phipps@fortune.UUCP (11/15/83)
On the assumption that the number 3 team really was better than the number 8 team, a loss by the number 8 team certainly is called for. I think that the primary thing causing the drop in ranking is that the formerly #8 team now has another (or first) loss. A team that loses to the number 1, 2, and 3 teams has THREE LOSSES, even if they deserve to be #4 on the basis of their play, and that is what seems to matter to the pollsters. That three-loss team would never be voted #4. Look at Florida: having a 6-1-1 record and a #9 or #10 ranking before losing to #4 or #5 Georgia by ONE POINT, they dropped to #13 in the following UPI poll, where they are surrounded by other teams with two-loss records. I suspect that a similar fate befell Maryland after losing to Auburn by a TD or so. As Bear Bryant, Vince Dooley, and in years past, Joe Paterno and Woody Hayes and Bo Schembechler (sp?) have demonstrated by perennial high rankings and championships, it's not to a team's advantage to play a schedule containing many strong opponents. Another consideration is when the loss occurs. A late-season loss to an undefeated team will probably place them lower in the rankings than the identical single loss would at the beginning of the season. If Texas or Nebraska is beaten once this year, they may well end up lower than Miami (Fla.), which has not lost since their opening game. -- Clay Phipps