I switched back to "no", since PollMastaJ's post is the first argument I've heard why one shouldn't rank Cinci: They might lose to respectable teams. Applying what you think could happen to the end of the season is valid in producing rankings. I'm convinced everyone is voting on the issue and not trying to force voters into agreeing. I think this is a very borderline case and thus I'm also willing to give the benefit of the doubt, and let future polls tell the story. If he continues to not rank Cinci in the future after more respectable wins, I can see no doubt in removing OP status.

I have no reason to be biased against Cincinnati or any other team, not even Oklahoma . Cincinnati has done better than I expected and I perhaps underrated them in my polls. Some of your arguments have been persuasive. However, I still believe that if Cincinnati suddenly found themselves in, for example, the Big 12 South, or the Southeast, they would struggle to have a winning season. Also, I was not comparing Cincinnati with last year's Tulsa except to say that previously unproven teams who suddenly have great records are on a "prove-it-to-me" basis. A win over Louisville does not constitute an "impressive" win to me. Any ranked team should have been able to do that to Louisville. I sincerely hope that no one here thinks my polls are invalid simply because they do not closely resemble everybody else's polls. I am sure there are many other fans in this country who also think that Cincinnati is grossly overrated.
Sincerely,
usbummer

WOW!!! And I thought we were trying to rank the best 25 teams each week based on their body of work from what they have accomplished on the field not what "might" happen. Anything can happen... If this was about predicting the future then we should all submit a preseason poll and be done for the year.

If it were so predictable that you could get it right from the beginning then it would be so boring people wouldn't even watch.

The bottom line is that Cincinnati has done enough so far to be ranked and even if they lose to Pittsburgh, shouldn't they still be ranked at 11-1???

I just can't get over the fact that a 4-2 team that Cincy had already beaten was moved from UNRANKED to 18th on their BYE WEEK while Cincy remained unranked the same week after beating another ranked opponent.

See my signature. I agree that's exactly what a pre-season poll is. It's the same argument I still ranked a 3-3 Oklahoma: because I expect them to win more and lose less at the end of the season.

To find out who has voted what, please see this topic: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=715&start=0

The topic ID for this is 686. Just punch that into that webpage and you can see who voted what. It's real-time, meaning if someone changes their vote, that page would change (if you refreshed the content). This works for any poll on the site (I think).

Sorry for belaboring the point, but could you still answer these questions:
What are your specific criteria for ranking? How did you come to these conclusion?

I get that the rankings include predictions, but how do you come up with those predictions? Specifically, what criterion made you think USF was going to better than Cincy after they played, and what criterion are you using that predicts that Oregon St. will perform better than Cincy?

Also, what do you mean by "previously unproven"? Aren't all teams unproven at the beginning of each year? If they aren't, but instead their past year's achievements and reputations are major components in your poll (which I'm assuming they would have to be to have an undefeated team that has beaten multiple ranked teams to still not be ranked), isn't that pretty much the definition of the bias?

USC is always good and therefore gets the benefit of the doubt and a high ranking because they have always been good. Cincinnati isn't historically good, so they have to do more to earn the same ranking. (I'm assuming these aren't based on last year alone, since Cincy won 11 games and their league last year.)

I agree with you on the preseason poll. It should be a predictor... Certainly better than just using last year's final poll with no regard for returning starters, coaching changes, etc.

But this is week 9 and thankfully there is no fail-safe method to get it right from the start. However there are things like injuries, weather and upsets that can't be predicted but affect the outcomes. How long do you hold a team out because you "think" they are going to lose a game but continue to rank teams they have already beaten? Predictions at this point in the season is not a valid way to submit a poll. Especially when it singles out one team that otherwise is almost a unanimous top 10.

This is just my opinion and as I've said before it doesn't make me right... It's just how I see it.

Now, after usbummer's last comment I don't think there is any intentional bias against Cincinnati but I do think he has waited to long for them to prove themselves. They are the defending Big East Champs and have now won 28 games in the past 2 1/2 years.

But since he said some of the comments here may have persuaded him that he has them underrated I am going to abstain for now since I don't want to see an OP lose his status because of a disagreement over one team.

I'll change my vote to abstain since at least we're having a discussion about it. I would still like to see more of a factual argument as to why Cincy isn't anywhere in the top 25 (including ahead of teams they easily beat), but at the same time, I will concede that their strength of schedule isn't that great. I still really don't see how you could still keep them behind Oregon State nor do I think they have the weakest schedule of your top 25 teams.

As an overall question, when the final polls are tabulated each week, do we do anything like drop out the two highest and lowest rankings for each team? Such a method would probably remove some of the need to have discussions about integrity based on the ranking of a single team.

I changed my vote from yes to abstain because usbummer finally replied and I am not sure if this is a case of bias or simply ignoring facts. There is no justification, to me, for ranking Ohio State and Oregon State so high, and having Boise State and Cincinnati so low. I am still leaning towards yes, but I will see what others say before making my final decision.

I changed to abstain to ask this question. Cincy beat down USF who at the time was 5-0. USF beat Fla. St, now while they aren't having a very good season stomped on BYU who beat Oklahoma, yes, Bradfords injury was a very large part of that and they not having Jermaine Grisham(sorry if I spelt his name wrong) was also a factor in BYU "upsetting" the Sooners. You said that you have Cincy at #26, and according to your poll, BYU is at #25 and they lost to a team(FSU) who lost to a team(USF) Cincy beat while having a backup QB in for about half the game and then you have Oklahoma at #13 who BYU beat. I just don't see how you can have BYU higher than Cincy. Please explain.

The benefit of the doubt is the only basis for me changing this to no. It's not so much about the bias, which I've ruled out. It is about the confusion of whether other factors are cause for removal.

So, based on your poll, you think if Boise St. or Houston "suddenly found themselves" in the Big 12 South, they would produce winning seasons and be ranked top 25?

We can not possibly turn this into a game of what ifs. I could say "what if Florida lost every other game this year" as a justification for not ranking them. Cincinnati isn't in the Big 12, they are in the Big East. If you think they're not as good as some Big 12 teams then fine, rank them under them. But don't not rank them at all just because they haven't beaten some Big 12 team.

You have to go by what has happened, not a bunch of what ifs. I could legitimately play the what if game on my Top 25 right now and just rank Cincy #1 all the way until the last week and put whoever else wherever I feel like by saying "what if Temple won out?", "what if USC forfeited every game?", etc.

If the consensus here is that this BS "what if" game is a legitimate argument then I have no problem leaving.

I feel a little odd defending Cincinnati and I consider the Big East to be a "lesser" conference than the SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, and ACC.

However, right is right, and Cincinnati has demonstrated a deserving place in the top 25. They have not only won their games, but they have done so by impressive margins, a factor to consider when comparing strengths.

Rutgers by 32! (at Rutgers) ; Oregon St. by 10 (at Oregon St); USF by 17 (at USF)

I would like to see usbummer remain a member and voted as much. I do urge you to really consider this team as a legitimate power. For the record, I have Cincy power rated above the likes of Boise St., Penn St., Va Tech, and all but 2 Big 12 teams!

I agree... I decided to abstain here because I think the point was made and I would be shocked if Cincy wasn't in his poll next week but I don't get this whole "what if" or predicting losses thing as being legitimate.

It was said earlier in this thread that removing this pollster would undermine the credibility of this poll. I personally think that the ability to challenge things like this is the only thing that gives us credibility. But if this way of submitting polls is okay then there is no hope of credibility IMO.

Could you imagine the uproar if Nick Saban left Florida off his ballot and said it was because he "thinks" Tebow is going to get hurt and if so Florida "should" lose the rest of their games.

I know that sounds extremely far fetched... But so does expecting Cincy to lose enough games the rest of the year to finish unranked considering how they have looked so far.