Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
People on this board were discounting the '14 season within the year because Auburn, A&M and LSU all ended up "having down seasons". People have posted the same about JoMo's win against #8 Auburn in 2018 before the season was even over.
Personally, I've always gone by the "ranked at time of game" approach - mainly because it helps perceptions about the program. Which sounds better for us? "Jackie's first season in '91 was highlighted by a nationally televised win over #13 Texas", or "Jackie's first season was highlighted by a close, early season battle against a Texas team that wound up 5-6"?

I'm not going to knock the OP for presenting facts - how you use it to make an analysis is up to the reader.
It works both ways. What about 2007 Auburn? Why shouldn't Croom get credit, simply because the voters didn't realize Auburn was top 25 in that particular week? We knew by the end of the year that Auburn was a top 25 team.

Ultimately, I want to credit wins over teams that really were good, not based on how they seemed the time. Also, its important that everybody who beat a particular team that year all get credit or none, rather than some get it and some don't based on scheduling quirks. See the example about us last year being ranked for 1 week.