[CTcard]

The thing I hate about Wilner's ranking approach is he says he votes based on how he thinks teams will finish in the rankings, and then he "adjusts" based on season's results. 

Isn't the purpose to rank the teams based on your perception of their quality when you produce your weekly ranking?  I wish someone would ask him to please rank the teams based on how good you think they are now, not where they will finish in 3 months.

The AP, which runs these rankings, does not make clear just what the purpose of the ranking is - at least in fine detail. The voters are free to vote on lots of different possible meanings. 

Wilner says he bases his preseason ranking on where he thinks they will end up, though curiously he seems to base that upon the common wisdom of how rankings work rather than his own expressed logic of how rankings should work. So, like many (most?) pollsters he gives breaks to teams with easy schedules.

Once the season starts Wilner tries to immediately base everything upon results, explicitly discounting teams with easy schedules.

Where I actually give Wilner credit is that he intends that his preseason rankings NOT influence his in-season rankings. At least on that score, on intention, he is better than most.

[CTcard]

The thing I hate about Wilner's ranking approach is he says he votes based on how he thinks teams will finish in the rankings, and then he "adjusts" based on season's results. 

Isn't the purpose to rank the teams based on your perception of their quality when you produce your weekly ranking?  I wish someone would ask him to please rank the teams based on how good you think they are now, not where they will finish in 3 months.

The AP, which runs these rankings, does not make clear just what the purpose of the ranking is - at least in fine detail. The voters are free to vote on lots of different possible meanings. 

Wilner says he bases his preseason ranking on where he thinks they will end up, though curiously he seems to base that upon the common wisdom of how rankings work rather than his own expressed logic of how rankings should work. So, like many (most?) pollsters he gives breaks to teams with easy schedules.

Once the season starts Wilner tries to immediately base everything upon results, explicitly discounting teams with easy schedules.

Where I actually give Wilner credit is that he intends that his preseason rankings NOT influence his in-season rankings. At least on that score, on intention, he is better than most.