Georgia is ranked number one in both the Associated Press and USA Today college football polls to start the season. In fact, the Bulldogs are the pick of most experts to win the national championship. They have a lot of experience returning this year especially on defense.
However, I have never understood the need for polls before the start of the season. The polls are supposed to rank the top 25 teams in the country, but how is that possible if no games have been played? True, the pre-season polls are largely ceremonial and play an important roll in adding to all the pre-season chatter related to the sport. But don't these polls give an unnecessary advantage to teams that have not earned anything yet?
Every year, it seems like there is at least one team that is ranked low in the polls or not at all, but they emerge as one of the top teams. However, because they began so low, it was more difficult for them to reach the top than it was for teams that were bestowed high rankings without playing a game.
When Tennessee won the national championship in 1998, we began the year ranked tenth and had to slowly but surely jump teams on the way to the top. Conversely, the Volunteers started the 2005 season ranked third, but stank it out and finished with only a 5-6 record. Clearly, the Vols were vastly overrated that year.
Polls should not be issued until the first week of October. By then, all the teams have been playing for a month, and we should have a pretty good idea of who the better teams are. It will not guarantee that teams won't get overlooked, but it will greatly reduce the possibility. If we aren't going to have a playoff system, then we must look at ways to refine the current system. And this is one way.
No comments:
Post a Comment