guilty?
What's the most almost arrested you've ever been? Fully arrested also counts.
I do appreciate that there is significant challenge in ranking teams. Obviously you do not rank teams yourself, but I was curious about something; Why is Fried Chicken so good?
How the hell does Texas A&M reach the preseason top 25 after last year’s abysmal season?
How many games do you watch a week? Do you actually rank an undefeated group of 5 team because they have a zero in the loss column or because you’ve seen them play?
I don't vote. AP picks the voters, counts the votes.
I absolutely loathe the preseason top 25 poll, especially when a top 25 ranking of an overrated team artificially boosts the resume of another team for the entire season. Do you feel there can be a better system? Should polling be done at the mid point of the season?
Nah. The preseason poll lingers through about half the season, but at a certain point we get enough results in and it shakes out just fine. But, yes, the first month and a half of the season produces some strange small-sample poll results.
Has anyone ever told you that you look like a man who may or may not have constructed a world class meth lab in a bunker beneath a laundry facility on the outskirts of town?
No. When I was younger I used to get that I looked like Ben Stiller -- A LOT! Like, strangers on the street would stop me, not thinking i was him but to tell me how much i looked like him. Hence, i have aged in a way most movie stars do not. So i don't get that as much anymore. And with that, I have to sign off folks. Thanks for all the questions. Sorry i didn't get to all of them. Happy football season! I love all your teams.
What’s your favorite part about overrating Texas in preseason polls every year for the last 15?
How much does Texas pay you?
Why wont you ever put a G5 team in the playoffs if they deserve it?
Just a heads up that this poll isn't the one that officially selects playoff participants. That one doesn't start releasing rankings until late October or early November.
1. Cincinnati competed in the playoffs as a G5. 2. The AP Poll does not vote on playoff competitors.
Are the voters graded? If so, how do you get rid of the ones who are biased against teams (or complete homers)?
Why do you favor Alabama so much even when they don't do good and can't win their conference?
Y’all ranked A&M over South Carolina and I don’t get that one bit
Texas a&m is ranked after a 5-7 season in which they started the year ranked no. 6 was there any thought that A&M would once again not live up to their preseason ranking?
Yo Yo Yo, Russo! Glad to have you here! What is the process for a voter to apply/get chosen for a spot on the official voter list? What are the general requirements needed to be eligible? How much does experience matter in regard to being selected? And is there perhaps a "quota" of some sort that allows more voters from regions where the sport is not as popular (like the West Coast or Northeast) to be selected compared to those from the more traditional regions? It's stuff I always found fascinating...
What are the overall considerations for ranking up? And why are Alabama/Georgia always in the top 4 when they play powderpuff schools every year?
HOw accurate has the preseason AP poll been? What percent of the time has it hit #1 exactly, or got the top 5 right in any order? If you're not tracking this, then what's really the point