Final AP Poll

Donate To GopherHole

Final 2024-25 Season Associated Press Poll
1. Ohio State
2. Notre Dame
3. Oregon
4. Texas
5. Penn State
6. Georgia
7. Arizona State
8. Boise State
9. Tennessee
10. Indiana
11. Ole Miss
12. SMU
13. BYU
14. Clemson
15. Iowa State
16. Illinois
17. Alabama
18. Miami (Florida)
19. South Carolina
20. Syracuse
21. Army
22. Missouri
23. UNLV
24. Memphis
25. Colorado
 


Bama being ranked ahead of Miami is pretty comedic

As is SMU being ranked ahead of BYU
 

I'm not sure what the point of the rankings are or even what can be gleamed beyond the CFP Teams given that all the consolation-Bowl Games were played with vastly different rosters and in a lot of cases Coaching staffs.

How does Michigan get left out given their last 2 Ws?
 


Ope3 said:
I'm not sure what the point of the rankings are or even what can be gleamed beyond the CFP Teams given that all the consolation-Bowl Games were played with vastly different rosters and in a lot of cases Coaching staffs.

How does Michigan get left out given their last 2 Ws?
Click to expand...
5 losses?
There are 0 teams in the poll with 5 losses.
 


MaxyJR1 said:
That's the issue, I'd argue a few 5 loss teams that should be in the top 25 over 4 loss or G5 teams.
Click to expand...
Hard to compare
I personally value the regular season much more than the bowls.

They went 7-5 and beat a depleted bama squad on a bowl.
Who should they be rated ahead of?
In my mind not losing is just as important as having a quality win

Quality wins matter more if you only have quality losses

To me, the loss to 6-6 Washington looms large. If that loss is to another top 20 type team…I could say yeah I’m going to overlook the 5 losses because of SOS. But they didn’t sweep against the medium or worse teams. This is the same reason I would’ve had bama below a lot of teams others would’ve had them ahead of. Plus since I didn’t feel as high on bama going in the win vs bama isn’t as impressive.

So then it’s like, who lost less. But everyone ranks them their own way.
 

Some guy said:
Hard to compare
I personally value the regular season much more than the bowls.

They went 7-5 and beat a depleted bama squad on a bowl.
Who should they be rated ahead of?
In my mind not losing is just as important as having a quality win

Quality wins matter more if you only have quality losses

To me, the loss to 6-6 Washington looms large. If that loss is to another top 20 type team…I could say yeah I’m going to overlook the 5 losses because of SOS. But they didn’t sweep against the medium or worse teams. This is the same reason I would’ve had bama below a lot of teams others would’ve had them ahead of. Plus since I didn’t feel as high on bama going in the win vs bama isn’t as impressive.

So then it’s like, who lost less. But everyone ranks them their own way.
Click to expand...
I don't have issue with it. They should just rank the top 12 to 15. If you weren't in the playoffs should you really be ranked?

G5 teams being ranked just seems odd to me. They are a different classification IMO.
 



Some guy said:
5 losses?
There are 0 teams in the poll with 5 losses.
Click to expand...
That's exactly my point about "not sure what the point of the rankings are or even what can be gleamed".

Is it the whole body of work? Is it right here, right now. I don't think just counting up the losses and ranking them based on that is a true measure, and seems lazy.

Even arguing the 5 loses straight up, 3 of them were to Top 10 teams (Oregon, Texas & Indiana) and another in the Top 16 (Illinois).

They beat #1. On the road. Full rosters. They beat #17. That should override multiple teams in the 20-25 range, in my opinion.

They did get enough votes to be 29th.

Also, at the end of the day it's not really a true injustice, they matter next nothing beyond a footnote in a Wikipedia page or Media Guide (if those still exist) and something I will likely forget about by dinner time.

Given the lack of importance to the task, I don't blame the AP Voters for taking the easy route. #1 is obvious. That's all that matters.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
I don't have issue with it. They should just rank the top 12 to 15. If you weren't in the playoffs should you really be ranked?

G5 teams being ranked just seems odd to me. They are a different classification IMO.
Click to expand...
I mean army beat Oklahoma who beat bama

I don’t see why we should downgrade a team for their conference affiliation.
Conferences down play games, teams do.
 

Ope3 said:
That's exactly my point about "not sure what the point of the rankings are or even what can be gleamed".

Is it the whole body of work? Is it right here, right now. I don't think just counting up the losses and ranking them based on that is a true measure, and seems lazy.

Even arguing the 5 loses straight up, 3 of them were to Top 10 teams (Oregon, Texas & Indiana) and another in the Top 16 (Illinois).

They beat #1. On the road. Full rosters. They beat #17. That should override multiple teams in the 20-25 range, in my opinion.

They did get enough votes to be 29th.

Also, at the end of the day it's not really a true injustice, they matter next nothing beyond a footnote in a Wikipedia page or Media Guide (if those still exist) and something I will likely forget about by dinner time.

Given the lack of importance to the task, I don't blame the AP Voters for taking the easy route. #1 is obvious. That's all that matters.
Click to expand...
Yup they’re right on the edge. As they should be. If they had beat a Washington team that finished 6-7 they’d probably be rated about 17

I don’t think saying a team that went 7-5 with 4 losses to good teams and one loss to a mediocre team is the easy route.

There aren’t enough games to determine it truly.

I would have Michigan rated probably as a top 15 best team at the end of the year. Probably better than SMU, Clemson, injured Georgia, and Tennessee IMO

But we don’t really rank best teams and never had. They rank best seasons. 5 loss season being left out of top 25 isn’t really lazy. They didn’t have a top 25 best season.

20. Syracuse was 9-3 and had a win over Miami and as many wins over bowl eligible teams as Michigan had total wins.
21. Army didn’t lose to a team that didn’t win 10 games.
22. Missouri was 9-3 with no real quality wins but no losses as bad as washington.
23 is UNLV with 3 losses all to top 20 teams.
24 is 2 loss Memphis who lost to 10 win navy and UTSA. UTSA is as good as Washington to me. But I’ve only seen Washington play 1 game and I’ve only seen UTSA play one game. But Memphis has two losses to Michigan’s 5.
Colorado is 9-3. Not a lot of quality wins.

I would pick Michigan over all these teams but michigan didn’t have a better season.

I think I would’ve left out Colorado and Memphis but would’ve had in Navy and Kansas State over Michigan still.
But I think that Arizona State, byu, and Iowa state are just as good as Indiana, Texas, and Illinois
Not much separates team 21 from 61 this year. It’s who has a better day. So I gotta lean on the teams who had more good days rather than the team who had the best good day. Because the bad days matter too


Michigan had two great wins to close the year but they’re also about 7 plays away from being 4-8
 
Last edited:

Some guy said:
I mean army beat Oklahoma who beat bama

I don’t see why we should downgrade a team for their conference affiliation.
Conferences down play games, teams do.
Click to expand...
True. Martin Luther College in New Ulm was the National Champion a few years ago on the team who beat teams ranking system.
 



MaxyJR1 said:
True. Martin Luther College in New Ulm was the National Champion a few years ago on the team who beat teams ranking system.
Click to expand...
The argument you’re making is an argument a lot of people believe

And that’s fine. Perhaps we should just bracket the team based on preconceived notions of who is good and ignore results of games.

Michigan probably is a a top 10 most talented roster. Maybe they should’ve been in the playoff.
Or maybe losing to Washington matters.
Michigan was 6-5 against bowl teams. Two of the wins were Arkansas state and Fresno state. One of the losses was 6-7 Washington.

That’s a really hard schedule to win games against. And they won a little over half of them.
 


Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0 said:
Disappointed only 5 B1G teams in the final Top 25 considering it's obvious dominance over the SEC.
Click to expand...
Losses matter.
Michigan with 5 including one out of conference (and Washington)
Iowa with 5 including 2 out of conference (and Michigan state)
Minnesota with 5 including 1 out of conference (and Rutgers)
Rutgers with 6 including 1 out of conference (and UCLA)
USC with 6 including 1 out of conference (and Maryland)

The next best options to be ranked for the big ten all had too many losses. And not just at the hands of good teams.

The big ten probably has 7 teams between 20-50 though. Those 5 plus Nebraska and Washington.

If Michigan beats Washington, Iowa beats Michigan state or Missouri, Minnesota beats North Carolina, Rutgers beats UCLA, and USC beats Maryland…they might all be in the top 25
 

Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0 said:
Disappointed only 5 B1G teams in the final Top 25 considering it's obvious dominance over the SEC.
Click to expand...
It's the 5 loss thing that does it. As others pointed out there are no 5 loss teams in the final AP poll. Now if the Big Ten dropped to an 8 game schedule like the SEC and added an additional creampuff there is a good chance that Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota all would have finished with 4 loses and had a decent shot of ending up in the final top 25.
 

Some guy said:
21. Army didn’t lose to a team that didn’t win 10 games.


Michigan had two great wins to close the year but they’re also about 7 plays away from being 4-8
Click to expand...

Just specifically with Army, yes their 2 losses were to 10 win teams but they got blown out in both of them and Navy also was outside the Final Top 25.

The other was Notre Dame who lost to Ohio St who lost to Michigan, though I recognize the transient property can be a foolish endeavor.

If you have fewer losses but also fewer (or not even 1) Wins against other Top 25 Teams, that ranks lower in my criteria, however nebulous it might be.
 

MNVCGUY said:
It's the 5 loss thing that does it. As others pointed out there are no 5 loss teams in the final AP poll. Now if the Big Ten dropped to an 8 game schedule like the SEC and added an additional creampuff there is a good chance that Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota all would have finished with 4 loses and had a decent shot of ending up in the final top 25.
Click to expand...
Yes, the majority of B1G schools schedule 10 P4 teams and SEC schedule 9. There should be an agreed to formula for scheduling. Some SEC schools play 10. Purdue played 11 if you count Oregon State.
 

Some guy said:
The argument you’re making is an argument a lot of people believe

And that’s fine. Perhaps we should just bracket the team based on preconceived notions of who is good and ignore results of games.
Click to expand...
That's SEC logic. Or lack thereof.
And the G5 is not a different level. They are FBS, which is why I keep saying that their conference champs should all get autobids.
 

disco said:
That's SEC logic. Or lack thereof.
And the G5 is not a different level. They are FBS, which is why I keep saying that their conference champs should all get autobids.
Click to expand...
Would love that. I understand not putting them in if they have 4 or 5 losses.
Like the year Wisconsin won the big ten because Penn state and Ohio state were both on probation. 7-5 Wisconsin shouldn’t go

A smart thing would be to have autobids that convert to at larges if the champ isn’t in the top 25
But then the system is open to be gamed more than I already feel it is gamed


I feel the committee gamed the system this year to not get an Oregon Ohio state final.
They did this by inexplicably rating Ohio state behind a 2 loss team who Ohio state beat.
Ohio state had better wins than Penn state too.

But the mission failed by the committee. Because Notre dame and Penn state won the other side of the bracket anyways
 


Some guy said:
Would love that. I understand not putting them in if they have 4 or 5 losses.
Like the year Wisconsin won the big ten because Penn state and Ohio state were both on probation. 7-5 Wisconsin shouldn’t go
Click to expand...
I agree with this as a fair compromise. I don't love it, because that's not how literally any other sport would work, but it's better than the top 25 thing, because it's a firm number, and can't be gamed.
 

btowngopher said:
Oregon should be two ahead of ND.
Click to expand...
Agree


I would go:
1) Ohio State
2) Oregon
3) Notre dame
4) Penn state
5) texas
6) Arizona state
7) Georgia
8) Indiana
9) Tennessee
10) BYU

As my final top 10

Playoff teams left out for me:
11) Boise state
Illinois
Miami
Ole Miss
15) Clemson
16) SMU
Iowa state
South Carolina
Alabama
Syracuse
Army
Missouri
Navy
UNLV
Kansas State

Would be my top 25



It’s hard to do it post bowls
Like, if the QB plays Miami beats Iowa State 10/10 times
He doesn’t. They lose. Who should be rated higher?
 



Developing trend: the Midwest and West are rising while the South is falling.

In the NIL era, this is a predictable outcome of the Midwest and West being generally wealthier than the South.
 


Some guy said:
Would love that. I understand not putting them in if they have 4 or 5 losses.
Like the year Wisconsin won the big ten because Penn state and Ohio state were both on probation. 7-5 Wisconsin shouldn’t go

A smart thing would be to have autobids that convert to at larges if the champ isn’t in the top 25
But then the system is open to be gamed more than I already feel it is gamed


I feel the committee gamed the system this year to not get an Oregon Ohio state final.
They did this by inexplicably rating Ohio state behind a 2 loss team who Ohio state beat.
Ohio state had better wins than Penn state too.

But the mission failed by the committee. Because Notre dame and Penn state won the other side of the bracket anyways
Click to expand...
I understand why Ohio State was rated lower than Penn State. The committee was making a point not to punish teams for CCG loses, but I completely see your side of it as Ohio State went into Happy Valley and won and probably would have won in Indy and got the one seed if they hadn't shit bed vs Michigan. But unfortunately they did shit the bed in the Michigan game and that matters. I think some rare and weird scenarios happened this year and aren't common. Next year it could be straight forward where the big ten, Big 12 and ACC have undefeated champions and a one loss team beats an undefeated team in the SEC title. Top five seeds would be pretty straight forward. In 2023 the top six would have been obvious and I am sure will get years like that as well.
 

I'll keep saying, the CFP screwed up the whole bracket by seeding Boise above Clemson. Nice season, but they would have been an underdog to all 11 other teams in the CFP.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom