Topic: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25
Replies: 68   Last Post: Sep 8, 2018 12:22 AM by: ClemsonPoker489®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 68  

It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:10 PM

You old Tnetters will remember my column from back in the day that generated much discussion and argument. Lets do it here, but please remember that clicks keep me employed, so go read the column, then yell at me. Go Tigers!


Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:15 PM

You are correct. It’s just click bait no need feeding the possum.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

thanks for your support

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:17 PM

I hope you are successful in your profession and support fellow Tigers along the way, perhaps even without calling them names

Re: thanks for your support

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:15 PM

Sorry if you are offended. I was not aware of your past ventures using TigerNet to line your pockets. If your publication was strong enough TigerNet would pick it up on its own and you wouldn’t have to peddle your work here. Nothing personal, I just found it not to be of the quality to garner my time. Good luck!

Message was edited by: baker5801®

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

That is two minutes I will never get back

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:19 PM


I should quit, or there is something I can do to improve?

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:21 PM

Do you not agree that writers are biased and don't watch enough?

There is something I can do to improve.

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:37 PM

I apologize for being rude. That was uncalled for and I should not have posted that.

I don't mind being ripped, I just want to know why****

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:39 PM

Re: I don't mind being ripped, I just want to know why****

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:09 PM

I’m not trying to be rude, just honest. If you think Clemson is not one of the top 10 teams in the country, you don’t know football.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

they don't have top 10 results

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:13 PM

If they are top 10, it will show this weekend and then they will have earned their position

Re: they don't have top 10 results

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:51 PM

quite possibly the dumbest gd comment


2019 purple level member

I for one am glad you are stopping. You are one of the most ignorant posters ever. You obviously think very highly of your own opinion, unlike the rest of us - RockHillTiger

Are you new or something?

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:33 AM

You obviously have not read ANYTHING from that caulk loving coot GWPTiger®

2019 purple level member

If pigs are so smart, why do 66% of them use weak and inferior materials during construction?

Re: Are you new or something?

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 5:50 PM

she puts “tiger” in her name - she’s fooling no one

2019 purple level member

I for one am glad you are stopping. You are one of the most ignorant posters ever. You obviously think very highly of your own opinion, unlike the rest of us - RockHillTiger

More like how are we NOT top 10? or even top 5?

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 11:16 PM

We lost in the CFP last year to the eventual champion, and we are as good or better at almost every single position this year. Sometimes the eyeball test and common sense goes a long way. Ask Alabama. That's how they lobbied their way into the CFP on their way to winning it after their regular season record had some flaws. I agree with you that sometimes teams get overlooked and others get the benefit-of-the-doubt, but your rankings make little sense at this point. It fails to even take into consideration things like the fact that Clemson played 3 QB's for most of the game and played a lot of other second and third string as well. We could have easily run the score up by another 14-21 point margin.

I'd feel pretty confident in our odds with UCF too.

your missing the entire point

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 11:31 PM

The point is to stop with all of that and go with what has actually happened on the field. Where do you think winning at Texas A&M will compare with other wins to date?

Better than ND at home over Michigan?
Better than LSU on a neutral field over Miami?
Better than UCF thrashing UConn?
Better than VT at FSU?

Those are the teams that stand high in my rankings because they have actually done something, and we have not. Winning at TAMU would seem like it would be on par if not better than all of those wins above, and then we would be ranked near the top

make any sense?

Re: your missing the entire point

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 11:47 PM

No I wasn't missing the point. I was just trying to be polite and not say it was pointless. Nobody believes that any of those teams you have ranked ahead of Clemson are better than them just because Clemson didn't hang 80 points on Furman at home.

You are basically saying that UCF beating UConn by a TD more

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 4:02 PM

than we beat Furman was enough to put them above Clemson by 5 spots.

Not only is your opinion not valid, but it's borderline idiotic. Good luck in your writing, but you do not have my support, and judging by the rest of the comments, maybe you should rethink your strategy on ranking teams.

P.S. I do understand that you only want comments and attention, so this is my first and last post on anything of yours.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


Mike knows Clemson is in the top two.

Posted: Sep 8, 2018 12:22 AM

But his system doesn't allow him to give them credit for beating Furman. He ONLY cares about what has happened so far on the field. With one game for most teams, his poll is going to be crazy.

2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2008_ncaa_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-clemsonpoker489.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

From Inside the WH, it's

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:24 PM

oh, never mind...

Better known as "Mr. Doesn't Matter"

Very informative, thanks for sharing

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:25 PM



Posted: Sep 6, 2018 7:28 PM

Some serious feedback....

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:15 PM

Next year, don’t do this till week 6 or so. Your logic is sound, but it is impossible at this stage to do your rankings the way you want to. Compile data, and give a good product week six. You lose credibility by posting this after week one and ranking people way too high off of one performance.


Thanks, the input should change each week

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:49 PM

And hopefully will be a better representation of where the teams are than some writer that just moves a team up one spot because a team above them lost.

I just hate the eyeball test so much. If you know by looking at teams who will win, then Pitt and Syracuse would have never beaten us. UCF would have never beaten Auburn, and on and on

Thanks again

Re: Thanks, the input should change each week

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:22 PM

UCF would likely have been favored in your poll, but Pitt and Syracuse would never have been favored to beat an undefeated team mid season. They are upsets... for a reason.

If you hate the eyeball test so much

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 11:59 PM

then how would you account for Alabama last year? They had wins over mediocre opponents, an L to Auburn, and didn't even play in the SEC championship. Yet they clearly showed they were the best team by dominating us and beating UGA. Your ranking would have never let them in, but the committee "eyeballed" them in. And they were right.

And why do you have them at #1 this year, but we're not even in the top 10? They beat a talent-less Louisville team. Without LJ and the team they had 2 years ago, I'd argue that wasn't much more of a contest than our Furman game.

Re: Some serious feedback....

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:02 PM

I agree with this poster. The problem with your rankings in week #1 is that it's impossible to determine "quality" wins without being subjective (which you're trying to avoid). There is no objective reason to have VA Tech at #3 and WVU at #7. Both of these teams had dominant wins on the road against Power-5 teams. You're giving VA Tech more credit only because you're being subjective about Tennessee being a trash SEC team. You won't know that until they've played some more games. At this point in the season we have no what of knowing if FSU is any better/worse than Tennessee. FSU actually outgained VA Tech in yardage but had 5 turnovers. WVU nearly doubled Tennessee's yardage.

2019 orange level member

I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.

At least to the extent

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:05 PM

That I am going off what I have read about the new players, and what they have coming back from last season

Watching 12-15 games does give you some indication though, as incomplete as it is

If you really believe, after watching us all last year,

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 1:42 PM

with what we had coming back plus the quality of the new players coming in, that we (Clemson) are only #13 in the country, even this early, I sincerely hope this is not your day job. Our philosophy has never been to hang 70 on FCS opponents, but to play as many players as possible, and keep the game plan as vanilla as possible, while still winning comfortably. Mission accomplished on all those fronts. And, we don't have a QB controversy because of the starter being inadequate, it is because we have HIGH quality all across the board at that position. That is a healthy thing.

Per your method, I would think it possible that a team like Alabama could run the table, and still not make the playoff based on their regular season, because their SOS would not be in the top 4 in the country. So, per your assumptions, we would not REALLY know how good they are, right? Siriusly flawed.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

How much do you pay Tigernet for advertising here?

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:27 PM

You can also spam fgf, they would appreciate it too.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

I was a donor for a long time

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:50 PM

my presence, and yours sells ads for this site

I hope that's enough. If not I'm sure Crump will let me know

Hey if you offend only half of TNet

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:27 PM

and the other half of TNetters come to see what it is you offended them by. You will remain a staple of the TNETS. Mods and ownerz do love their clicky clickerz! You'll probably even get an invite to Crump's for the games. DREAM BIG!

Just so long as you're not a well loved member of the TNETS who is capable of writing a "Process" of FAN FICTION!

Let's axe him

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:43 AM


2019 purple level member

If pigs are so smart, why do 66% of them use weak and inferior materials during construction?

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:38 PM

Well that's one way to rank them. Don't you think you should give some weight to teams talent levels? It seems a little wacky to me

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

the hope is that performance should matter not talent level

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:52 PM

I really hate the eyeball test

Theoretically, talent will rise to the top and I would think my poll would look pretty similar to the rest by the end of the season, but we will see

and thanks for the input

Re: the hope is that performance should matter not talent level

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:42 PM

I feel like the *eyeball test" has to be part of it.

We don't have mearly enough information to make a ranking without it at this point in the season. Everybody in the country knows Clemson will be a top 10 team based on our talent and depth. We have a ton of players back from a 12 win team.

It will be interesting to see how your poll changes as the season progresses.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:58 PM


Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 8:59 PM

Geez, while the hate? It’s one man’s opinion of the top 25 with a somewhat unique twist. Don’t agree with everything he says, but I enjoy everything associated with college football, so I enjoyed reading this guy’s opinion.

I'm not sure why everyone is being so rude.

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:00 PM

Harshly criticizing your article - and thus your occupation - was uncalled for. I expect better from Clemson men.

I appreciate you sharing your article with us, and I was happy to click on it and support a fellow Clemson alum. It is a very interesting way to rank the teams, and I will be interested in seeing how the rankings change as the season progresses using your methodology.

All the best to you, and thanks again for sharing.

2019 white level member

they should change dramatically

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:03 PM

especially if we can whup TAMU
thanks Judge

Different way to look at it and you have to EARN it.***

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:08 PM

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

I don’t get it

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:14 PM

Polls are meant to suggest how good teams are. It’s a combination of what you have done and what teams are capable of. Instead, your poll only looks at what has recently happened. You have UCF bias from last season and Bama bias (albeit they deserve it). The best win was Auburn over Washington. Bama’s eye test is crazy high, but Louisville is garbage and not a quality win. However, comparing teams based on who they beat contradicts your logic given that all of the teams who lost are winless.

This poll seems to just be the knee jerk reaction to what happened the week before.

I don't want it to have anything to do with "capability"

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:19 PM

That to me is the biggest problem with the whole ranking system. I only want to use what teams have actually done, not what I think they could do

I'm not sure Louisville's cupboard is completely bare. We will see. Things should change each week as you learn more about each team. Maybe VT's win was worthless? We will know more as the teams play more.

As far as UCF goes, did you see them? If I changed their name to USC or Michigan or Texas, then told you they're bringing back one of the top QBs in the nation from an undefeated team last year, everyone would have them in the top 5 right?

Really appreciate the feedback, thanks and Go Tigers

Re: I don't want it to have anything to do with "capability"

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:42 PM

You don’t have UCF in your top 5. I’d say beating UConn earns you little. Also, the schedule doesn’t give opportunity for the climb. If your poll is honest, UCF would slide into oblivion as the season goes even winning each game.

How does anyone know how good FSU or Louisville is at this point? FSU showed a good defense, but a poorly coached offense with an inept line. Louisville has good WRs, but little else. You have to go by history and expectations to even rationalize the quality of these wins.

You have removed the eye test and added back margin of victory.

Lastly, the Clemson comment just shows laziness. There isn’t controversy. Sure, a loss or a repeat of FSU with DW4/Cole could create controversy. Now, you are just speculating... which is hypocritical to the anti-speculation you claim your poll provides.

So you believe KB clearly outperformed 16?****

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:47 PM

Re: So you believe KB clearly outperformed 16?****

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:14 AM

Controversy carries a negative connotation. Fans always debate depth chart, but this isn't controversy, this is competition.

"Clemson has a two headed monster at QB"
"Clemson introduces the worlds first quad-threat QB system"

Those are fine headlines and more accurately describe what is present. Clemson has two offensive coordinators. Why is this not "controversial"? Only one gets to pick the play, but they share and do so quite well.

Having 2 QBs to traverse the 15 game season is strategic and not controversial.

and you're right UCF should slide if they don't maul teams****

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:51 PM

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:50 PM

Thanks Synan. I always enjoyed these and your perspective in the past. Unfortunately these other comments is what TigerNet has become and it’s very sad. Great job as always!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

You misspelled "what society has become"****

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 9:53 PM

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25***

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:20 PM

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:48 PM

Following your reasoning, why would Alabama be #1 for beating Louisville? Don't think that was the toughest match in the country was it?

by the complete butt kicking - utterly crushed them****

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 11:05 PM

You want some honest assessment, here you go....

Posted: Sep 6, 2018 10:49 PM

It looks like this is part of a good looking website overall that caters to primarily news topics with this as an "add on". Your angle is that the polls are biased because they don't move teams appropriately and are influenced from preseason rankings and brand. I agree with these sentiments.

As another poster said, then wait until later in the season. Maybe not Week 6, but at least past the cupcakes. Maybe start around Week 3 or 4. For the initial weeks, instead of ranking a Top 25, why not just give some recap of the "teams anticipated to be good" and the "dark horses". You could also use those initial weeks to point the problems with the other polls and ESPN's FPI, etc.

Anyway, that's just a few ideas to share and good luck with it.

Never ask people to click because it makes you money. That's just really pretty lame and asking for smart ### responses. Most people understand that websites make money from clicks/hits. Don't draw attention to it.


Posted: Sep 6, 2018 11:07 PM

This is a political site mostly, but I used to do this column back in the day for the radio station I worked at with raging arguments over the merits of the rankings so I wanted to try and bring it back. I don't make money per click, but the survival of the column does depend on reads

Appreciate the advice

How do you justify leaving Washington out of your Top 25?

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 2:03 AM

They play your #4 team very tough, it's basically a road game, and they aren't in your top 25? That goes against your whole argument of rating the teams only on what they did in week one!

2019 white level member

They don't even have a single victory yet

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 8:33 AM

Why should UW be ranked ahead of winning teams? Were I to judge and consider the one loss teams, they would certainly be the highest ranked among them

Thanks for the input

Washington is....better.

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 10:41 AM

The reason why Washington should not have dropped out of the Top 25 is because anyone who even casually keeps up with CFB knows that Washington is a top-15 team. Just because they lost to a great Auburn team does not mean that they aren't one of the better team in CFB.

To have Cincy ranked and not Washington is a travesty. The CFB rankings are the "TOP 25" teams, not just a simple calculation of wins and losses.

Just like FSU was a top 5 team last year

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 10:59 AM

and everyone knew it. That is why they were ranked #3 in the preseason

6-6 later they had to reschedule some patsy just to make it to a bowl.

Every single year there is a team that is ranked highly and terrible (Notre Dame 2 years ago went 4-8)

Thanks for chiming in!

Re: Just like FSU was a top 5 team last year

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:30 AM

You can't take one or two examples and apply it across the board.

That's exactly the reason that that the top 25 looks at a myriad of factors, not just W/L and who you played, which you're doing.

Glad to see you back!

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 7:47 AM

You certainly know how to stir the pot!

My two cents

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 7:48 AM

Instead of posting a link and asking for clicks, you should just post your articles/top 25 here then offer a link to the site at the bottom in case people want to read more articles and explore the site.

The site is almost all politics

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 8:34 AM

I'd have to take that mess to the Lunge. Thanks for the input!

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 8:37 AM

I was almost with you til I saw the rankings.Wow!

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 10:34 AM

Objectively, this is a horrendous assessment of the top 25.

Your entire argument is rooted in "Who have you played?"

So, the best team in the nation can start out with the worse team in the nation, and no matter how much they win by, they're now no longer the best team in the nation just because of who that first matchup was?

I agree that you can't judge solely based on the "eye-test", but you also can't judge solely based on schedule either, which you're doing.

You're throwing out roster-talent, veteran player-presence, last-year's results vs. which players stayed/left, stats, everything all in favor of "who you played".

That is what your article is just plain bad. The rankings are an amalagm of all of the important factors. As I said, you can disagree with how much weight you give one or more variables, but to put all your eggs into one single factor is not smart. If I were you, I would lobby this site to take this analysis down, man.

Question about your input

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 10:57 AM

"So, the best team in the nation can start out with the worse team in the nation"

How do we know who the best team in the nation is before any team has played a single game? Part of my whole point

Thanks for the input

Follow your logic beyond the first step

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:17 AM

How do you know the team they beat in week one is any good? You can't define a quality win after a single week. The logic is seriously flawed unless you release the poll 6+ weeks into the season.

From what I watched, but

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:41 AM

The input changes each week based on how a team performs over the course of the season. Therefore it might have been OK to go bonkers over Bama dominating FSU in week 1, but by week 12 that win didn't mean anywhere near as much because they were a bottom of the bowls team

Conversely Clemson's win over Auburn turned out to be better than the way it was viewed that week

More input of wins and losses should equal better and more true rankings

Re: Question about your input

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 11:27 AM

Easy. For the variables I just listed:

How they performed last year vs. which players they have back this year that were on that team
Veteran presence of roster-members
Overall talent level

The way you evaluate Clemson is the most obviously glaring flaw of your analysis.

-Top 4 finish last year
-Returning a veteran D-Line, all of which will likely play NFL football

-Returning Starting QB, starting RB, WR's that greatly contributed last year.

Essentially returning all of the most important players that gave them a top 4 finish last year.

Yet according to your own logic, they aren't top 4 because of who they played.

That's why your analysis makes no logical sense when you look at all factors.

As a relatively new T-net member who's not

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 12:54 PM

familiar with you I'll give you some feedback.

I read your article, and honestly didn't find engrossing enough to where I'll be seeking it out to read it again next week. I get your logic and spin on doing the rankings, and it's an interesting way to look at things...just not this early in the season. A couple of other posters here suggested waiting until a few weeks in or even half way through the season for the rankings, and writing up some other college football related stories in the meantime. To me that makes a lot more sense.

So there's my input, you can take it for what's it worth since it was free :)

2019 white level member

Re: It's back! Synan Says and Top 25

Posted: Sep 7, 2018 4:10 PM

WE'RE # 12 WE'RE #12... sheesh

2019 white level member

Replies: 68  
[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
2794 people have read this post