No. 5 in ESPN's 2021 Pre-Season Poll? Whew!

[Charles Fischer]

Look Oregon fans....we cannot claim lack of respect or being passed over by national media.  While this is nice--I do not want players to get a big head going into the season as I think our defense did this last season.  Is this ranking a good thing?  (Imagine you are an Iowa State fan with most of your team returning and looking at this poll?)

Oregon Ducks football ranked No. 5 nationally in ESPN projections for 2021 by NBC Sports Northwest

[Jon Sousa]

9 minutes ago, Charles Fischer said:

(Imagine you are an Iowa State fan with most of your team returning and looking at this poll?)

Iowa State at 7 is pretty good. They can justify two spots to the Ducks because of the last couple recruiting cycles... I'm sure that's how ESPN was thinking.

"Look Oregon fans....we cannot claim lack of respect or being passed over by national media."

This is what I have been thinking for a while. We may not DESERVE all the respect at times, but the PAC 12 is still POWER 5. There were a total of 5 that's FIVE PAC 12 teams in the top 25. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by Jon Sousa

[Trevor]

I take the rating with a grain of salt... IMHO its more about boosting ratings and viewers and less about true ranking. Its certainly not unrealistic, any team  not Alabama, Clemson, or Ohio have arguments to move them all over the place. Oregon has the players/talent. We've seen glimpses. We've also seen the head scratchers. I'm really hoping things fall together.

On offense Oregon has the WRs, TEs, and RBs. They still have a very young O-Line. They have depth at QB, but who will they pick and long to develop a rhythm? 

On defense, they are loaded. With what's coming in, they should be the best in the PAC-12. I have faith Deruyter, but its still a new system, new names, and new areas of focus. His history shows repeated first year results and our best players is where he excels... the reason for having faith.

Based on last year though (hopefully an outlier) I would expect a ranking between 7 and 12. Toss out last year and include this year's recruits and 5 is about right.

[jrw]

At this point, without better evidence on the field, I feel as if high expectations are a curse.

But then, it's only ESPN.

[UtahDuck]

1 hour ago, Charles Fischer said:

(Imagine you are an Iowa State fan with most of your team returning and looking at this poll?)

 

 

I think you have a few key points contributing to Iowa State's lower ranking.

1. Iowa State is not the top dog in conference and likely never will be. That belongs to Oklahoma, If were to bet on Oregon winning the Pac12 vs ISU winning the BIG12 my money is on Oregon.

2. Recruiting, ISU does more with less but that honestly means they have a cyclical team. they will Surge and fall. They need to recruit better than 55th.

3. While the Fiesta Bowl was Ugly, and oregon performed horribly... I also don't think one game comparison from 2020 is honestly fair. ISU, had both returning Coordinators. a returning starting qb and a longer season. 

With all that said, I wouldn't rank Oregon fifth, I wouldn't even rank them in the top 10. The position of QB is too valuable and with that being a question prior to the season I wouldn't rank them that high. I also hope spring allows our Offensive Line to get better settled and defined. 

[Charles Fischer]

16 minutes ago, UtahDuck said:

The position of QB is too valuable and with that being a question prior to the season I wouldn't rank them that high.

Agreed on both your comments there....

[30Duck]

I'm fine with it. It's a "way too early poll" and as the saying goes, "any publicity is good publicity". I'm much happier seeing Oregon at No. 5, then down at No. 23. I don't know how much players/teams are affected by these rankings. I certainly believe that fans care a lot more about them then do the teams, players and coaches. 

[Ducks4ever]

1 hour ago, 30Duck said:

I'm fine with it. It's a "way too early poll" and as the saying goes, "any publicity is good publicity". I'm much happier seeing Oregon at No. 5, then down at No. 23. I don't know how much players/teams are affected by these rankings. I certainly believe that fans care a lot more about them then do the teams, players and coaches. 

It doesn't matter where you start the season, only where we finish. 

I think we're given this high ranking to boost hype for the OSU matchup. Which will also really suck for us and continue a false narrative about Pac-12/Oregon football if things don't go right that game. There's literally no justification for putting us this high up when we don't even have an established QB yet. We should start in the 10-15 area at best imo. 

[Charles Fischer]

42 minutes ago, Ducks4ever said:

We should start in the 10-15 area at best imo. 

I completely agree; we need to earn it.

[RatherBe]

Bill Connelly’s SP+ is a predictive analytic rating. Historically, it has not been friendly to Oregon and it’s surprising to see. Like the good analytics it’s more accurate than the eye test, but it’s not the gold standard. 
ESPN’s FPI is much better. It is one of the ten or so analytics systems that has consistently beaten Vegas’ formula. If there is one mainstream analytic to keep an eye on that would be it. 

[AnotherOD]

It does look like a pretty simple formula to possibly maximize views to a national audience?:

1. Predicted Best SEC Team

2. Predicted Best ACC Team

3. Predicted Best Big 10 Team

4. Predicted Best Big 12 Team

5. Predicted Best Pac-12 Team

6. Predicted Second Best SEC Team

7. Predicted Second Best Big 12 Team

8. Predicted Second Best ACC Team

9. Predicted Second Best Big 10 Team

I guess the only "upset" would be not having the Second Best Predicted Pac-12 Team (presumably USC) at number 10 and instead having NC (some intern must have screwed that one up).

I would guess the "usual" probably would generate less views nationally - and will wait until closer to the season?

1. Best SEC Team

2. Best ACC Team

3. Best Big 10 Team

4. Second Best SEC Team

5. Best Big 12 Team

6. Third Best SEC Team

7. Notre Dame

8. Second Best ACC Team

9. Second Best Big 10 Team

10. Fourth Best SEC Team

Ok maybe a bit cynical. It actually will be interesting to see Alabama, Clemson, and tOSU all (basically)  breaking in a new starting QBs. All have highly rated next guys, but given how college football sometimes goes, there might be some vulnerability to each in the early part of the season:

Alabama has Miami and @Florida in its first 3, tOSU opens up @Minnesota then Oregon, and Clemson has Georgia in Charlotte NC in their opener.

 

[30Duck]

4 minutes ago, AnotherOD said:

Ok maybe a bit cynical

Maybe, but it's a poll based wholly on speculation and whatever else, to generate a response in February. 

[Haywarduck]

It is a what if poll. What if Oregon beats tOSU? What if Oregon plays up to their talent level. What if Oregon wins the Pac-12 again. You have to have the talent, play competitive teams, and have a decent track record to get into the what if poll, but we have those what if factors.

I will say what if's don't matter one bit. You kind of get into the could have, would have, should have dilemmas when you get the preseason rankings. I actually detest programs that are preseason darlings and end up failing. I guess it is my Brooks era foundational fan mentality.

I would rather have us work our way up and earn a spot based on what is, and what was, as we build a championship program. Throw the what if's into the garbage, along with the preseason hype of players and big games. 

Coach each player up to their potential and most importantly get them playing as a team. Going off of preseason hype is like going to a movie because of a great preview or trailer. Often you have already seen and heard about all the good stuff. What is left is just a let down.

[AnotherOD]

 

Until somebody breaks through (LSU notwithstanding), it probably is hard to argue against just recycling the same teams at the top of college football - as absolutely unappealing (to many) as that might be. Odds must be pretty good taking Alabama, Clemson, and tOSU over the rest of the college football field in 2021? What has it been the last 7 years?

20 Alabama

19 LSU

18 Clemson

17 Alabama

16 Clemson

15 Alabama

14 Ohio State

It wasn't even crazy long ago where we saw a 10 year run without a single repeat champion, and all P5 conferences with at least one.

04 USC

03 LSU

02 Ohio State

01 Miami

00 Oklahoma

99 Florida State

98 Tennessee

97 Michigan

96 Florida

95 Nebraska

Although still "household names" at the top of college football recently, even a Georgia or Oklahoma breakthrough (in 2021) would be encouraging for the sport.

Edited February 11, 2021 by AnotherOD

[30Duck]

45 minutes ago, Haywarduck said:

I actually detest programs that are preseason darlings and end up failing.

Sometimes, but remember that USC is the poster child for preseason darlings.

[Ed O]

6 hours ago, 30Duck said:

Maybe, but it's a poll based wholly on speculation and whatever else, to generate a response in February. 

This is not a poll. It's an algorithm that takes in numbers and generates a ranking. It's something that they use throughout the year, and not just preseason.

From the ESPN article, they give this explanation into what goes into the projections:

1. Returning production. As I wrote last week, I have updated rosters as much as possible to account for transfers, graduation and the announced return of many 2020 seniors. The combination of last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on returning production now make up more than two-thirds of the projections formula.

2. Recent recruiting. Returning production aims to tell us what kind of talent and experience a team is returning. Recruiting rankings inform us of the caliber of the team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. They make up about one-quarter of the projections formula. This piece is determined not only by the most recent recruiting class but also, in diminishing fashion, the last three classes as well.

3. Recent history. Last year's ratings are a huge piece of the puzzle, but using a sliver of information from previous seasons (two to four years ago) gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This is a minor piece of the puzzle, but the projections are better with it than without.

Clearly it's not perfect, but it makes sense. 

And within that framework, Oregon should be ranked highly. We return almost everyone of consequence from last year (other than Demo?) and we've had three straight very strong recruiting classes (and young players should improve more than those who have been in the program for a longer period). We weren't great last year, but we had our moments and given the other two factors should be on the upswing.

[BigDucksFan]

IMO, its a "potential" ranking. Based a lot on hype. 

[30Duck]

6 hours ago, BigDucksFan said:

IMO, its a "potential" ranking. Based a lot on hype. 

Precisely. 

 

10 hours ago, Ed O said:

From the ESPN article, they give this explanation into what goes into the projections:

I agree, After games, preferably 3 or so, it will be a ranking based on performance on the field, not projections of what might happen, 

[Ed O]

9 hours ago, BigDucksFan said:

IMO, its a "potential" ranking. Based a lot on hype. 

I mean. It's mainly math. 

Hype might come out of the math, but it's not like it's an opinion on how many players are returning or the production they had last year. Recruiting classes are opinion, of course, and how the three things are weighed is opinion, but it's not a poll that is just opinion. That was my point