This discussion came up in a couple threads so let's give it a thread of it's own.

 

In 1A, Fairview has lost 2 games in a row but is still ranked #7 . Hazard is 3-1 but lost big to Fairview, so who should be ranked higher?

 

In 2A, CAL is 2-2 and ranked #4 . New Cath is 1-3 but ranked #7.

 

In 5A, Highlands is 1-3 and still ranked.

 

There are numerous teams in every class that are undefeated and aren't ranked. Is this right? What is more important - wins or strength of schedule or common opponents or head to head? How would you factor in all this information? What takes priority in ranking teams?

None entirely and most all some

The two things I put the most stock in are good wins and bad losses.

 

If you have a great record but don't play anybody who is good, then that doesn't mean a whole lot, and if you play great teams, but don't win any of them, that doesn't do much either.

 

Head to head is definitely important, but I think it gets blown out of proportion. It is almost impossible for rankings to exist where no team is ranked behind a team it defeated. If the overall body of work is very similar, it is a great "tiebreaker" but it can't be a stand alone argument.

Same with common opponents. It can be helpful when teams have very similar resumes, but doesn't dictate an entire body of work.

Body of work, I agree with Rez. 1 game does not a season make, you have to consider all the information available. All of those things posted in the OP are factors.

 

Rankings also are about "what have you done for me lately". A bad loss 4 weeks ago may not be as relevant as what happened this week. Likewise, a bad loss in week 5 may tell us much more than what we thought was a good win in week 1.

 

As a really smart guy we all know and love likes to say, this is more Art than Science.

I picked Head to Head because I believe it is the "Most" important category, but as Rez said it does have flaws.

If I beat you in week 1, there is no doubt that I am better than you in week 2. End of discussion. But the further away from the head to head matchup, the less important it becomes IMO because every team changes along the way (injuries, chemistry, different players stepping up, etc) or you just had a bad game and that's where the other items come into play. It's not an exact science, unless it is like my week 1 example above.

Ranking teams solely on their record does nothing but cause exponentially more upsets.

 

Daviess County is 4-0... should they be ahead of Trinity at 3-1?

I find that when rankings go bad is usually when the mystique around the team and too big of a role. History etc.

 

Highlands for instance right now should in no way be ranked where they are but it is the name itself that keeps them ranked. If it was any other team such as Grant Co who had the same record against the same teams they wouldn't be ranked at all.

Another factor is that this early in the season you sometimes can't tell if a win was a good win or a loss was a bad loss. A win over a perennial power may look good early on but if they go 3-7 and had a down year was it really a good win? Also losing to a team coming off of a losing season (maybe 3-8) may look like bad loss, but that team may end up making a deep run in the playoffs this season making that early season loss to them look much better than it did at the time.

 

It all seems to sort itself out as the season goes along...but even then comparing two teams with equal records with no common opponents is more voodoo than science.

Tough to decide the 'most' important as they are all important to some degree. However, if I have to choose one it's strength of schedule. Large wins or slim losses are not impressive against weak teams. Figuring out which teams are weak and which are strong is part of the season though.

I guess I would fall into the strength of schedule category and believe you also must take into account what classes wins/losses are coming against. For example, Mayfield losing to McCracken should not and will not effect their ranking. I know Mayfield is Mayfield but McCracken is a 6A school while Mayfield has just recently made the move to 2A, so don't think you can penalize them. Another example to look at is Louisville Central who as of late hasn't set the world on fire during the regular season, but year after year they are in BG playing for a state title so to say they should slip in rankings is a little crazy....am i looking at this wrong?

I guess I would fall into the strength of schedule category and believe you also must take into account what classes wins/losses are coming against. For example, Mayfield losing to McCracken should not and will not effect their ranking. I know Mayfield is Mayfield but McCracken is a 6A school while Mayfield has just recently made the move to 2A, so don't think you can penalize them. Another example to look at is Louisville Central who as of late hasn't set the world on fire during the regular season, but year after year they are in BG playing for a state title so to say they should slip in rankings is a little crazy....am i looking at this wrong?

 

You think Mayfield should have remained #1 despite the fact DeSales has played similar 6A teams and defeated them?

I find that when rankings go bad is usually when the mystique around the team and too big of a role. History etc.

 

Highlands for instance right now should in no way be ranked where they are but it is the name itself that keeps them ranked. If it was any other team such as Grant Co who had the same record against the same teams they wouldn't be ranked at all.

 

Good example to show why strength of schedule is the most important factor in my opinion. Actually, I take that back. The most important factor is quality wins. Playing a strong schedule proves nothing if you lose them all. A team needs to get quality wins to prove they are a top team.

 

You say Highlands is ranked because of name. Highlands' three losses are all to top 10 quality 6A teams. Not one team in 5A has a win over a team of that quality. The best win by a team in 5A is Bowling Green's win over Owensboro. And when Bowling Green faced a top 10 6A team they got blasted, just like Highlands. Pulaski County faced a top 10 6A team and got blasted. If those two had played 3 6A top ten opponents, would they also be 1-3 with 3 lopsided losses? Possibly.

 

Highlands is almost surely going to lose again this week facing the same St. X team that crushed Bowling Green. That will make them 1-4. My question to you, and others focused on record is this. Would any team in 5A have 2 wins against the schedule Highlands has played? In my mind, only the top 3 in 5A might be able to get 2 wins against Highlands' schedule. This is why strength of schedule is so important.

 

Let's look at Southwestern. I believe Highlands would be undefeated against Southwestern's schedule. If Highlands played that schedule and was 4-0 they would probably be #1 in the 5A rankings. Same team. Different schedule.

 

The jury is definitely out on Highlands until they get a quality win. But the losses they are taking are against such high level teams it is hard to say how good or bad Highlands is right now. They will likely lose their next two against 2 6A top ten teams. They will enter their game against Dixie Heights with a 1-5 record, and will most likely be a big favorite entering that game because of their strength of schedule.

 

For me, all the factors listed here need to be considered in rankings, but here is how I rank them in order of importance:

 

1. Quality wins

2. Strength of Schedule

3. Won/lost record

4. Head to head if applicable

5. Common opponents

 

My comment to anyone questioning rankings because of a team's record, look at strength of schedule and you will probably see why a team is where they are.

None entirely and most all some

 

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

 

Not all who wander are lost.

Not all who wander are lost.

 

I spent way too much of my college career reading those books over and over.