FB: Region 4 fan poll

[smedindy]

I'm giving B-W the benefit of the doubt against Capital. I didn't drop them from my top 25, so I won't here.

But they're on a short short leash.

[wally_wabash]

I think there are some teams (well, two really) that you get a pass for losing to.  Capital is not on that short list.  Losing to Capital at home is definitely not on that list.  The disconnect I see is that Capital only lost to Witt (not sure how high on your list Witt is, but they are obviously on the list) and beat B-W.  B-W has beaten nobody on the list and lost at home to Capital...doesn't Capital have to ahead of B-W if you're ranking any of them?  I can certainly understand these polls are rankings and not standings so there is definitely some subjectivity allowed, but h2h results have to matter.  I have the same beef with Redlands being below North Central in polling as well. 

[smedindy]

No, they don't Wally. They don't have to go above them.

If A beats B and B beats C and C beats A, who gets ranked ahead of who?

B-W is a better team than Capital. But the better team doesn't always win, and I rank based on who the better team is. On that particular day, Capital beat B-W. Maybe there were exigent circumstances? I didn't see the game film, but the turnovers could have been total flukes (Football Outsiders has data that shows that fumble recoveries are luck - not forced fumbles of course, but the recoveries are just random really), bad bounces, bad breaks, bad karma. It's obvious B-W didn't get it done, that day. Another day, they get it done, and I feel 3 times out of 4, they get it done against Capital.

I'm sure that any North Central - Redlands rematch would go to NC 3 times out of 4, maybe 4 out of 5.
 

[wally_wabash]

I guess that's where we differ, which is perfectly fine.  We don't play football games in best of 5 series.  I don't disagree that North Central would beat Redlands three or four times out of five, but they didn't play five times.  They played one time and Redlands won.  Same with Capital and B-W.   I just think that the results that actually happen should carry more weight than the hypothetical results that we might ponder. 

[smedindy]

There aren't a lot of data points to consider. If those games happened later, then it may be different because there's just a lot more of a body of work to consider.

Capital could end the year 7-3, and B-W 8-2. Redlands could be undefeated and North Central just one loss. But if Capital struggles against John Carroll and the 'Berg, and B-W doesn't really impress then I will re-evaluate. Remember, Capital lost to a Witt team that may be 'special'. (Wow, I really typed that...)

Time will tell. I just want more data.

[ExTartanPlayer]

B-W has beaten nobody on the list and lost at home to Capital...doesn't Capital have to ahead of B-W if you're ranking any of them?  I can certainly understand these polls are rankings and not standings so there is definitely some subjectivity allowed, but h2h results have to matter.

Agreed!  This is the same philosophy that Andy Staples, SI.com writer, espouses when ranking his Top 25.  If two teams have relatively equal accomplishments, and one has beaten the other, that team should be ranked higher.

The two teams have equal records.
Capital's loss is to a highly ranked team (Witt) on the road.
B-W's loss is TO CAPITAL at home.
Therefore, Capital deserves to be ranked ahead of B-W.

smeds, I see your general argument - that the "best" team doesn't always win a single game - and I respect that.  As the season goes on, you can make corrections as the results continue to roll in.  If B-W wins their next five games, and Capital loses 1 or 2, then eventually we'll reach a point where B-W's overall body of work outshines Capital's regardless of the H2H result.  But, for now, with an equal body of work thus far, the H2H result should trump your opinion that "B-W is a better team than Capital" IMHO.

*I know this is all in good fun, so don't anyone get their dobber up.  I'm glad you guys are voting on a fan poll.  Just expressing my opinion that, all other things being equal, H2H results should matter more than hypotheticals.

[ExTartanPlayer]

There aren't a lot of data points to consider.
Capital could end the year 7-3, and B-W 8-2...

Sorry, smeds, you posted while I was posting the previous reply.

I think the fact that "there aren't a lot of data points to consider" is exactly why H2H matters more in early-season rankings than in late-season rankings. 

If Capital ends 7-3 and B-W ends 8-2, yes, then you should probably rank B-W ahead of Capital.  But...right now the teams have equal records, and you can't exactly point to Capital's loss as being "bad" (this would be a different argument if Capital had lost to Marietta or Heidelberg, but their loss was a competitive game on the road vs. a consensus Top-15 team).

Consider the following fictional scenario:

Suppose Wabash plays Mount Union in Week 1 and loses, then wins 8 straight.
Suppose Wittenberg opens 9-0, and the teams meet in Week 10 for NCAC glory.
Wabash defeats Witt.
Both teams are now 9-1 and Wabash has a H2H victory.

Who are you ranking higher?

[smedindy]

No, it doesn't. It means head-to-head results could be more due to random chance than anything.

And in your scenario, it all depends on the other results, where people played home / road, and other factors. It's not that simple.

Which is why I like the process! It's harder than it looks to generate votes each week!

[Mr. Ypsi]

There aren't a lot of data points to consider.
Capital could end the year 7-3, and B-W 8-2...

Sorry, smeds, you posted while I was posting the previous reply.

I think the fact that "there aren't a lot of data points to consider" is exactly why H2H matters more in early-season rankings than in late-season rankings. 

If Capital ends 7-3 and B-W ends 8-2, yes, then you should probably rank B-W ahead of Capital.  But...right now the teams have equal records, and you can't exactly point to Capital's loss as being "bad" (this would be a different argument if Capital had lost to Marietta or Heidelberg, but their loss was a competitive game on the road vs. a consensus Top-15 team).

Consider the following fictional scenario:

Suppose Wabash plays Mount Union in Week 1 and loses, then wins 8 straight.
Suppose Wittenberg opens 9-0, and the teams meet in Week 10 for NCAC glory.
Wabash defeats Witt.
Both teams are now 9-1 and Wabash has a H2H victory.

Who are you ranking higher?

In that scenario, I'll have to take DePauw, for getting screwed out of the Monon Bell game!

If you had stuck with 7-1, 8-0, you might have had me (though Wabash/UMU in game one is probably never to be ), but 'bash/Witt is game 9, not 10!

[DPU3619]

Week 5 North Region Fan Poll.  First, a big thank you to Dr. Acula who created a freakin sweet spreadsheet for me that makes my life way easier in adding this up.  I wish I thought of stuff like that myself.  Now, here's the thing with the thing:

1.  Mount Union        60 pts (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
2.  North Central       54 pts (2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
3.  Wabash              46 pts (3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4)
T4. Wittenberg         39 pts (3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6)
T4. Illinois Wesleyan  39 pts (3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5)
6.  Wheaton             31 pts (4, 6, 6, 6, 6, 7)
7.  Adrian                19 pts (7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 9)
8. Franklin               18 pts (7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10)
9. Muskingum           14 pts (6, 8, 9, 9, 9, -)
10. Ohio Northern      7 pts (9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10)

RV Trine                  3 pts (8, -, -, -, -, -)

Corrections Appreciated.  The North Region Fan Poll is voted on by Wes Anderson, wally_wabash, Mr. Ypsi, ADL70, smedindy, & FCGrizzliesGrad.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I know that we just went through this charade last week...but what's the logic for someone with ONU ranked #10 and Muskingum unranked?

Musky defeated ONU 27-7, and it wasn't exactly a "fluky" win (if anything, ONU benefited from the odd breaks of the game, as their only TD came off a Musky fumble in the first five minutes).   That said, Musky was at home, and you expect the home team to hold serve in contests between equal opponents.  Fine.  Still, it is a decisive head-to-head win, so, in order to rank ONU ahead of Musky, presumably they should have some other meritorious accomplishment.

I even understand giving ONU some credit for a close loss to Mount...I generally don't count close losses to the purple powers when doling out rankings as a real "loss."  Let's consider that a push with Musky's H2H win over ONU for the time being.

ONU opened with a 38-20 home win over a 1-3 N.C. Wesleyan team and needed overtime to survive Otterbein at home.  Otterbein isn't exactly a dominant team - with a one-point victory over Gallaudet, a blowout loss to Heidelberg, and a double-OT loss to John Carroll, I'm not sure I'd count that as a real "quality" win for ONU.

Besides the 14-6 loss to UMU in a mudpit, what has ONU done to deserve a ranking over Musky?  I'm asking for some rationale other than "I think ONU would win if they played again."

*Edited to add: Obviously, this whole post will look dumb if Musky goes out and loses to Heidelberg this week, but I've always thought that your poll should reflect the teams' on-field accomplishments/power to this point in the season, not a projection of what will happen in the future.

[wally_wabash]

We are in agreement, ETP.  I think what makes it hard is that we get accustomed to the names that we usually see toward the top of these polls and when a result like like Muskingum 27, ONU 7 happens, some voters can't believe it.  Is Muskingum better than Ohio Northern?  I don't know.  I know they were on the day when they were keeping score and until Muskingum shows through further play this season that that day was a one-off, I can't vote ONU ahead of Muskingum. 

And since I'm talking ONU here, I'll also note that I went back and forth between ONU and Heidelberg as to who to vote #10.  I guess I'm a little guilty of maybe paying too much attention to that result against UMU.  If the Princes beat Musky this week, they'll jump over both Musky and ONU for sure on my ballot.  I'm also watching the other 3-1's from the CCIW.  That stuff will sort itself out as we go along though. 

I think it's telling that the six of us voting in this thing only found 11 teams to vote for in a top 10 poll.  The North Region has really been cannibalizing itself this year. 

[ExTartanPlayer]

I'm fine with leaving ONU at #10, as long as Musky is ranked ahead of them (and the majority of the voters did do this in this admittedly just-for-fun fan poll).  I do think ONU deserves a little credit for the close loss to UMU...just not so much that someone should rank them ahead of an undefeated Musky team that beat them head-to-head.  And if Musky goes 9-1 with a loss to UMU, I will stand by that, even if UMU beats Musky by 50.  If Musky drops 2-3 games, then it becomes a conversation.

I see your point that it's hard to divorce yourself from prior beliefs, i.e. ONU as a perennial contender and Musky as a perennial doormat.  This is even worse in Division I - a lot of times the traditional powerhouses start out ranked and subsequently STAY ranked a lot higher than they ought to be, even after losses (ex. Notre Dame inexplicably starting the season ranked every year en route to another 6-6 season)

To tell the truth, I've seen (and heard) of a lot more egregious/ridiculous votes occurring in the Division I polls from coaches that are either a) seriously biased or b) completely unaware of results on the other side of the country.

http://tucsoncitizen.com/wildcatreport/2009/12/07/those-wacky-college-football-coaches-and-their-poll-voting/

(admittedly, this article focuses on Arizona b/c it's a Tucson paper, but I've heard plenty of similar stores elsewhere)

I also agree, wally, that it's surprising how strong the consensus is about who belongs (only 11 teams even receiving votes) with it still "relatively" early in the season...but you guys are right, it's hard to pick out another deserving team.  Possibilites such as Heidelberg, Capital, and Baldwin-Wallace have a weird score triangle, but we'll know more about them in a week or two since Heidelberg plays Musky and Capital plays ONU this week.  Like you said, the 3-1's from CCIW all have a chance to establish themselves over the next few weeks.

[DPU3619]

Personally, I went to put ONU in at 10 and then realized I didn't have the fish in. Had to go back and rebuild to get Muskingum at 9 and ONU AT 10.

[FCGrizzliesGrad]

Personally, I went to put ONU in at 10 and then realized I didn't have the fish in. Had to go back and rebuild to get Muskingum at 9 and ONU AT 10.

So you originally had a team ranked at least 9th (ahead of ONU at 10th) then to get Muskingum in you put them in 9th and dropped the other team below ONU and out of the poll?