D3boards.com

Division III football (Post Patterns) => General football => Topic started by: short on July 11, 2008, 10:56:29 PM

Title: TOP 25
Post by: short on July 11, 2008, 10:56:29 PM
I for one can't wait for the D3 TOP 25 to come out.  I love D3 Football and enjoy read all about all the teams. I went ahead and come up with my own top 25 again this year.  Please let me know what you think.

1) Mount Union
2) Wesley
3) UWW
4) St Johns
5) MHB
6) St Johns Fishers
7) Muhlenberg
8) W&J
9) Wabash
10) Wartburg
11) North Central
12) Salisbury
13) Bethel
14) Capital
15) UWEC
16) CWRU
17) Central
18) Ithaca
19) Wittenburg
20) Depauw
21) Corland St
22) Wheaton
23) ONU
24) Franklin
25) Randolph-Macon
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on July 12, 2008, 12:45:05 AM
Can we add a "most likely to disappoint" section to the question?  :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: BigtenBadger2006 on July 14, 2008, 09:41:27 AM
Does anyone have any of the preseason college football magazine DIII top 25 polls they can post?

I think I have heard that USA Today and Street & Smith have released there's. I know Lindys usually does one as well.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:14:19 PM
Lindy's Division III Preseason Top 25
1. Mount Union
2. Wisconsin-Whitewater
3. Bethel (Minn.)
4. Mary Hardin-Baylor
5. Washington & Jefferson (Pa.)
6. Wesley (Del.)
7. Wabash (Ind.)
8. Capital
9. St. John's (Minn.)
10. Case Western Reserve

The Sporting New's Division III Preseason Top 25
1. Mount Union
2. Washington & Jefferson
3. Wesley (Del.)
4. Wisconsin-Whitewater
5. St. John's (Minn.)
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor
7. Muhlenberg
8. Wabash
9. Bethel (Minn.)
10. Wisconsin-Eau Claire
11. Wittenberg
12. Case Western Reserve

USA Today's Division III Preseason Top 25
1. Mount Union
2. Wesley (Del.)
3. Wisconsin-Whitewater
4. Wabash
5. St. John's (Minn.)
6. St. John Fisher
7. Capital
8. North Central
9. Muhlenberg
10. Bethel (Minn.)
11. Salisbury
12. Mary Hardin-Baylor
13. Cortland State
14. Central
15. Wisconsin-Eau Claire
16. Case Western Reserve
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:19:14 PM
I think North Central is underrated in all the polls.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on July 14, 2008, 02:21:44 PM
Underrated at No. 8?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:34:03 PM
They will make the quarter finals this year for sure....unless injury kills them
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on July 14, 2008, 02:43:04 PM
Perhaps, but most years only two of Mount Union, Wabash and North Central could make the North finals.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:47:53 PM
I am aware.....and I think I would rank NCC with the edge over Wabash heading into this season
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on July 14, 2008, 07:14:41 PM
Quote from: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:47:53 PM
I am aware.....and I think I would rank NCC with the edge over Wabash heading into this season

Are you being disloyal to your son, or tryin' to sand-bag us! ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: BigtenBadger2006 on July 15, 2008, 10:25:05 AM
thanks Wabash...any chance you post the whole 25s for each?

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on July 15, 2008, 10:27:14 AM
The last named team on each list should tell you where the lists came from.

The USA Today preview was done by our own moderator.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 15, 2008, 10:54:43 AM
Quote from: cwru70 on July 15, 2008, 10:27:14 AM
The last named team on each list should tell you where the lists came from.

The USA Today preview was done by our own moderator.

BINGO
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 15, 2008, 11:00:09 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on July 14, 2008, 07:14:41 PM
Quote from: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:47:53 PM
I am aware.....and I think I would rank NCC with the edge over Wabash heading into this season

Are you being disloyal to your son, or tryin' to sand-bag us! ;D

Recognition only of what has been happening and will continue to happen under Thorne at NCC...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on July 15, 2008, 12:27:03 PM
I wish I knew why so many of these ratings overrate W&J year in and year out. 

And you notice USAT does not.  Wonder why  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on July 15, 2008, 12:37:37 PM
This is the third or fourth year of the USA Today preseason ranking and each one has either been done by me or Keith or a combination of the two.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Knightstalker on July 15, 2008, 12:43:52 PM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 15, 2008, 12:27:03 PM
I wish I knew why so many of these ratings overrate W&J year in and year out. 

And you notice USAT does not.  Wonder why  ;)

According to the OAC board somebody is smoking crack.   ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on July 15, 2008, 01:31:41 PM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 15, 2008, 12:27:03 PM
I wish I knew why so many of these ratings overrate W&J year in and year out.***

And you notice USAT does not.  Wonder why  ;)
*** Maybe it is an obligatory "shout-out" to W&J and to the Commissioner of the NFL.

:D ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 04, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
So I did my top 25 vote.

Let me just say it was uncertainty top to bottom. I voted for two JV teams in my top 3 (more or less), and two teams I didn't even vote for at the end of last year in my top 11.

Obviously the goal is to stick to what you know, and at the same time try to have some prescience about the whole thing, so I like to lean on teams with lots of players back, especially within one unit.

I think with Mount Union bringing only six starters back total, and Whitewater eight, this is one of the more wide-open years at the top in recent memory. Unfortunately a handful of other elite programs were gutted too, leaving voters to slide some names into the top 10-15 that you might not normally see up there.

I definitely revised it a few times and still didn't feel all that great about it. But that's sort of how it is in the preseason, if you care about getting it right, and there are so many unknowns, you really can't hit the mark.

Anyway, let me just say that I did the best I could with what I know now, but I sure would have liked to have read Kickoff '08 before doing that :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: short on August 04, 2008, 10:13:33 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 04, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
So I did my top 25 vote.


Please share your TOP 25 K-Mack, or maybe the two teams that have made their way from Others receiving votes to top 11.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 05, 2008, 01:57:17 AM
Quote from: short on August 04, 2008, 10:13:33 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 04, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
So I did my top 25 vote.

Please share your TOP 25 K-Mack, or maybe the two teams that have made their way from Others receiving votes to top 11.

I'll have to check with the man on that.

But suffice it to say, despite 23 of the 25 teams in the top 25 being teams I voted for, the group's poll and my ballot aren't all that similar.

I think, historically, the group has a better track record than just me though :)

25 heads are better than one!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on August 05, 2008, 06:19:08 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 05, 2008, 01:57:17 AM
Quote from: short on August 04, 2008, 10:13:33 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 04, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
So I did my top 25 vote.

Please share your TOP 25 K-Mack, or maybe the two teams that have made their way from Others receiving votes to top 11.

I'll have to check with the man on that.
...
Save it for an ATN column!   ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on August 05, 2008, 08:03:44 AM
Wow.  There are some definite surprises.  Biggest of which is Bethel at #5. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on August 05, 2008, 10:27:12 AM
Yeah, that's pretty high for me. I'd like to see them have a quarterback first.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: gordonmann on August 05, 2008, 12:16:16 PM
I was surprised SJU ended up so high.

For what it's worth, I had 23 of the 25 teams on my ballot.  I had RPI and Millsaps instead of Mississippi College and Trinity (TX).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on August 05, 2008, 03:00:44 PM
I've got 23 of 25. RPI and Montclair St instead of Miss College and Trinity(TX).  Both Miss College and Trinity are in my top 30. Agree with many of 26-40.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on August 05, 2008, 10:14:46 PM
I hope that pollsters are kind to SJF after their first game, and remember who they are playing.

Good Top 25 +, but of course, it'll be about week 5-6 for it to all shake out.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on August 06, 2008, 02:22:31 AM
Quote from: smedindy on August 05, 2008, 10:14:46 PM
I hope that pollsters are kind to SJF after their first game, and remember who they are playing.

Good Top 25 +, but of course, it'll be about week 5-6 for it to all shake out.
#1 should beat #10.  The voters in the Top 25 have always been very just about match-ups between Top 25's.  If SJF executes as a #10, then there won't be any problem.  :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on August 06, 2008, 09:58:22 AM
Over at Foxsports.com coulmnist Pete Fiutak asserts that the idea for preseason polls "is to ranks [sic] teams on how good they are going into the season and not where they will end up."

He doesn't explaim what  he means by that, but he compares Ohio St. and SoCal and asks which is "the better team RIGHT NOW?."  I guess that means that you don't consider depth as a factor to lessen the impact of injuries or a team's history of being able to replace departed players with back-ups who may not have played much the previous season or who were even redshirted.

What do d3.com's voters think about that statement?     
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on August 06, 2008, 12:56:30 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 04, 2008, 03:59:05 PM
I think with Mount Union bringing only six starters back total, and Whitewater eight, this is one of the more wide-open years at the top in recent memory. Unfortunately a handful of other elite programs were gutted too, leaving voters to slide some names into the top 10-15 that you might not normally see up there.

Even though Mount Union is bringing back a few starters, most of their back ups have probably had the opportunity to see plenty of action on the field.  This is always beneficial for those players to step up into the starting position the next season. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on August 06, 2008, 02:16:00 PM
There are quite a few quality programs replacing a lot of starters with their JV teams from last year.  I think reputation has kept some teams high (perhaps correctly) on the pre-season top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on August 06, 2008, 10:13:26 PM
I actually think that #5 for SJU may be a little low. They are bringing back many quality players, had a good recruiting year, including what look to be a few very good transfers. Time will tell.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 08, 2008, 01:38:29 AM
Quote from: cwru70 on August 06, 2008, 09:58:22 AM
Over at Foxsports.com coulmnist Pete Fiutak asserts that the idea for preseason polls "is to ranks [sic] teams on how good they are going into the season and not where they will end up."

He doesn't explaim what  he means by that, but he compares Ohio St. and SoCal and asks which is "the better team RIGHT NOW?."  I guess that means that you don't consider depth as a factor to lessen the impact of injuries or a team's history of being able to replace departed players with back-ups who may not have played much the previous season or who were even redshirted.

What do d3.com's voters think about that statement?     

That's funny, that's exactly how I am.

What it means in our context is if you have a team with six starters back and a team with eight, it's hard to put faith in them right now. There's no doubt in my mind Mount Union or Whitewater could end the season as champion -- they might be starting off with virtual JV teams, but recruiting off three straight Stagg Bowls, and having five extra weeks of practice per year. I had to consider whether one of those teams right now at this moment was better than the playoff teams returning what they return; Voters have to consider whether one of those returning a handful of all-Americans might be better right now than the UWW and MUC who are going to need time to jell and develop.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 08, 2008, 08:37:22 AM
Quote from: retagent on August 06, 2008, 10:13:26 PM
I actually think that #5 for SJU may be a little low.

I object, your honor.

Joking aside, having seen them play last season, having seen what the Johnnies bring back in terms of returning starters, and considering they're not even the most accomplished team in their own conference based on the season that just passed, I fail to see why the Johnnies would deserve to be ranked fourth or higher.

Maybe this is another good example of the question that was just asked. Certainly there's the possibility that the Johnnies recruited really well and will be better off without a 10,000-yard quarterback, etc., but I don't know if it's fair to expect voters to bank on that kind of stuff right now. I think we'd like to see it in action some.

You did say "time will tell," and it most certainly will, that's the fun of the season. However, the fun of the message boards in August isn't agreeing to disagree, so fire away!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on August 08, 2008, 04:24:36 PM
I don't have a strong disagreement with you K-Mack, but by that same reasoning, Mt Union, and certainly UWW are subject to downgrading. I'm going a lot on what those who have shown themselves to be knowledgeable on the MIACCPP, and news releases are revealing.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Jonny Utah on August 08, 2008, 04:42:09 PM
Is there anyone in here who thinks Mount Union would beat W-Whitwater 9/10 times last season?  Im not saying I do, but I was just wondering....
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on August 08, 2008, 05:03:35 PM
Quote from: Jonny Utah on August 08, 2008, 04:42:09 PM
Is there anyone in here who thinks Mount Union would beat W-Whitwater 9/10 times last season?  Im not saying I do, but I was just wondering....

I MIGHT go 6 or 7 of 10, but no way would I go 9/10. :P
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on August 08, 2008, 07:29:18 PM
And I wonder if I'll be alive for the year when Mt. Union doesn't start off number 1  :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on August 08, 2008, 08:52:01 PM
Quote from: pg04 on August 08, 2008, 07:29:18 PM
And I wonder if I'll be alive for the year when Mt. Union doesn't start off number 1  :D

It WILL happen some day - even they haven't matched Augie's fourpeat (though their overall dominance has long since put Augie in the shadows), and the Vikings are now just another good, not great, team in the CCIW. 

It will be interesting to see if they can outlast the tenure of LK (and the rest of d3 hopes LK doesn't think he is Gagliardi or Paterno! :D)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on August 08, 2008, 09:53:19 PM
Quote from: Jonny Utah on August 08, 2008, 04:42:09 PM
Is there anyone in here who thinks Mount Union would beat W-Whitwater 9/10 times last season?  Im not saying I do, but I was just wondering....

Sometimes destiny is just that... it was UWW's time.  I'd take UWW for 5 out of 10 against Mount last year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: gordonmann on August 08, 2008, 09:57:16 PM
QuoteAnd I wonder if I'll be alive for the year when Mt. Union doesn't start off number 1

You were alive in 2005 (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2005/week-0), right? :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on August 09, 2008, 11:25:25 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on August 08, 2008, 09:57:16 PM
QuoteAnd I wonder if I'll be alive for the year when Mt. Union doesn't start off number 1

You were alive in 2005 (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2005/week-0), right? :)


Nope, that was the year I was cryogenically frozen.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 11, 2008, 11:35:10 PM
Quote from: retagent on August 08, 2008, 04:24:36 PM
I don't have a strong disagreement with you K-Mack, but by that same reasoning, Mt Union, and certainly UWW are subject to downgrading. I'm going a lot on what those who have shown themselves to be knowledgeable on the MIACCPP, and news releases are revealing.

I actually think you're right.

But one thing they do have going for them, which bumps them up in a D3 poll the way it wouldn't in a D1 poll, is having played in three consecutive Stagg Bowls. Not only are they benefitting from the obvious recruiting advantages of playing on TV and in a championship game for three consecutive seasons, but their younger players have the benefit of as many as 15 additional weeks of practice and/or games.

So while I tend to look at experience returning as a major factor in the preseason polls, the idea that a Mount Union rising junior who had been on the playoff roster twice has 30 weeks/games of experience, the same experience as a rising senior on a perfectly good team which has never made the playoffs, or about the same as a team which has played 31 or 32 games in that span.

Certainly there are other teams who have gained significantly from all the extra weeks of practice per the playoffs over the past three years (Wesley and UMHB come to mind first), and certainly not all their young players were on the playoff roster each time.

However, I think you have to factor that in some when looking at those two teams in particular, offsetting the complete lack of starting experience. Also, we might be getting a little abstract if I go this far, but having championship expectations in your program I bet does wonders for getting the young players on board and getting them to buy into a workmanlike attitude.

For Kehres (and probably Gagliardi too) it's established, their job is just to maintain it. For Leipold, he's also got to keep the ball rolling in that UWW program, lest another WIAC program strike while they're "weak."
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 11, 2008, 11:38:51 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on August 08, 2008, 05:03:35 PM
Quote from: Jonny Utah on August 08, 2008, 04:42:09 PM
Is there anyone in here who thinks Mount Union would beat W-Whitwater 9/10 times last season?  Im not saying I do, but I was just wondering....

I MIGHT go 6 or 7 of 10, but no way would I go 9/10. :P

Yeah, I've seen a lot of upsets where you say "no way that team beats that other team in that way again," but I thought all three UWW-MUC matchups were in the 6/10 range either way. Neither team blew the other off the field, although the first year MUC did have a 28-7 lead. But in the same way the replay overturn/UWW goal-line stand was a big play last year, the Pete Schmitt not TD (via replay) before the half in the first Stagg Bowl kept that from being 14-14 at the break.

I think every Stagg Bowl I've seen since MUC-Trinity has been a hell of a matchup.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on August 11, 2008, 11:43:27 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 11, 2008, 11:38:51 PM

I think every Stagg Bowl I've seen since MUC-Trinity has been a hell of a matchup.
I agree.   Don't you wish that Trinity had had their QB!   :P
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on August 12, 2008, 12:08:38 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on August 11, 2008, 11:43:27 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on August 11, 2008, 11:38:51 PM

I think every Stagg Bowl I've seen since MUC-Trinity has been a hell of a matchup.
I agree.   Don't you wish that Trinity had had their QB!   :P

Yes. Would've liked to see Roy Hampton play that day. But it was exponentially more painful for him than it was for me to watch, so I try not to complain.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on September 08, 2008, 03:40:21 PM
Gotta love early polling.

Preseason #9 Central tosses a 41-0 shutout of Lakeland
Gets leapfrogged by idle Wabash in a walkover against the always tough "Open Date"

Similarly, PS#6 St. Johns scores 2-touchdown win over East Texas Baptist and gets jumped over by PS#7 Capital as a result of the Crusaders' 3-score win over Adrian...

Not to mention PS#20 Trinity's 30-point win over McMurry and the Tigers drop to 22 in the new poll...

Gotta love early polling, right Mssrs. Obama & McCain?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 08, 2008, 03:43:10 PM
::shrug:: I'll take any poll of ours over any D-III poll produced by anyone else, any week of the year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 08, 2008, 04:06:43 PM
Quote from: Bob.Gregg on September 08, 2008, 03:40:21 PM
Gotta love early polling.

Preseason #9 Central tosses a 41-0 shutout of Lakeland
Gets leapfrogged by idle Wabash in a walkover against the always tough "Open Date"

Similarly, PS#6 St. Johns scores 2-touchdown win over East Texas Baptist and gets jumped over by PS#7 Capital as a result of the Crusaders' 3-score win over Adrian...

Not to mention PS#20 Trinity's 30-point win over McMurry and the Tigers drop to 22 in the new poll...

Gotta love early polling, right Mssrs. Obama & McCain?
Pre-season #19 thru #24 was separated by only 27 votes (basically one slot).

Trinity lost 6 votes (from 131 to 125) because the voters thought that they should have beaten McMurry by more.  Even if they had kept those 6 votes, they still would have only slotted at #22.

If McMurry does better than 2-8 this year, then we will know that TU beat a different team.  Improving on 2-8 may be hard this year in the ASC.

Mississippi College was the only team that drastically dropped in the first weekend!

The vote total between #18 and #25 is only 59 points.  Ordinarily, in the "Perfect Top 25", it should be 175 points!
 
It is still too early for me.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on September 08, 2008, 04:47:50 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 08, 2008, 04:06:43 PM
It is still too early for me.

Ralph, THAT was my point exactly.

Pat, wasn't impuning THE only reputable D3 poll (and everything else) in any way.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: gordonmann on September 08, 2008, 07:29:58 PM
Bob:

Keep in mind this is the first time individual voters can react to the poll at large and adjust their ballots.  Perhaps voters had a team slotted considerably higher or lower than the poll on the whole and reconsidered when they saw where everyone else had them.  I did that with UW-Eau Claire.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 09, 2008, 03:01:06 AM
Well Bob has a right to be asking questions ... at least he's doing it in the right place.

two things.

First, to second what Gordon said, a lot has happened since the preseason poll and this week, and while game results primarily should affect the poll, there were things I read in Kickoff that affected my opinions. That information wasn't available to me or any other voter when we did the poll in early(?) August.

Second, I tried not to penalize Wesley for getting its game canceled, however I did end up penalizing its opponent, Christopher Newport, which I had the very bottom of my top 25, because I felt two teams I had on the fringe but didn't put on my preseason ballot played their way into the top 25, and even though CNU didn't play at all, and technically should not have been penalized, with the added data I now felt those teams were better and it bumped CNU off my ballot. So weird things can happen even to idle teams.

Oh, and third ... if the three teams you mentioned really had any gripe about their poll movement (I'm sure they didn't, it's just us) maybe they should have scheduled tougher opponents in Week 1. I wouldn't have a problem with a voter who said he learned more about the caliber of St. John Fisher getting beaten at Mount Union than he did about Trinity shellacking McMurry. Maybe that's an extreme example, but you get the picture, no?

Just some things to think about and discuss.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2008, 01:58:36 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 09, 2008, 03:01:06 AM
Well Bob has a right to be asking questions ... at least he's doing it in the right place.

two things.

First, to second what Gordon said, a lot has happened since the preseason poll and this week, and while game results primarily should affect the poll, there were things I read in Kickoff that affected my opinions. That information wasn't available to me or any other voter when we did the poll in early(?) August.

Second, I tried not to penalize Wesley for getting its game canceled, however I did end up penalizing its opponent, Christopher Newport, which I had the very bottom of my top 25, because I felt two teams I had on the fringe but didn't put on my preseason ballot played their way into the top 25, and even though CNU didn't play at all, and technically should not have been penalized, with the added data I now felt those teams were better and it bumped CNU off my ballot. So weird things can happen even to idle teams.

Oh, and third ... if the three teams you mentioned really had any gripe about their poll movement (I'm sure they didn't, it's just us) maybe they should have scheduled tougher opponents in Week 1. I wouldn't have a problem with a voter who said he learned more about the caliber of St. John Fisher getting beaten at Mount Union than he did about Trinity shellacking McMurry. Maybe that's an extreme example, but you get the picture, no?

Just some things to think about and discuss.

Could this be a trap by K-Mack?  I will bite.  How do you schedule a tougher opponent that a Bye?  One of the three teams mentioned played a game (Central) and got leap frogged by Wabash.  Now having said this I was shocked that Central was in the top ten to begin with.  (I have no problem with the current ranking) I agree that Lakeland is not a powerhouse  playoff caliber team but neither is the dreaded bye team.  You mentioned scheduling.  It is not really easy to schedule teams when you start to have some success.  I have heard rumors from others and none that are directly connected to Central but seems some of the opponents that we have had in the past years would not play us any more.  You have to take the teams that are willing to play you.  So IMHO your comment about scheduling seems to not account for this factor.   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2008, 02:16:06 PM
I think the factors he references under "first" are what apply most to Central.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2008, 03:31:53 PM
That might be.  A team with only a few starters back are an unknown.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 09, 2008, 08:03:15 PM
Central's position on my ballot (if they were/are even on it) actually improved with the win over Lakeland, and it's true, teams known as traditionally strong programs sometimes have trouble scheduling. If you've been kicking some team's butt for several years and they manned up to play you then but got tired of it, hard to get mad at them, don't you think? Maybe other teams of a similar caliber should be filling that slot. Not saying it's easy, but you look at Ohio Northern playing North Central this week or St. John Fisher going to Mount Union or Hardin-Simmons and La Crosse. It can be done.

I don't know why Wabash leapfrogged Central in particular, but the point remains ... voters know a lot more about these teams than they did when the preseason vote was taken. In theory you'd think Week 1 was all that matters, but unknowns becoming knowns in camp, information disseminated through Kickoff AND Week 1 performance might all be factors. And even within just Week 1 alone, voters' opinions can change on things like quality of competition (regardless of why you couldn't get a top opponent) not just final score.

Oh, and everything's a trap designed to foster discussion. You should know that by now. I think we all learn from each other.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2008, 08:30:59 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 09, 2008, 08:03:15 PM
Central's position on my ballot (if they were/are even on it) actually improved with the win over Lakeland, and it's true, teams known as traditionally strong programs sometimes have trouble scheduling. If you've been kicking some team's butt for several years and they manned up to play you then but got tired of it, hard to get mad at them, don't you think? Maybe other teams of a similar caliber should be filling that slot. Not saying it's easy, but you look at Ohio Northern playing North Central this week or St. John Fisher going to Mount Union or Hardin-Simmons and La Crosse. It can be done.

I don't know why Wabash leapfrogged Central in particular, but the point remains ... voters know a lot more about these teams than they did when the preseason vote was taken. In theory you'd think Week 1 was all that matters, but unknowns becoming knowns in camp, information disseminated through Kickoff AND Week 1 performance might all be factors. And even within just Week 1 alone, voters' opinions can change on things like quality of competition (regardless of why you couldn't get a top opponent) not just final score.

Oh, and everything's a trap designed to foster discussion. You should know that by now. I think we all learn from each other.


Your points are all on target as usual.  The one thing that was not addressed is Wabash having a bye and moving up.  I think that voters after reading the kick off addition may have more info and yes that might infleuence decisions after week one but I would think the on the field results would be taken into account.  Since Wabash did not play they really have only a list of players that showed up for camp and not game results.  Just curious on how voters can say that Wabash is better than they expected as they have not even strapped it up yet.  They moved up 43 points or about 1.5 places on each voters ballots.  Central on the other hand shut out a team and they hadn't done that for over a year.  I know the competition was not great but We didn't shut out Hope or ST Thomas last year in non conference games either.  If voters wanted a 60 point showing I doubt that they ever get that out of Central at least not a home game.  Central substituted early and really after the first drive of the second half almost ran the ball exclusively.  In the 4th qtr Lakeland was loading it up and didn't really shut us down.  Central loses 7 points so they really didn't move all that much.  That is not even .25 per voter.  So the question isn't really with Central performance the point totals show or at least that is how I read it.  How does a team improve two spots by not playing a game is my question.  I mean as a voter how does it happen.  The only team that lost was SJF against MUC I can understand saying ok maybe they didn't belong there and Wabash maybe is better after the showing (not saying Wabash would have done better against MUC but understandable that they move down. Thats 25 point for Wabash 1 from every voter.  There are still 35 points left to go for Wabashes leap with out a down of football to go on.  If you can make sense out of it I am willing to listen and there could be logical reasons.  I am not trying to beat up any voter just trying to get educated.  K-Mack you and Pat always have solid answers and I think your polls are the best because you guys take the time and you worry more about getting things right than trying to placate people.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2008, 08:45:37 PM
Quote from: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2008, 08:30:59 PM
Your points are all on target as usual.  The one thing that was not addressed is Wabash having a bye and moving up. 

Well, anytime someone moves down, someone else has to move up. Just because Wabash didn't play doesn't mean that voters couldn't have become more confident in them based on Kickoff or less confident in someone around Wabash.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 09, 2008, 08:49:33 PM
Dutchfan, I think that Wabash picked up the SJF vote.  With MUC/JCU and the OAC having been moved east for a couple of playoffs this decade, (or the eastern half of the North Region drawing from western NY), I think that Wabash got slotted in as the third best team in that part of the country, as strange as it seems,  filling SJF's slot [sic].

I think that the West Region may have taken a minor hit at the same time.  ETBU's game versus SJU and HSU's game versus UW-LAX boosted the ASC and did not help the West.  I think that those two games allowed the 1.5 position jump by Wabash.

I am glad to see your analysis actually looking at total votes and not the ordinal ranking.  :)

(Wow, those Central fans are just chomping at the bits to redeem that 2007 Regional Finals loss!   :)   ;)  )
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2008, 09:39:49 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 09, 2008, 08:49:33 PM
Dutchfan, I think that Wabash picked up the SJF vote.  With MUC/JCU and the OAC having been moved east for a couple of playoffs this decade, (or the eastern half of the North Region drawing from western NY), I think that Wabash got slotted in as the third best team in that part of the country, as strange as it seems,  filling SJF's slot [sic].

I think that the West Region may have taken a minor hit at the same time.  ETBU's game versus SJU and HSU's game versus UW-LAX boosted the ASC and did not help the West.  I think that those two games allowed the 1.5 position jump by Wabash.

I am glad to see your analysis actually looking at total votes and not the ordinal ranking.  :)

(Wow, those Central fans are just chomping at the bits to redeem that 2007 Regional Finals loss!   :)   ;)  )

Not really.  I think that any team that gets jumped in this situation I would be asking about.  It is not just Central.  I am not secure in the fact that after our losses to graduation we should be this high.  Having said that it is early and some one has to be.  The huge test is in two weeks for the Dutch that will clear many things up for the voters and myself after the Wartburg game.  I saw that SJF lost 95 points yes 65 points went to Wabash or you can deduce that a portion of them had to.  One thing I have drawn from this (and I am not a math major but I can add and do some analysis) there must be a wide range of where the voters have teams outside maybe 1-3. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 09, 2008, 11:52:47 PM
Quote from: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2008, 09:39:49 PMI am not secure in the fact that after our losses to graduation we should be this high.

If it makes you feel any better, neither am I.  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on September 10, 2008, 12:12:06 PM
In the CCIW pickem's we have a good bonus question for this weeks games.

"Who will be ranked higher in the D3.com poll after this weeks games? #5 Bethel, #15 NCC, #16 ONU or #17 Wheaton. Of course it depends on who you think will win but it poses a number of interesting questions, not all of which are tied to the results of these games.

There will be extra pressure on the voters to "get it right" this week!!  ;D 8)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 20, 2008, 04:54:05 PM
Look at the "upsets"!

Wartburg beat Central 19-17.

SJU fell to the Cobbers!

Carleton beat Bethel!



Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 21, 2008, 01:45:21 AM
To whom it may interest:

This is a discussion pulled from the Empire 8 board mid-week and something I felt like moving here to loop in more people beyond one conference, since it's largely a philosophical discussion.

And as we all can agree on in D3, polls are just polls, or an accurate an approximation as possible of who the most accomplished 25 teams are. I am glad they do not have a hand in the playoffs, I agonize over my weekly ballots enough as it is.

Quote from: fisheralum91 on September 18, 2008, 12:55:14 PM
Quote from: Bombers798891 on September 18, 2008, 12:49:26 PM
Quote from: fisheralum91 on September 18, 2008, 12:19:26 PM
did anybody read keith's around the nation piece this week?
gave a little slam to fisher about why "this Year" 's team was rated so high.
well keith---it is only the second game of the season for everybody and all teams are trying to get themselves together.
Will they live up to the ranking---as you said it will determine itself in the coming weeks--- but why not throw a few barbs in other directions.
not trying to complain- but that barb could be said about anybody--------well minus MUC

I guess I didn't read it like that. I've always thought that polls should be put out no earlier than after the 4th week of the season. Obviously, Fisher is talented, but, much like many other teams, I think much of the rankings are based of of last season, which is, of course, irrelevant.

I think the reason he brought up Fisher specifically, is because his ranking for them is much lower than

A) Other rankings
B) Many people's general belief on Fisher

And so he wrote that line specifically as a pre-emptive answer to the question "Why is Fisher not in the Top 25 when they're ranked in the Top 15 in the .com poll and three of their last four losses have been to Mt. Union?"

Early season  Top 25 rankings are pointless for two reasons

1) It's too early to get a feel on anyone
2) Rankings don't determine playoff status anyway

SJF will be there when the season ends (Or, more specifically, when Hartwick, Ithaca and Sailsbury have come through) so I wouldn't worry about "barbs" being thrown out

bombers--- i understand what you are saying.
however the same could be said about many other teams- thats all

ddnt mean to look too much into it----i like seeing fisher named in a national conversation-- just want it all roses!

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 18, 2008, 01:09:53 PM
I'm not going to officially speak for Keith on this because I don't have nearly enough knowledge to do so, but I think you can also make a distinction as follows: when he says "this year's St. John Fisher team" it's not only what the players on the field have done in 2008 but it may also encompass what the 2008 players have done in previous years.

In the grand scheme of things, yes, not many teams have accomplished anything in 2008 aside from MUC, UWW, UMHB, etc. But every team has players from 2007 and earlier on it. What did those players accomplish in 2007 and earlier, or, how much did they contribute to the team's earlier success? In the preseason, that's what we have to go on -- who's back and what have they done? If Keith doesn't feel the players on this year's team have shown him much then that may be why he said what he said.

I'll flag him down for you and see if he has time to come by and elaborate.

Quote from: realistic on September 18, 2008, 01:37:03 PM
Quote from: fisheralum91 on September 18, 2008, 01:25:28 PM
again--Pat im not trying to make a big deal out of this---but again many teams havent shown much and have had personnell changes----just saw the alma mater there and cringed.
thats all
keith isnt out of bounds---nor am i

I think you could probably take it the other way too though.  He needed an example of a team who maybe has hit a level he's looking for yet, and used SJFC as an example not to slam them but because people in Texas, Califfornia, Oregon, Iowa, etc would recognize their success in the past few seasons on a national level.

Quote from: fisheralum91 on September 18, 2008, 01:41:13 PM
agreed realistic.

OK,
So you guys hit on a couple of things, one being a pre-emptive note to why is SJF not yet on my particular ballot when most everyone else clearly has them pretty high. Also, in context with what I wrote about North Central, Millsaps and St. John's, it's meant to show the range of variation in early season ballots.

Specifically with St. John Fisher, it goes back to my style of preseason voting. I try to make my first ballot more than just a rehash of last season's playoff results and/or top 25, and that involves some projecting. I try to have a reason, any reason, to slot teams where I slot them. In the preseason that involves quite a bit of leaning on the number of returning starters and the significance of said starters.

In the preseason, voters have access to a spreadsheet that breaks down, among many other things, returning starters by position. The numbers on SJF were 4 offense/5 defense/2 specialists at that point, though it later ballooned to 7/7 by the time kickoff was published, which is quite the discrepancy. But the first time we voted between kickoff being released (after the preseason poll) was following the Week 1 games. So by then I'm going less of the returning starter data and more off of a 33-3 loss in Week 1.

Obviously they played Mount Union so you can't read too far into the loss itself, but 33-17 would've been a lot more impressive than 33-3, or 10-3 in the fourth and it got out of hand late to be 33. But it wasn't that, it was 33-0 in the third.

So granted a small sample size, but not anything that would vault SJF into the top 25 if I didn't already have them there based on my preseason vote. I didn't drop them either though. And the Week 2 result was just enough to keep them where they were.

I think with the games they have coming up, that's when we'll get the clarity on SJF and in the meantime it's not wise to push them too far up or down unless I had reason to downgrade a bunch of teams I was less impressed with or vice versa.

So it's sort of a wait-and-see for me until I get a reason to get excited about this year's team.

Perhaps if the original vote of keeping them on the fringe was based off the 4/5 number and not 7/7 I should reconsider it entirely, however what's happened since then hasn't exactly convinced me that mid-20s isn't the right spot for them right now.

So that's my story with that.

As for the logic of leaning heavily on number of returning starters and also key starters lost, I didn't rank Central in the first poll either, as they lost a star QB and RB (kind of like SJF) and a lot of key players. St. John's lost a star QB and I had them in the teeens when a lot of people have them in the single digits.

After today I look really smart for doing that, but that logic is also the same logic that had me placing Wesley and Missisippi College way high (many starters back, star QB in the Choctaws' case, 5 A-As in the wolverines' case, I believe).

So no system is really foolproof because the results are going to mess with your ballot one way or another.

But if you want to discuss the validity of the logic, I am willing to listen.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on September 21, 2008, 11:19:34 AM
It's pretty much a crapshoot, especially this early in the season. Then there's matchups and rivalries. The Concordia victory over St John's is a good case in point. Surely the Johnnies will drop in the polls, as well they should, but these two teams have regularly played tough, close games - last year being the exception. SJU outgained the Cobbers 307 - 183 and otherwise won the statistical battle, except for turnovers and otherwise uncharacteristic sloppy play. The unsettled situation at QB also contriutes to the inconsistency, and makes it more difficult to tell what SJU will be in a few weeks. Time will tell, and it looks like an interesting year in the West, and from what little I've seen pretty much all over. It also makes for an interesting discussion about rankings, which may be the point of having ratings in the first place.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 21, 2008, 02:04:38 PM
As part of the South Region Fan Poll (and borrowing from the East Region and continuing Matt Barnhart's tradition), I have listed the votes, so the fans can see where the voters have voted.  It would be cumbersome to do all 25 in the Top 25, but it would give us an idea of the breadth of support that a team might have.

As you look at last week's South Region, the big question was, "who's 3rd?"  We had 4 teams within 6 votes of each other.

I am sure that that degree of introspection goes into ".com Top 25" as well and we can see how this week's South Region Poll "shakes out".

I agree that it is early, but Fans want to see Polls. 

The amazing thing that I can take from this early season is that Pool C appears to be wide open.  From a Pool C perspective, the MIAC and IIAC are wide open.  The Centennial looks strong.  HSU has a chance at A or C. What's happening in the CCIW and OAC.  Is the bigger NJAC morelikely to be a 2 Pool C bid conference?  Trinity-Millsaps looks like a Pool A-C game.  I think that we must pencil in two Pool C's who have lost their Pool A bids to Cinderellas. 

The early message, once again, is "Leave not doubt".
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 21, 2008, 10:04:08 PM
Agreed ret and Ralph.

Regarding the newest poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2008/week-3), Ralph, isn't this where you point out the difference between, say, No. 24 and 25 by highlighting the difference in points?

The whole SJF spiel is less relevant now because they move into the top 25 (mine anyway) pretty easily this week given who lost.

I think Willamette gets help by association with Concordia-Moorhead (Bearcats beat Cobbers in Week 1)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 21, 2008, 11:02:28 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 21, 2008, 10:04:08 PM
...
Regarding the newest poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2008/week-3), Ralph, isn't this where you point out the difference between, say, No. 24 and 25 by highlighting the difference in points?

The whole SJF spiel is less relevant now because they move into the top 25 (mine anyway) pretty easily this week given who lost.

I think Willamette gets help by association with Concordia-Moorhead (Bearcats beat Cobbers in Week 1)
Look how close the teams cluster in the bottom half of the poll!

10  EauClaire  349 votes
11 -SJF            340 votes ("Perfect #12 is 350 votes in the Perfect Top 25).



12 Wesley 289     
13 W&J      274       (275 Votes is a perfect #15)


14  Franklin  248    (250 Votes is a perfect #16)
15  CWRU     235
16  Ithaca     224    (225 Votes is a perfect #17)


17  Cortland   205  (200 Votes is a perfect #18)
18  SJU           196
19  Millsaps     185
20  Redlands   176  175 Votes is perfect #19)


21  Trinity        156  (150 Votes is a "perfect #20")
22  Wartburg   144
23 Central       129
24  HSU           122  (125 votes is "perfect #21")

This tells me that the voters have a good idea about the 11 teams who should be ranked in the 7 slots at #15 thru #21.

We will now watch the best teams solidify their positions.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Foss on September 21, 2008, 11:27:54 PM
Random note: Willamette's 38 points is the lowest number of points for any team ranked in the top 25 since the D3football.com poll's inception.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 21, 2008, 11:46:49 PM
Ah hah, someone read our news release. :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Foss on September 22, 2008, 12:00:58 AM
Pat, believe it or not I haven't yet. Embarrassing to say but I had too much time on my hands tonight and looked through all the previous polls. Which release are you referring to? Wish I would have read it first, would have saved me a lot of time.  :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2008, 12:05:00 AM
It's what I send to the schools, papers and wire services. I figured you'd read it on someone's site, sorry.

All the football polls are in the database era so I was just able to pull out all the No. 25s and sort them by fewest to most points.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:12:10 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2008, 12:05:00 AM
It's what I send to the schools, papers and wire services. I figured you'd read it on someone's site, sorry.

All the football polls are in the database era so I was just able to pull out all the No. 25s and sort them by fewest to most points.

Which leads to the inevitable question: what's the greatest number of points it has ever taken to crack the top 25? ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:28:11 AM
The only real 'head scratcher' I saw this week was Wabash 'monkey-stomping' Chicago, yet getting passed by two teams.  Salisbury was not a shock, since their victim, Christopher Newport, had received 36 points in the previous poll, but I was quite surprised that Wheaton also jumped them.  Wheaton did a number on CUW, but their big jump the previous week was for beating then-#5 Bethel, which now seems a bit less impressive than it did then.  Did voters receive tape of the Wabash/Wheaton scrimmage, and the Thunder 'won'? ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2008, 12:38:17 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:12:10 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2008, 12:05:00 AM
It's what I send to the schools, papers and wire services. I figured you'd read it on someone's site, sorry.

All the football polls are in the database era so I was just able to pull out all the No. 25s and sort them by fewest to most points.

Which leads to the inevitable question: what's the greatest number of points it has ever taken to crack the top 25? ;)

Not surprisingly, since there is little consensus in July, it's a preseason poll, where it would've taken 128 to match Johns Hopkins at 25 in 2004. Among regular season polls it's the 103 that JHU got the next week.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 01:04:17 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:28:11 AM
The only real 'head scratcher' I saw this week was Wabash 'monkey-stomping' Chicago, yet getting passed by two teams.  Salisbury was not a shock, since their victim, Christopher Newport, had received 36 points in the previous poll, but I was quite surprised that Wheaton also jumped them.  Wheaton did a number on CUW, but their big jump the previous week was for beating then-#5 Bethel, which now seems a bit less impressive than it did then.  Did voters receive tape of the Wabash/Wheaton scrimmage, and the Thunder 'won'? ;D
Man, those Wheaties get you every time.

It's just not fair!   :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:44:57 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 01:04:17 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:28:11 AM
The only real 'head scratcher' I saw this week was Wabash 'monkey-stomping' Chicago, yet getting passed by two teams.  Salisbury was not a shock, since their victim, Christopher Newport, had received 36 points in the previous poll, but I was quite surprised that Wheaton also jumped them.  Wheaton did a number on CUW, but their big jump the previous week was for beating then-#5 Bethel, which now seems a bit less impressive than it did then.  Did voters receive tape of the Wabash/Wheaton scrimmage, and the Thunder 'won'? ;D
Man, those Wheaties get you every time.

It's just not fair!   :D

Not that I'm complaining, mind you - just mystified. :D

I haven't gotten around to checking all the past polls yet, but I'm reasonably sure this is the first time the CCIW has had two top ten teams at the same time.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on September 22, 2008, 01:02:15 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:44:57 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 01:04:17 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:28:11 AM
The only real 'head scratcher' I saw this week was Wabash 'monkey-stomping' Chicago, yet getting passed by two teams.  Salisbury was not a shock, since their victim, Christopher Newport, had received 36 points in the previous poll, but I was quite surprised that Wheaton also jumped them.  Wheaton did a number on CUW, but their big jump the previous week was for beating then-#5 Bethel, which now seems a bit less impressive than it did then.  Did voters receive tape of the Wabash/Wheaton scrimmage, and the Thunder 'won'? ;D
Man, those Wheaties get you every time.

It's just not fair!   :D

Not that I'm complaining, mind you - just mystified. :D

I haven't gotten around to checking all the past polls yet, but I'm reasonably sure this is the first time the CCIW has had two top ten teams at the same time.

You shouldn't be mystified. There is no secret sauce here. although maybe if you post this on 6 more boards you may find something!  ;D

btw, since the d3 poll started the closest the CCIW has gotten to getting 2 teams in the top 10 is the final poll in 2004 (Carthage #5, Wheaton #12) and week #11 in 2005 (Augie was #10 and NCC #12).

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ken Pickens on September 22, 2008, 08:23:09 PM
Man, you better do a little more research! There's a new team out there in only their third year and they are all ready making some noise.
It's LaGrange College and they are 2-1 right now (should be 3-0 after a horrible officiating call).
They just beat the pants off Maryville (no matter what the Head Coach says for Maryville, they got their butts whipped).
Coach Pickens
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 08:38:59 PM
I think Coach Pickens would be well advised to learn some lessons from Coach Holtz! :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 08:53:58 PM
Quote from: usee on September 22, 2008, 01:02:15 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:44:57 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 01:04:17 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 12:28:11 AM
The only real 'head scratcher' I saw this week was Wabash 'monkey-stomping' Chicago, yet getting passed by two teams.  Salisbury was not a shock, since their victim, Christopher Newport, had received 36 points in the previous poll, but I was quite surprised that Wheaton also jumped them.  Wheaton did a number on CUW, but their big jump the previous week was for beating then-#5 Bethel, which now seems a bit less impressive than it did then.  Did voters receive tape of the Wabash/Wheaton scrimmage, and the Thunder 'won'? ;D
Man, those Wheaties get you every time.

It's just not fair!   :D

Not that I'm complaining, mind you - just mystified. :D

I haven't gotten around to checking all the past polls yet, but I'm reasonably sure this is the first time the CCIW has had two top ten teams at the same time.

You shouldn't be mystified. There is no secret sauce here. although maybe if you post this on 6 more boards you may find something!  ;D

btw, since the d3 poll started the closest the CCIW has gotten to getting 2 teams in the top 10 is the final poll in 2004 (Carthage #5, Wheaton #12) and week #11 in 2005 (Augie was #10 and NCC #12).

Thanks for saving me the research time! ;D  Interesting that the two teams that nearly cracked a double top ten were four different teams, even though it was consecutive years.

With a 15-3 record so far this year (and either 5-1 or 6-0 seems likely in week four) against non-con teams, perhaps the CCIW can at least come close in football to their status in basketball.  Afterall, even Mount Union so far hasn't matched one thing Augustana did (four consecutive national titles); MUC has to fall sometime, why shouldn't the CCIW take them down? ;D

(With apologies to those teams who have already taken down MUC for a single year; no one has done it in forever in the North [even if UWW was an import last year].)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 22, 2008, 10:08:07 PM
Quote from: Foss on September 22, 2008, 12:00:58 AM
Pat, believe it or not I haven't yet. Embarrassing to say but I had too much time on my hands tonight and looked through all the previous polls. Which release are you referring to? Wish I would have read it first, would have saved me a lot of time.  :)

Foss, now you know what it's like to write Around the Nation, or at least a portion of it. :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 11:05:05 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 08:38:59 PM
I think Coach Pickens would be well advised to learn some lessons from Coach Holtz! :D
I believe that Coach Pickens has two sons who play for LaGrange. ;)

I am all for the success of D-III in the South.  D-III is a new animal down there.

Most of the kids in the South for whom D-III is an option just give up football all together and then hang out with 80,000 spectators watching SEC football...not good enough to play for the Tide or the Gators or another of the various Tigers or Bulldogs, and so they give up what they love.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 22, 2008, 11:18:04 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 11:05:05 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 08:38:59 PM
I think Coach Pickens would be well advised to learn some lessons from Coach Holtz! :D
I believe that Coach Pickens has two sons who play for LaGrange. ;)

I am all for the success of D-III in the South.  D-III is a new animal down there.

Most of the kids in the South for whom D-III is an option just give up football all together and then hang out with 80,000 spectators watching SEC football...not good enough to play for the Tide or the Gators or another of the various Tigers or Bulldogs, and so they give up what they love.

Agreed about D3 down South, although there is quite the D2 presence in the Gulf Coast region and there are options between I-A and III as you well know in cities like Abilene ... options which probably attract a caliber of player (to some degree) who go D3 in a state like Wisconsin.

But you are right on about some kids having to give up what they love and D3 being that opportunity, especially when your favorite schools emerge.

(Mine were initially Temple, Maryland and Howard, and eventually became Maryland, Howard, Albright and Randolph-Macon)

I couldn't envision myself watching games when I knew I could be playing them. I'm OK with it now because I know I reached my limit, that the NFL wasn't for me (I might have tried the XFL though :) ) ... but I'm very glad there are those opportunities for kids to choose a school they love and to realize that college football is still (or is not) for them.

, that wasn't for me.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 23, 2008, 12:10:53 AM
Quote from: Ken Pickens on September 22, 2008, 08:23:09 PM
Man, you better do a little more research! There's a new team out there in only their third year and they are all ready making some noise.
It's LaGrange College and they are 2-1 right now (should be 3-0 after a horrible officiating call).
They just beat the pants off Maryville (no matter what the Head Coach says for Maryville, they got their butts whipped).
Coach Pickens

LaGrange has been on the front page for both wins. What more do you want? Top 25 votes are a little premature, no?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 23, 2008, 12:16:05 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on September 22, 2008, 11:05:05 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 22, 2008, 08:38:59 PM
I think Coach Pickens would be well advised to learn some lessons from Coach Holtz! :D
I believe that Coach Pickens has two sons who play for LaGrange. ;)

I am all for the success of D-III in the South.  D-III is a new animal down there.

Most of the kids in the South for whom D-III is an option just give up football all together and then hang out with 80,000 spectators watching SEC football...not good enough to play for the Tide or the Gators or another of the various Tigers or Bulldogs, and so they give up what they love.

Given the circumstances, I guess Coach Pickens earns a pass.  I'm just not used to coaches deliberately giving out bulletin-board material! :D

Your next opponent is supposed to be the greatest team in the history of football, while your team has trouble tying their shoelaces! ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 23, 2008, 01:13:56 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 23, 2008, 12:10:53 AM
LaGrange has been on the front page for both wins. What more do you want? Top 25 votes are a little premature, no?

I thought of asking the same thing about top 25 votes, but then I decided to shut my mouth and let the season play itself out.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 23, 2008, 03:26:20 PM
And I'm not saying they can't and never will get Top 25 votes, just that it's a little premature, that's all.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 24, 2008, 12:57:06 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 23, 2008, 03:26:20 PM
And I'm not saying they can't and never will get Top 25 votes, just that it's a little premature, that's all.

It's a lot premature, let's be frank.

We are watching. Keep winning, that's been proven over time to draw attention and top 25 votes.  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on September 29, 2008, 04:39:42 AM
Aha, the McMillan Paradox again:

No. 25 Concordia-Morehead def. No. 18 St. John's, at the Natural Bowl, no less.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DanPadavona on September 29, 2008, 05:40:17 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 22, 2008, 11:18:04 PM
I might have tried the XFL though :)


He Hate Mack?   :P
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 30, 2008, 03:10:56 AM
Quote from: DanPadavona on September 29, 2008, 05:40:17 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 22, 2008, 11:18:04 PM
I might have tried the XFL though :)

He Hate Mack?   :P

I like that!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 30, 2008, 03:12:28 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 29, 2008, 04:39:42 AM
Aha, the McMillan Paradox again:

No. 25 Concordia-Morehead def. No. 18 St. John's, at the Natural Bowl, no less.

I can assure you that isn't where I specifically had those teams ranked.  ;)

I can also assure you that I am wrong a lot, and if I couldn't handle being wrong, this would be a very bad job for me to have.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on September 30, 2008, 10:14:59 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 30, 2008, 03:12:28 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 29, 2008, 04:39:42 AM
Aha, the McMillan Paradox again:

No. 25 Concordia-Morehead def. No. 18 St. John's, at the Natural Bowl, no less.

I can assure you that isn't where I specifically had those teams ranked.  ;)

I can also assure you that I am wrong a lot, and if I couldn't handle being wrong, this would be a very bad job for me to have.

To clarify, I didn't coin the term "McMillan Paradox" to indicate that McMillan was the cause.

Since McMillan was the first commentator to chronicle the phenomenon of teams being ranked lower in polls than teams they defeated in head-to-head matchups, the phenomenon is called the "McMillan Paradox."

Similar to the Doppler Effect, which is not caused by Christian Doppler, but rather was identified by him.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on September 30, 2008, 10:48:14 AM
I certainly hope nobody here is advocating the position that, simply on the basis that "B" beat "A" that "B" should be ranked higher...

Chaminade immediately comes to mind, followed by innumerable others to blow that position completely out of the water.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on September 30, 2008, 11:12:41 AM
Quote from: Bob.Gregg on September 30, 2008, 10:48:14 AM
I certainly hope nobody here is advocating the position that, simply on the basis that "B" beat "A" that "B" should be ranked higher...

Chaminade immediately comes to mind, followed by innumerable others to blow that position completely out of the water.

I'm certainly not advocating that position.  I'm certain that K-Mack isn't advocating that position.  I don't think that such a position is even implied.

As Keith has discussed at some length, when there is no other basis of comparison, then there is no objective justification to rank a losing team higher than the head-to-head winner.

As an example, in 2007, after week 1 of the D-1A season, there was no objective basis to rank UMichigan higher than Appalachian St. (even though Appalachian St. is D-1AA and thus couldn't be included in any D-1A polls, but I'm sure you understand my point).

This implicates two very different approaches to poll ranking: objective (thinking) v. subjective (feeling).  The d3football.com gurus have promoted the d3football.com poll as a more objective poll than available alternatives, and to a large extent I think they're correct.

At this point in the season, the head-to-head matchup between Concordia-Morehead and St. John's--at St. John's home field--vastly outweighs the other available objective criteria such as common opponents, and/or opponents winning percentage.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 02, 2008, 03:40:05 PM
Hello,

I am confused about the rankings in the D3football top 25 poll.  It seems if you are ranked in the preseason top 25 then you can lose a game and it does not change the view of the voters.  It is disappointing that a defending conference champion that is the preseason pick to win a top 15 conference that is 4 - 0 cannot crack the top 25 because of other teams that have lost unexpectedly must be kept in the poll to make the preseason picks look somewhat legitimate.  I am a partisan for the team I support.  I will not name the team for fear of retribution, but you can figure it out by my posting name.  It is just disappointing for all of the teams out here that don't get the pre-season publicity to still have to fight for recognition even after the performances and records warrent it. 

I realize that this is only a subjective evaluation.  And I appreciate all that the staff of D3football and the poster do to promote D III athletics.  But most of all I appreciate the forum where concerns can be raised and discussed.


Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on October 02, 2008, 04:30:56 PM
let's see.

"HSC" barely beat .500 NC Wesleyan
You had to go to OT to beat 0-4 Gettysburg
You beat 1-2 King's by 2 TDs
and you had your best game of the year against 2-2 Guilford, winning by 3 TDs.

Maybe when you beat someone you'll get more votes - you are "30th" right now and given your results that's about right.  Until then you're just another team that hasn't beaten anyone of consequence or been winning impressively on a consistent basis.   In the meantime, remember that there are nearly 240 D3 football teams. 

It's not easy to get in the D3football.com top 25.  And it's not just winning, it's who you're defeating and how you're doing it. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 02, 2008, 04:43:19 PM
85, I think what's important to remember, too, is that there are 239 teams in Division III, twice as many in Division I FBS. It's twice as difficult to get into the Top 25 in Division III.

Let's make sure, too, to look at the teams in the Top 25 that have a loss and who they have lost to.

UW-Eau Claire was ranked in the preseason, has a loss and is still ranked. Lost to No. 2/defending national champion UW-Whitewater.
St. John Fisher lost at No. 1 Mount Union.
Wesley lost at Delaware Valley, currently ranked No. 16.
Salisbury lost at Delaware Valley, currently ranked No. 16.
St. John's lost to Concordia-Moorhead, currently ranked No. 25.
Wartburg lost at Augsburg, unranked but first among others receiving votes. Plus, Wartburg with a road win against ranked Central.
Central -- see Wartburg.

Delaware Valley and Concordia-Moorhead are also in the poll with losses, but neither was ranked in the preseason poll. Both also have wins against ranked teams.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 02, 2008, 05:08:08 PM
Ron and Pat,

Thank you so much for your input. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 02, 2008, 07:48:42 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 02, 2008, 05:08:08 PM
Ron and Pat,

Thank you so much for your input. 
Welcome to the boards, HSC85.

You got a couple of great answers.

FYI, Ron Boerger was South Region reporter for several years early in this decade.  He is a well-respected Trinity TX fan who has seen his great share of winning D-III football.   :)

Good luck in the ODAC!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 06, 2008, 12:19:45 AM
I've been marveling at the entertainment provided by the Empire8, so that's where my mind is these days.  I guess I'm still surprised to see St. John Fisher in the top 20.  Everything is relative of course, so I'll think out loud:

St. John Fisher, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses big at Mount Union, and loses close at home to (schizophrenic?) in-conference foe, 2-1 Hartwick.  End result, 3-2 St. John Fisher is ranked no. 20.

St. John's, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses a squeaker at home to the surprise conference tri-leader Concordia-Morehead (whose only loss was at ranked, faraway Willamette), and loses another squeaker at defending conference champion Bethel.  End result, 3-2 St. John's is 34th in voting with 10 points.

Wartburg, preseason top 20 from a preseason top 10 conference, ties loses in 2OT at other surprise MIAC tri-leader, undefeated Augsburg, then loses a squeaker at (surprise?) conference leader Buena Vista.  End result, 3-1-1 3-2 Wartburg is off the charts--zero points.

Polling is an inexact science, I understand.  Nonetheless, Fisher is no. 20, St. John's is 14 places behind them (after starting out in preseason 4 places ahead of Fisher), and Wartburg is at least 7 places behind St. John's.  Am I wrong to see less than 21 "teams of separation" between these 3 preseason ranked teams, who today each have 3-2 records?

I'll be curious to read K-Mack's Top 25 ruminations--exciting reading, in this weeks ATN!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 06, 2008, 12:38:36 AM
In this week's Top 25, we know that MUC received 21 votes for first and 4 votes for 2nd.

(21 votes for #1)(25 points for #1) + (4 votes for #2)(24 points for #2) =
525 + 96 = 621 points.

I will bet that UMHB got this vote total.

(21 votes for #3)(23 points for #3) + (4 votes for #2)(24 points for #2) =
483 + 96 = 579 points.

I think that UWW got this vote total.

(4 votes for #1)(25 points for #1) + (15 votes for #2)(24 points for #2) + (4 votes for #3)(23 points for #3) + (2 votes for #4)(22 points for #4) =
100 + 360 + 92 + 44 = 596 points.

Just guessing...   ;)


Or a friend suggests this combination for UMHB

(5 votes for #2)(24 points for #2) + (19 votes for #3)(23 points for #3) + (1 vote for #4)(22 points for #4) =

(5)(24) + (19)(23) + (1)(22) = 579
120      +    437     +      22 = 579

Curiouser and curiouser...  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 01:58:29 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 06, 2008, 12:19:45 AM
I've been marveling at the entertainment provided by the Empire8, so that's where my mind is these days.  I guess I'm still surprised to see St. John Fisher in the top 20.  Everything is relative of course, so I'll think out loud:

St. John Fisher, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses big at Mount Union, and loses close at home to (schizophrenic?) in-conference foe, 2-1 Hartwick.  End result, 3-2 St. John Fisher is ranked no. 20.

St. John's, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses a squeaker at home to the surprise conference tri-leader Concordia-Morehead (whose only loss was at ranked, faraway Willamette), and loses another squeaker at defending conference champion Bethel.  End result, 3-2 St. John's is 34th in voting with 10 points.

Wartburg, preseason top 20 from a preseason top 10 conference, ties loses in 2OT at other surprise MIAC tri-leader, undefeated Augsburg, then loses a squeaker at (surprise?) conference leader Buena Vista.  End result, 3-1-1 3-2 Wartburg is off the charts--zero points.

Polling is an inexact science, I understand.  Nonetheless, Fisher is no. 20, St. John's is 14 places behind them (after starting out in preseason 4 places ahead of Fisher), and Wartburg is at least 7 places behind St. John's.  Am I wrong to see less than 21 "teams of separation" between these 3 preseason ranked teams, who today each have 3-2 records?

I'll be curious to read K-Mack's Top 25 ruminations--exciting reading, in this weeks ATN!

St. John Fisher beat Ithaca. St. John's best win is ... East Texas Baptist? Wartburg's best win is ... 2-2 Central? St. Norbert?

Your analysis is way way too simplistic. Not all 3-2 records are the same.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 06, 2008, 09:40:15 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 01:58:29 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 06, 2008, 12:19:45 AM
I've been marveling at the entertainment provided by the Empire8, so that's where my mind is these days.  I guess I'm still surprised to see St. John Fisher in the top 20.  Everything is relative of course, so I'll think out loud:

St. John Fisher, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses big at Mount Union, and loses close at home to (schizophrenic?) in-conference foe, 2-1 Hartwick.  End result, 3-2 St. John Fisher is ranked no. 20.

St. John's, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses a squeaker at home to the surprise conference tri-leader Concordia-Morehead (whose only loss was at ranked, faraway Willamette), and loses another squeaker at defending conference champion Bethel.  End result, 3-2 St. John's is 34th in voting with 10 points.

Wartburg, preseason top 20 from a preseason top 10 conference, ties loses in 2OT at other surprise MIAC tri-leader, undefeated Augsburg, then loses a squeaker at (surprise?) conference leader Buena Vista.  End result, 3-1-1 3-2 Wartburg is off the charts--zero points.

Polling is an inexact science, I understand.  Nonetheless, Fisher is no. 20, St. John's is 14 places behind them (after starting out in preseason 4 places ahead of Fisher), and Wartburg is at least 7 places behind St. John's.  Am I wrong to see less than 21 "teams of separation" between these 3 preseason ranked teams, who today each have 3-2 records?

I'll be curious to read K-Mack's Top 25 ruminations--exciting reading, in this weeks ATN!

St. John Fisher beat (3-1) Ithaca. St. John's best win is ... (3-1) East Texas Baptist? Wartburg's best win is ... (preseason top 10) 2-2 Central? (4-1) St. Norbert?

Your analysis is way way too simplistic. Not all 3-2 records are the same.

Well, I suppose you're right, if way way too simplistic means analyzing two losses per team instead of analyzing one win per team.  Is it relevant that of the three teams, only St. John Fisher has a loss where they've not been competitive?  When the non-competitive loss is v. Mount Union, I can see how it could/should be ignored, but does a second loss demand that the nature of the first loss be considered?

I didn't mean to give the impression that I thought all 3-2 records are the same.  I infer from your analysis that St. John's appears to be the weakest of the three teams.  The voters disagree.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: voice on October 06, 2008, 10:27:22 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 01:58:29 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 06, 2008, 12:19:45 AM
I've been marveling at the entertainment provided by the Empire8, so that's where my mind is these days.  I guess I'm still surprised to see St. John Fisher in the top 20.  Everything is relative of course, so I'll think out loud:

St. John Fisher, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses big at Mount Union, and loses close at home to (schizophrenic?) in-conference foe, 2-1 Hartwick.  End result, 3-2 St. John Fisher is ranked no. 20.

St. John's, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses a squeaker at home to the surprise conference tri-leader Concordia-Morehead (whose only loss was at ranked, faraway Willamette), and loses another squeaker at defending conference champion Bethel.  End result, 3-2 St. John's is 34th in voting with 10 points.

Wartburg, preseason top 20 from a preseason top 10 conference, ties loses in 2OT at other surprise MIAC tri-leader, undefeated Augsburg, then loses a squeaker at (surprise?) conference leader Buena Vista.  End result, 3-1-1 3-2 Wartburg is off the charts--zero points.

Polling is an inexact science, I understand.  Nonetheless, Fisher is no. 20, St. John's is 14 places behind them (after starting out in preseason 4 places ahead of Fisher), and Wartburg is at least 7 places behind St. John's.  Am I wrong to see less than 21 "teams of separation" between these 3 preseason ranked teams, who today each have 3-2 records?

I'll be curious to read K-Mack's Top 25 ruminations--exciting reading, in this weeks ATN!

St. John Fisher beat Ithaca. St. John's best win is ... East Texas Baptist? Wartburg's best win is ... 2-2 Central? St. Norbert?

Your analysis is way way too simplistic. Not all 3-2 records are the same.

Great job on working the numbers Ralph, pretty impressive!

The one curious aspect of this year's Top 25 poll to date has been that MUC has been a near unanimous #1 since week 1 of the season.  26 first place votes to Whitewater's 4 first place votes.  It is the same way the poll went all of last year.

If all has been "the same this year as last year," maybe this season will end the same way? 

I wonder if the NCAA and Division III schools around the country really want another MUC-WW Stagg Bowl matchup.
Not forecasting another match-up at this point of the season, but just wondering what others may think on the subject>



Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 06, 2008, 08:50:37 PM
How does Hardin-Simmons lose and go from 21st last week to 16th this week.  There weren't any big losses for the teams ahead of them.  Was it because they played Mary Hardin-Baylor close in the loss?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 09:24:28 PM
Played the No. 3 team toe to toe on the No. 3 team's home field. Why wouldn't they move up?

I suspect they will move down in the coaches' poll, which is silly. If the poll isn't broken, why break it by moving teams down?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on October 06, 2008, 10:04:02 PM
Quote from: voice on October 06, 2008, 10:27:22 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 01:58:29 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 06, 2008, 12:19:45 AM
I've been marveling at the entertainment provided by the Empire8, so that's where my mind is these days.  I guess I'm still surprised to see St. John Fisher in the top 20.  Everything is relative of course, so I'll think out loud:

St. John Fisher, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses big at Mount Union, and loses close at home to (schizophrenic?) in-conference foe, 2-1 Hartwick.  End result, 3-2 St. John Fisher is ranked no. 20.

St. John's, preseason top 10 from a highly regarded conference,  loses a squeaker at home to the surprise conference tri-leader Concordia-Morehead (whose only loss was at ranked, faraway Willamette), and loses another squeaker at defending conference champion Bethel.  End result, 3-2 St. John's is 34th in voting with 10 points.

Wartburg, preseason top 20 from a preseason top 10 conference, ties loses in 2OT at other surprise MIAC tri-leader, undefeated Augsburg, then loses a squeaker at (surprise?) conference leader Buena Vista.  End result, 3-1-1 3-2 Wartburg is off the charts--zero points.

Polling is an inexact science, I understand.  Nonetheless, Fisher is no. 20, St. John's is 14 places behind them (after starting out in preseason 4 places ahead of Fisher), and Wartburg is at least 7 places behind St. John's.  Am I wrong to see less than 21 "teams of separation" between these 3 preseason ranked teams, who today each have 3-2 records?

I'll be curious to read K-Mack's Top 25 ruminations--exciting reading, in this weeks ATN!

St. John Fisher beat Ithaca. St. John's best win is ... East Texas Baptist? Wartburg's best win is ... 2-2 Central? St. Norbert?

Your analysis is way way too simplistic. Not all 3-2 records are the same.

Great job on working the numbers Ralph, pretty impressive!

The one curious aspect of this year's Top 25 poll to date has been that MUC has been a near unanimous #1 since week 1 of the season.  26 first place votes to Whitewater's 4 first place votes.  It is the same way the poll went all of last year.

If all has been "the same this year as last year," maybe this season will end the same way? 

I wonder if the NCAA and Division III schools around the country really want another MUC-WW Stagg Bowl matchup.
Not forecasting another match-up at this point of the season, but just wondering what others may think on the subject>






Voice I am sure that there are 237 Division 3 schools that prefer that there were other schools in the Stagg Bowl. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on October 07, 2008, 12:08:54 AM
How did Case Western Reserve and Cortland State switch positions this week?  Case was ahead of Cortland, and they both played similar teams (Case played Denison, who lost by 14 to No. 7 Wabash and was 1-2 going into the game, and Cortland played Buffalo State, who lost by 13 to No. 20 St. John Fisher and was 0-3 going into the game, so you may even be able to make the case that Case played a bit tougher team, but I digress).

After 3 quarters, Case was up 45-0 and pulled their starters.  Cortland State was only up 14-7 after 3 quarters and needed a big 4th quarter to win by 21.  So I really don't see how Cortland State is justified in passing up Case.

Also, just to throw in some propaganda statistics for Case...they have only given up 7 points in the first half of games this year, and have outscored their opponents 142-7 in the first halves.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 12:16:50 AM
Appreciate the question, and welcome to the board. I don't think your base assumption is correct. I think Buff State is a better team than Denison.

Interestingly, their current Massey ratings are very similar to our preseason rankings in Kickoff.

We ranked Buff State 154 in the preseason and Massey has them 152 now.
We ranked Denison 171 in the preseason and Massey has them 171 now.

But more importantly, it's important to remember that the entire season resume can be re-evaluated each week. (We make sure the voters see this data so they can decide whether to use it. The AFCA, to our understanding from coaches who vote in both, does not.)

Here's the entire season resume for both teams:

No. 15 Case Western Reserve (4-0):
Sep 06   AWAY   Kenyon (1-4)   W   26-62
Sep 13   HOME   Rochester (1-3)   W   38-6
Sep 20   AWAY   Oberlin (1-3)   W   21-48
Oct 04   HOME   Denison (1-3)   W   45-14

No. 14 Cortland State (4-0):
Sep 06   AWAY   Morrisville State (0-4)   W   37-51
Sep 20   AWAY   Rowan (3-1)   W   20-27
Sep 27   AWAY   Kean (3-1)   W   28-32
Oct 04   HOME   Buffalo State (0-4)   W   35-14

Case has been pounding teams, yes, but all they've proven is that they're better than four bad teams. Cortladn has proven its better than Rowan, and that's a road game as well.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on October 07, 2008, 07:49:28 AM
Thanks for the explanation.  I can see how re-evaluating Cortland's schedule led to bumping them up, and in that case they probably should have been ahead of Case since Week 2.

I do think that of Case's opponents, Rochester is one that is better than their record currently indicates.  Granted, they aren't exactly a good team, but they definitely aren't a bad 1-3 team.  Other than the pounding Case gave them, they played tough games in a 7 point loss to St. John Fisher and a 10 point loss to RPI.

And using the Massey ratings as a guide can help, but I wouldn't say the difference between 150 and 170 is significant.  If the positions are taken that literally, we would have to say that #1 Willamette should be able to handle #4 Mount Union. :)

By the way, so you know I'm not being an unappreciative jerk, I do love the site.  Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on October 07, 2008, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman
...(We make sure the voters see this data so they can decide whether to use it. The AFCA, to our understanding from coaches who vote in both, does not.)


Quote from: Pat Coleman
I suspect they will move down in the coaches' poll, which is silly. If the poll isn't broken, why break it by moving teams down?


Pat, you've got the top site for D-3 information without challenge.
You've got the most-referenced poll for D-3 teams without question.
You've assembled the most knowledgable team of D-3 analysts without doubt.

Don't lower yourself, or your site, by throwing out sophomoric jabs at the "other" poll.

Just ignore them.  They won't go away.  But they will stay in the large shadow cast by the leader--d3football.com!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on October 07, 2008, 08:56:11 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 12:16:50 AM
Cortladn has proven its better than Rowan, and that's a road game as well.


Rowan hasn't proven to be anything but better than three mediocre to bad teams as well.

Bridgewater State (2-3)
William Patterson (1-3)
Brockport State (1-3, and the win was vs. Wm.Patterson)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on October 07, 2008, 09:47:55 AM
Also, as far as the Massey ratings go, math and statistics intrigue me, so naturally I am fascinated by the Massey ratings.  However, sometimes I am amazed at their inaccuracy and that they seem to defy logic and even statistics.  I can't imagine how they have Hiram ranked ahead of Denison.  Yes, Hiram is 2-2, but they beat two AWFUL teams in overtime and got killed (41-6) by Carnegie Mellon, who is having a down year.  I predict next week we will see how far-fetched that rating is when Denison goes into Hiram's house and beats them by 3+ TDs.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 07, 2008, 09:47:55 AM
CWRU had an advantage over Rochester, since it was Rochester's first game and the Spartan's second.  But then the Spartans won without Whalen.  Oberlin played now #10 W&J (with no quality wins either, except maybe Geneva who beat Salisbury) tough as well, being tied 35-35 in the fourth quarter.

Another factor is that Fisher was ranked 10th before the loss and had a 53 vote lead over #11 (thanks to Ralph Turner for pointing out this method of analysis).  When Fisher lost, a lot of votes were freed up and they seem to have mostly gone to two other East teams, Cortland and Del Valley, who gained 53 and 70 points respectively to CWRU's 24.

The top tier is now just the first nine not the top ten.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on October 07, 2008, 09:58:35 AM
You will get no argument from me about Delaware Valley...I was surprised it took them as long as it did to crack even the Top 25.  I just don't feel Cortland State deserved as many of those freed up points as they received...but overall the poll is excellent and I don't have any say in it, so I guess I just accept it. :)  The unfortunate thing is that Case's schedule doesn't provide them any opportunities to gain any more respect, as blowing out bad teams doesn't seem to garner them any.  Wooster is undefeated, yes, but I know they haven't played any tough teams.  And Wash U. lost last week, so that diminishes their reputation, unless they can pull off an upset against Wabash later in the season.

What Case needs to worry about is finishing 10-0 (OK well they really just need to worry about Wooster at this point) and then gaining respect in the playoffs.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 07, 2008, 10:24:30 AM
I have no beef with Del Valley's ranking either.  And I realize CWRU probably needs to win out to get to the post-season.

Wabash @ WUStL is this Saturday.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 07, 2008, 10:42:38 AM
Quote from: cwru70 on October 07, 2008, 10:24:30 AM
I have no beef with Del Valley's ranking either.  And I realize CWRU probably needs to win out to get to the post-season.
I agree.

If we have only 2 Pool B bids, it is very hard to deny an undefeated team a bid. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 07, 2008, 12:07:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 09:24:28 PM
Played the No. 3 team toe to toe on the No. 3 team's home field. Why wouldn't they move up?

I suspect they will move down in the coaches' poll, which is silly. If the poll isn't broken, why break it by moving teams down?

AFCA Poll (http://www.afca.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9300&ATCLID=1598246)

HSU drops from #11 to #17!  UMHB doesn't drop at all, if we go by the theory that the HSU outcome shows that UMHB is not as good as one would think!

That makes no sense at all!  :o 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 07, 2008, 04:41:16 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 06, 2008, 09:24:28 PM
Played the No. 3 team toe to toe on the No. 3 team's home field. Why wouldn't they move up?
Because they lost!  Johns Hopkins played No.5 Muhlenberg pretty tough 28-23, shouldn't Johns Hopkins get some votes?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 05:13:27 PM
DC: Johns Hopkins also lost to Moravian by 23 points. Minor detail.

Are these rankings or standings? Do we punish a team for losing to someone better than them? No. That is what's expected. They just proved the poll was right; we don't then take our fixed poll and go out and break it.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 07, 2008, 10:05:38 PM
I've already written the portion of ATN that discussed movement in the poll, but I see the discussion here has been very lively (2-3 new pages on this week alone) and while I'm tempted to go touch up that portion of the column, I think it stands, and I think you all have so far had a sensible discussion.

A couple of quick responses though:

Re: Hampden-Sydney, one thing to keep in mind beyond this year's up-and-down results is the playoff game last season. Generally we try not to dip into last year, but not being very close to Wesley, and then having Wesley be more in the teens than top 5 can have a relative effect on H-SC.

Re: Hardin-Simmons, I agree with Pat, that's a very understated point ... if the poll hasn't been broken, why are we fixing it. We are punishing teams for losing to teams the ranking expects them to lose to. Actually, "we" are not.

Re: Case, jam you are right about the schedule. See: Hardin-Simmons. Just by playing a good team you can get a boost. Not that it's under CWRU's control ... they have to be conistently good against who they have scheduled.

re: St. John's/Wartburg/St. John Fisher ... haven't been voting for the former two since their initial losses. I wasn't really high on St. John Fisher until the Ithaca win. SJF is still on my ballot because the quality of teams lost to, plus they have a very good win. Wartburg if it continues on its current track plus Augsburg and Central turn out to be good, might find itself back in. St. John's in my mind is in a heap of top 25 trouble, especially since I overanalyze them because they tend to get 'name recognition' benefit of the doubt :)

Re: The McMillan Paradox ... redswarm had it pegged pretty much. In the absence of other data, h2h is a very strong piece of data to determine who is better. Though Chaminades happen, human voters are flexible enough to be discerning when it comes to flukey defeats. In most cases, even with a preponderance of other data, h2h is still the strongest piece you'll get.

There are many instances, of course, where h2h won't solve your problems, particularly in triangles like the one atop the E8 right now, or other mash-ups you see later in the season when there are several overlapping h2h results that don't jive (jibe?)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 08, 2008, 09:10:03 AM
Keith,

If you go back to previous years in evaluating Hampden- Sydney then I think you should go back and look at other teams in the poll as well that were one and done in the playoffs last year.  Last year one player made a huge difference in the separation of Wesley and Hampden Sydney.  It was the defensive end #92.  He was the most disruptive force of their defense and HSC did not adjust or couldn't adjust to that player. 

I thought the polls this year are for 2008.  I have posted before about the appearance of the D3 poll voters voting for teams that were in the pre-season top 25 or have had previous good years over teams that are having excellent years in 2008.  I have read the arguements that Hampden- Sydney is 5 - 0 against teams that are 8 - 16.  Well Trinity is 4 - 0 against a group of teams that are 3 - 15. 

I am not suggesting that Hampden-Sydney be ranked higher, I am suggesting that you stick to ranking teams in 2008 on 2008 performance.  The season is half over for many teams.  Personally, I don't think that Hampden Sydney should be ranked as high as 24.  There are excellent teams in Division III all over the country.  Hampden- Sydney has been inconsistent in the margin of victory against what appears to be a weak schedule.  When Josh Simpson comes back from his injury then the team may get some more complete game performances like the Guilford game. 

Thank you for your patience for my rambling.  I appreciate all that you and the D3football.com do to promote division III football.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on October 08, 2008, 09:23:14 AM
HSC's margins of victory:  10 (Away - NC) , 4 (Away - PA), 16 (H), 21 (H), 3 (Away - VA).  Avg =  10.8

Trinity (TX) margins of victory:  30 (H), 24 (H), 25 (Away - CO), 28 (Away - AL).  Avg = 26.8

Sense any difference?  I don't think Trinity was having to worry about playing their first string in their fourth quarters much, either. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 08, 2008, 09:38:42 AM
Ron,

I was using Trinity as an example of a team that should be ranked higher than Hampden-Sydney.  I realize that there is a difference in how a team handles a weak schedule.  I was trying to make the point that last years results should not be used to rank this years teams at mid-season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on October 08, 2008, 10:13:40 AM
Quote from: Bob.Gregg on October 07, 2008, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman
...(We make sure the voters see this data so they can decide whether to use it. The AFCA, to our understanding from coaches who vote in both, does not.)


Quote from: Pat Coleman
I suspect they will move down in the coaches' poll, which is silly. If the poll isn't broken, why break it by moving teams down?


Pat, you've got the top site for D-3 information without challenge.
You've got the most-referenced poll for D-3 teams without question.
You've assembled the most knowledgable team of D-3 analysts without doubt.

Don't lower yourself, or your site, by throwing out sophomoric jabs at the "other" poll.

Just ignore them.  They won't go away.  But they will stay in the large shadow cast by the leader--d3football.com!

The Rowan sports department's pre-game football releases publish only the D3football.com Top 25.  They dumped the AFCA poll. In my mind that is real progress, given how "fan" sites used to viewed at the school.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on October 08, 2008, 11:23:48 AM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 08, 2008, 09:10:03 AM
Keith,

If you go back to previous years in evaluating Hampden- Sydney then I think you should go back and look at other teams in the poll as well that were one and done in the playoffs last year.  Last year one player made a huge difference in the separation of Wesley and Hampden Sydney.  It was the defensive end #92.  He was the most disruptive force of their defense and HSC did not adjust or couldn't adjust to that player. 

I thought the polls this year are for 2008.  I have posted before about the appearance of the D3 poll voters voting for teams that were in the pre-season top 25 or have had previous good years over teams that are having excellent years in 2008.  I have read the arguements that Hampden- Sydney is 5 - 0 against teams that are 8 - 16.  Well Trinity is 4 - 0 against a group of teams that are 3 - 15. 

I am not suggesting that Hampden-Sydney be ranked higher, I am suggesting that you stick to ranking teams in 2008 on 2008 performance.  The season is half over for many teams.  Personally, I don't think that Hampden Sydney should be ranked as high as 24.  There are excellent teams in Division III all over the country.  Hampden- Sydney has been inconsistent in the margin of victory against what appears to be a weak schedule.  When Josh Simpson comes back from his injury then the team may get some more complete game performances like the Guilford game. 

Thank you for your patience for my rambling.  I appreciate all that you and the D3football.com do to promote division III football.



But you're forgetting that each season isn't played in a vacuum.  Early in the season, before teams get a chance to completely prove their worth (or lack thereof) on the field, the historical significance of the program means a lot. 

Even though Mount Union's opponents to date sport only a 6-10 overall record (2-2 St John Fisher, 0-4 Ohio Northern, 2-2 Muskingum and 2-2 Baldwin Wallace), where do you think they should be ranked?  About 15th since they don't have any "good wins"?. 

Just be thankful the Top 25 ranking has NOTHING to do with who gets a shot at winning a national championship! 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 08, 2008, 11:38:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 05:13:27 PM
DC: Johns Hopkins also lost to Moravian by 23 points. Minor detail.

Are these rankings or standings? Do we punish a team for losing to someone better than them? No. That is what's expected. They just proved the poll was right; we don't then take our fixed poll and go out and break it.
First of all the Jons Hopkins statement was sarcastic & second, no a team shouldn't be punished for losing to someone better than them, but reward by moving up 5 spots b/c they played the better team tough?  That was the only part that I was confused about.   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 08, 2008, 12:08:20 PM
Quote from: JT on October 08, 2008, 10:13:40 AM
The Rowan sports department's pre-game football releases publish only the D3football.com Top 25.  They dumped the AFCA poll. In my mind that is real progress, given how "fan" sites used to viewed at the school.

Wow. That is impressive.

Is that still the case the past two weeks with the AFCA poll starting up again? There isn't an AFCA poll to cite for the first three weeks of the season. But my dim recollection is that the D3football.com Top 25 wasn't cited by Rowan at any part of the season once upon a time, so I am grateful for the recognition.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on October 08, 2008, 01:36:36 PM
QuoteHampden- Sydney is 5 - 0 against teams that are 8 - 16.  Well Trinity is 4 - 0 against a group of teams that are 3 - 15. 


Ron, at this point in the season, the above quote could also be followed by your inquiry:

"Sense any difference?"
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on October 08, 2008, 03:29:30 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 08, 2008, 12:08:20 PM
Quote from: JT on October 08, 2008, 10:13:40 AM
The Rowan sports department's pre-game football releases publish only the D3football.com Top 25.  They dumped the AFCA poll. In my mind that is real progress, given how "fan" sites used to viewed at the school.

Wow. That is impressive.

Is that still the case the past two weeks with the AFCA poll starting up again? There isn't an AFCA poll to cite for the first three weeks of the season. But my dim recollection is that the D3football.com Top 25 wasn't cited by Rowan at any part of the season once upon a time, so I am grateful for the recognition.

When D3's Top 25 first started it wasn't published.  I believe they started publishing it in year three with the AFCA.  This year I have not seen the AFCA poll, including this week's West Conn pre-game.  It is possible that they just aren't going to update the pdf template, but maybe not. 

http://www.rowanathletics.com/Pdfs/football/2008/10/7/WesternConnecticut08.pdf
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on October 08, 2008, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: Bob.Gregg on October 08, 2008, 01:36:36 PM
QuoteHampden- Sydney is 5 - 0 against teams that are 8 - 16.  Well Trinity is 4 - 0 against a group of teams that are 3 - 15. 


Ron, at this point in the season, the above quote could also be followed by your inquiry:

"Sense any difference?"

Yes.  Trinity's not beating one win teams by three or four points.  You can't control the records of the teams you play, but you can control what happens when you play them.  Evidence shows that H-SC is not doing as well as Trinity in that regard.   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on October 08, 2008, 03:47:38 PM
I think that the discussion here is very enlightening. Most of us don't have the vast scope of data in our minds that Pat, Keith and the other voters have. When they give their explanations for why things come out the way they do, it always seems that there is sensible logic behind the results. That doesn't mean that we all will ever agree on a Top 25 - What would be the fun in that? This is exactly what such polls should engender.

As far as St John's, they are a good example of why there is disagreement. They have two losses to seemingly good or middle of the pack type teams. As someone pointed out, they are two plays away from being undefeated, and have "won" the stats battle in both those losses, but still are probably now about where they should be ranked. They just have not played like a Top 25 team this year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 08, 2008, 04:00:10 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 08, 2008, 03:47:38 PM
...
As far as St John's, ...


They just have not played like a Top 25 team this year.

All of us agree.  Top 25 teams "get 'er done"!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on October 09, 2008, 07:57:01 AM

Jon's
Hopkins??  I thought you were an officer of higher learning, has_been??  Must be teaching in South Central Los Angeles and NOT Encino! 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 09, 2008, 01:03:02 PM
Quote from: dc_has_been on October 08, 2008, 11:38:04 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 05:13:27 PM
DC: Johns Hopkins also lost to Moravian by 23 points. Minor detail.

Are these rankings or standings? Do we punish a team for losing to someone better than them? No. That is what's expected. They just proved the poll was right; we don't then take our fixed poll and go out and break it.
First of all the Jons Hopkins statement was sarcastic & second, no a team shouldn't be punished for losing to someone better than them, but reward by moving up 5 spots b/c they played the better team tough?  That was the only part that I was confused about.   
SaintsFan- Yes I forgot an h in Johns, and did not add an apostrophe.  Also, I am an educator of higher learning in Los Angeles & would take those students over students from Kentucky any day.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 09, 2008, 02:37:35 PM
Quote from: hscoach on October 08, 2008, 11:23:48 AM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 08, 2008, 09:10:03 AM
Keith,

If you go back to previous years in evaluating Hampden- Sydney then I think you should go back and look at other teams in the poll as well that were one and done in the playoffs last year.  Last year one player made a huge difference in the separation of Wesley and Hampden Sydney.  It was the defensive end #92.  He was the most disruptive force of their defense and HSC did not adjust or couldn't adjust to that player. 

I thought the polls this year are for 2008.  I have posted before about the appearance of the D3 poll voters voting for teams that were in the pre-season top 25 or have had previous good years over teams that are having excellent years in 2008.  I have read the arguements that Hampden- Sydney is 5 - 0 against teams that are 8 - 16.  Well Trinity is 4 - 0 against a group of teams that are 3 - 15. 

I am not suggesting that Hampden-Sydney be ranked higher, I am suggesting that you stick to ranking teams in 2008 on 2008 performance.  The season is half over for many teams.  Personally, I don't think that Hampden Sydney should be ranked as high as 24.  There are excellent teams in Division III all over the country.  Hampden- Sydney has been inconsistent in the margin of victory against what appears to be a weak schedule.  When Josh Simpson comes back from his injury then the team may get some more complete game performances like the Guilford game. 

Thank you for your patience for my rambling.  I appreciate all that you and the D3football.com do to promote division III football.



But you're forgetting that each season isn't played in a vacuum.  Early in the season, before teams get a chance to completely prove their worth (or lack thereof) on the field, the historical significance of the program means a lot. 

Even though Mount Union's opponents to date sport only a 6-10 overall record (2-2 St John Fisher, 0-4 Ohio Northern, 2-2 Muskingum and 2-2 Baldwin Wallace), where do you think they should be ranked?  About 15th since they don't have any "good wins"?. 

Just be thankful the Top 25 ranking has NOTHING to do with who gets a shot at winning a national championship! 

hscoach makes a couple of great points.

In the absence of other more recent data, I think we would be foolish as voters not to acknowledge what we already know, whether it took place in 2008 or not.

Now, the relevance of using a detail from a previous season is only a small sliver of the total picture, and can easily be outweighed by a more recent happening. For instance, Wesley beat Muhlenberg head to head in last season's playoffs, but because of Wesley's loss this season, I'm sure every ballot has Muhlenberg higher.

Some people even use that 'more recent, more relevant' theory when voting, as in results from Week 10 of the same season are weighted more heavily than ones from Week 4.

Polling is not a perfect science, it's more like the English language ... there are times when the rules apply, and then there are times when even though the rules clearly say put i before e, we spell it 'receive.' (Let me know if I trailed off into copy nerddom there ... point is the rules make sense a lot of the time but need breaking other times.)

The bottom line is a poll is an collection of opinions, and as hard as we try to base everything on data (thanks for noticing retagent), there are times when, say, a preseason poll ranks St. John's higher than Bethel even though Bethel won the last h2h matchup and brings back more starters or whatever ... People sometimes look at polling the way they do betting, in the 'ride the trend until it proves you wrong' sense.

And hscoach's other point, one that's frequently repeated on this site, is that we're glad the top 25 functions only as a best estimation of the strongest teams, and does not serve to actually award anybody the championship or a playoff spot or anything of that nature.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on October 11, 2008, 06:55:44 PM
Does SJF get booted from the top 25 this week?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 11, 2008, 07:30:54 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 11, 2008, 06:55:44 PM
Does SJF get booted from the top 25 this week?
They played a team rated higher then them & played them tough.  They'll probably move up a few spots instead.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2008, 07:34:38 PM
Dunno about that. They lost at home, plus it's the third loss, not the first. I'm guessing you were probably being a smart-ass with your response but in case you truly don't understand the difference, here you go.

Ranked three spots apart, not 18.
Lost at home, not on the road.
Third loss, not first.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on October 11, 2008, 08:24:04 PM
I'm curious to see where Capital ends up.  That's a pretty good football team that ran into an absolute buzzsaw in Alliance today.

I'm guess around 10-12th would be about right.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2008, 08:34:39 PM
Quote from: hscoach on October 11, 2008, 08:24:04 PM
I'm curious to see where Capital ends up.  That's a pretty good football team that ran into an absolute buzzsaw in Alliance today.

I'm guess around 10-12th would be about right.


Yeah...from #4 to #10-12 in the ACFA poll!

I guess that Capital will fall no farther than to 9th and, more likely, no worse than 7th.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on October 11, 2008, 08:53:32 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2008, 08:34:39 PM
Quote from: hscoach on October 11, 2008, 08:24:04 PM
I'm curious to see where Capital ends up.  That's a pretty good football team that ran into an absolute buzzsaw in Alliance today.

I'm guess around 10-12th would be about right.


Yeah...from #4 to #10-12 in the ACFA poll!

I guess that Capital will fall no farther than to 9th and, more likely, no worse than 7th.

Maybe third  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 11, 2008, 09:33:10 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 11, 2008, 07:34:38 PM
Dunno about that. They lost at home, plus it's the third loss, not the first. I'm guessing you were probably being a smart-ass with your response but in case you truly don't understand the difference, here you go.

Ranked three spots apart, not 18.
Lost at home, not on the road.
Third loss, not first.
I prefer sarcastic Pat, but hey you are always entitled to your opinion. 

I'm guessing SJF & Augsburg will drop out & two of the three: Ithaca, Franklin, or Curry move up into the top 25.  I would like to see Trine leap frog some teams & get in b/c they are an awesome story thus far.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 12, 2008, 10:56:01 PM
That's interesting, this convo ... I grappled with where to drop Capital if at all and what to do with SJF.

Long story short, I think the nature of the Capital loss meant they had to fall some. It was the same logic I used when SJF didn't perform all that well. It's one thing to lose to Mount Union, it's another to be pretty well dominated. Not that either is unexpected, but maybe Capital could've held its spot in a close loss.

As for SJF, it is loss No. 3, at some point you have to say 'OK, this team isn't getting it done, I can't keep giving them free passes.' But on the other hand, they've played Mount Union, Ithaca, Hartwick and Salisbury ... which is four teams better than any some top 25 teams have played. If SJF switched schedules with W&J or Case Western or some others, how would their record looked? Is there any way we could estimate what would happen if SJF were to face one of those teams h2h?

In the end I dropped SJF out of my top 25, and I don't know if anyone would much disagree with that. But they went toe-to-toe with Salisbury ... moving the Gulls up to the mid-teens and SJF out doesn't seem accurate, even though it seems right. (make any sense?)

I think I'll write more in ATN about the connections we have to follow now by h2h results ... those ones that are so confusing we don't learn much.

Also contemplated Trine at the 25 spot FWIW, but they missed by a hair.

As far as teams dropping out, seems like a long way for Redlands to go from high teens to out, and Occidental from zero votes to ranked, but I didn't have a problem replacing one with the other ... at least among the group of teams I'm voting for. I didn't automatically slot Oxy in where Redlands was. Redlands seems to be a different team without their stud QB, I think it's OK to adjust accordingly. Same with Salisbury having Chandler back.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 13, 2008, 02:16:05 AM
Wow?  Based on this weeks poll, I'm even more confused on how the top 25 voting works.  I do understand there are over 200 teams in DIII & there isn't that much media coverage, but Carleton, Occidental, & Linfield?  I know Occidental beat Redlands & all, but then I was right about Trine getting into the top 25 considering they beat the #14 team in the country at the time.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on October 13, 2008, 12:13:08 PM
With so little cross-regional play (and in some cases like the OAC with only 1 non-conference game) in the regular season, it's really hard to get a handle on teams without looking at the history of them individually and their conference as a whole. 

SJF has proven over the last few years that they're easily Top 10 material, so that's why it takes 3 losses before they're completely out of the Top 25.  And exactly why Trine is struggling to break in though they've played really well.  Without a lot of cross-conference or cross-regional games, it takes time to break the preconceived ideas of what a team is and will be.

Taking K-Mack's point a few steps further, it's really hard decide where to vote undefeated teams from historically weak conferences.  I would expect the bottom 4 teams in the WIAC are still in the top 30% of all Division 3 teams.  I know La Crosse is really struggling and is winless, but does anyone really think that Case Western or Trine would actually beat La Crosse on the field?  I don't. 

I'd put 1-4 Ohio Northern or 2-3 Baldwin Wallace from the OAC against Case or Trine and like my chances too.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 13, 2008, 12:39:52 PM
hscoach- thank you for the break down, you & K-Mack do make this a little bit easier to understand.  I am just questioning some of the changes. The main one being Occidental considering their track record.
I'm sure there are a lot of teams w/ unfarvorable records that are much better than teams in the top 25.  I'm not sure if I agree on ONU or BW being able to beat CWRU or Trine, but SJF for sure. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: repete on October 13, 2008, 01:53:11 PM
hscoach,

You're right on. Seems many years have these teams that rise from the unknown, but then fade early in the playoffs. And every year there are teams from power leagues like the OAC and WIAC that finish middle of the pack and would dominate the less competitive conferences.

I understand why Pat and crew did it, but I miss having the conference postseason records on the front page (static that it is) because it gave you a quick hint about conference strength (if used in context with other info.)

In this case, for example, you've got a team from a league with an 0-8 postseason mark, beating one from a 1-10 league. While it's dangerous to put too much weight on history, teams from these kinds of leagues rarely seem to improve so quickly that they can finish with the elite in one season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on October 13, 2008, 02:35:42 PM
Quote from: dc_has_been on October 13, 2008, 12:39:52 PM
I'm not sure if I agree on ONU or BW being able to beat CWRU or Trine, but SJF for sure. 

SJF could possibly beat Case, but I think overall Case is still a better team right now.  They even have a common opponent, Rochester.  Case beat Rochester 38-6 and SJF beat Rochester 24-17.  I know that doesn't translate into an automatic win for Case by 25 points :) but it surely doesn't point to SJF beatign Case "for sure".
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 13, 2008, 02:51:18 PM
Point taken jam40jeff, you are absolutely correct on that. 

repete- though I do agree OAC & WIAC are power conferences, but I wouldn't necessarily say the middle of the pack teams would dominate the less competitive conferences.  They would be very competive, but I think "dominate" is going overboard as I did in my previous post about SJF would beat CWRU or Trine "for sure". 
The HCAC for instance (conferance my school is in), would not be dominated by John Carroll, Baldwin-Wallace, or Wilmington. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 13, 2008, 06:51:47 PM
Quote from: repete on October 13, 2008, 01:53:11 PM
I understand why Pat and crew did it, but I miss having the conference postseason records on the front page (static that it is) because it gave you a quick hint about conference strength (if used in context with other info.)

True. You're aware, but in case others aren't, that chart isn't gone for good, it's just found a new home here among the FAQs (http://www.d3football.com/faq.php?answer&category=Playoffs&id=39).

Common opponents are great, even common opponents who have common opponents. Good point on SJF-Case ... but voters do have to factor in schedule disparities, and by the same token, no matter a team's schedule, it has to do well against who it plays.

Pretty good points all around. I will continue to refer people to this thread via ATN, it's as well thought out as it gets around here.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 13, 2008, 07:19:15 PM
Quote from: hscoach on October 13, 2008, 12:13:08 PM
With so little cross-regional play (and in some cases like the OAC with only 1 non-conference game) in the regular season, it's really hard to get a handle on teams without looking at the history of them individually and their conference as a whole. 

SJF has proven over the last few years that they're easily Top 10 material, so that's why it takes 3 losses before they're completely out of the Top 25.  And exactly why Trine is struggling to break in though they've played really well.  Without a lot of cross-conference or cross-regional games, it takes time to break the preconceived ideas of what a team is and will be.

Taking K-Mack's point a few steps further, it's really hard decide where to vote undefeated teams from historically weak conferences.  I would expect the bottom 4 teams in the WIAC are still in the top 30% of all Division 3 teams.  I know La Crosse is really struggling and is winless, but does anyone really think that Case Western or Trine would actually beat La Crosse on the field?  I don't. 

I'd put 1-4 Ohio Northern or 2-3 Baldwin Wallace from the OAC against Case or Trine and like my chances too.

That's a pretty good defense of a mostly subjective system of analysis.  There's nothing wrong with that, you just have to understand that there's often no objective evidence available to back up your conclusions, and that lack of objective evidence becomes more acute as the season progresses.  As you note, the objective evidence properly drops St. John Fisher (and St. John's, for that matter) off the top 25, even though their historical record is as good as it ever was.

Where I'm a little less comfortable is with the idea of comparing bottoms of one conference to the tops of other conferences.  As you admit, there's little cross-regional play on which to base conclusions.  In many conferences, "second division" teams rarely if ever play in the post-season.  That being the case, how are they entitled to (or saddled with) their conference's post-season record?

Here's a related thought, Coach:  Otterbein is traditionally a sub-.500 team in the OAC, but they're 5-0 as of today, including a win against traditional OAC runner-up Ohio Northern (having a seriously down year) and a second win against usually successful Baldwin-Wallace (struggling, but not as much as Ohio Northern).   Since Otterbein has yet to face Mount Union, John Carroll, and Capital - all of whom are winning and are traditionally much stronger than Otterbein, wouldn't the reputation-based analysis suggest keeping Otterbein unranked until after those games?

Since there are some unfamiliar names in the Top 25 this week, I'm going to look at the objective evidence and see if it makes any sense--often, it doesn't, with the 2008 MIAC and Empire 8 being perfect examples.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 13, 2008, 10:17:26 PM
                                        Massey (MOV)           Lazindex
CWRU                                         34                        22
UWLX                                          58                        80
ONU                                            91                        91 
BW                                              46                        48
SJF                                              71                        45

Non Top 25 teams                  Linfield               
above CWRU                          St John's                  St John's
                                                Bethel

FWIW
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: repete on October 14, 2008, 12:21:41 AM
Quote from: dc_has_been on October 13, 2008, 02:51:18 PM
Point taken jam40jeff, you are absolutely correct on that. 

repete- though I do agree OAC & WIAC are power conferences, but I wouldn't necessarily say the middle of the pack teams would dominate the less competitive conferences.  They would be very competive, but I think "dominate" is going overboard as I did in my previous post about SJF would beat CWRU or Trine "for sure". 
The HCAC for instance (conferance my school is in), would not be dominated by John Carroll, Baldwin-Wallace, or Wilmington. 
Dominate is a loaded term, for sure.

As I noted the playoff mark is a starting point. I'm more comfortable posting on the WIAC than the OAC (although Wilmington, which hasn't won more than 3 games in  a season for years, won't be a middle team in my book.)

Another thing I look at are the NC records. For example, the MIAA's top three teams last season were 17-6 in league play but 0-10 NC with many ugly scores. The HCAC scores better when that's factored in.

The WIAC situation is clearer. A telling "stat" is number of quality teams that won't schedule them. The MWC is right in their back yard and those teams won't touch a WIAC NC game. The same applied for the old IBC and now NAC (or whatever it is).  Even the MIAC, IIAC and NCAC aren't much better.

Bad or good, these teams struggle to fill their schedules, traveling from Texas to the West Coast. A couple of years ago, LaCrosse traveled to then d-iaa South Dakota St. (and won) and this year took on N. Dakota. A telling bottom vs. top game last year: River Falls, which was 3-7 and one OT victory away from the WIAC cellar, beat MIAA co-champ Hope by 30 points.

edit -- typo fixes
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 14, 2008, 11:47:31 AM
Warning!  D-III Geeky Analysis Ahead!

Quote from: jam40jeff on October 07, 2008, 12:08:54 AM
How did Case Western Reserve and Cortland State switch positions this week? 

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 12:16:50 AM
(I)t's important to remember that the entire season resume can be re-evaluated each week. (We make sure the voters see this data so they can decide whether to use it. . . .)

Here's the entire season resume for both teams:

No. 15 Case Western Reserve (4-0):
Sep 06   AWAY   Kenyon (1-4)    W  26-62
Sep 13   HOME   Rochester (1-3) W 38-6
Sep 20   AWAY   Oberlin  (1-3)    W  21-48
Oct 04   HOME   Denison   (1-3)  W  45-14

No. 14 Cortland State (4-0):
Sep 06   AWAY   Morrisville State (0-4)   W 37-51
Sep 20   AWAY   Rowan           (3-1)  W  20-27
Sep 27   AWAY   Kean              (3-1)  W  28-32
Oct 04   HOME   Buffalo State   (0-4)  W  35-14

Case has been pounding teams, yes, but all they've proven is that they're better than four bad teams. Cortland has proven its better than Rowan, and that's a road game as well.

Okay, so it appears that W-L Record, Strength of Schedule, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins (bonus for road marquee wins) are useful factors in poll evaluations.

Since this conversation started with Cortland  and Case Western, and since Case Western is not a longtime Top 25 Poll resident, I've charted W-L Record, Strength of Schedule, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins for all undefeated teams that are ranked below Cortland and Case (except Trinity, who isn't an unfamiliar poll team):

Team          Rank    W-L / Pct.     SoS      MofV     Marquee Wins
Cortland      13     5-0 / 1.000    0.600    10.4    Rowan, Montclair St.
CWRU         15     5-0 / 1.000    0.429    29.4    Wooster
Willamette   19     6-0 / 1.000    0.435    25.8    @CA Lutheran
Otterbein     21     5-0 / 1.000    0.350    25.2    @Ohio Northern
Carleton      22     5-0 / 1.000    0.542    13.8    Augsburg
Curry         "28"    6-0 / 1.000    0.483    19.8   
RPI            "29"    4-0 / 1.000    0.556    16.7    WPI
Trine          "30"    5-0 / 1.000    0.429    17      Franklin
Monmouth   "36"    6-0 / 1.000    0.607    33.2    @St. Norbert, Carroll
Huntingdon  "44"    4-0 / 1.000    0.421    28.3   

The SoS calculations are made using the NCAA method, where an opponents' record is evaluated with the head-to-head result excluded.  Thus for example, 4-1 Wooster's record for calculating CWRU's SoS is 4-0, since Wooster's 1 loss was to CWRU.

I don't know how to identify or evaluate Marquee Wins, so I included wins against former national champions, pre-season Top 25 ranked teams, and teams who currently have an SoS winning percentage of .800 or higher.

If I understand the explanation from last week, SoS is more important than Margin of Victory (agreed).  So let's see how these undefeated teams look in descending order of SoS:

Team          Rank    W-L / Pct.     SoS      MofV     Marquee Wins
Monmouth   "36"   6-0 / 1.000    0.607    33.2    @St. Norbert, Carroll
Cortland      13     5-0 / 1.000    0.600    10.4    Rowan, Montclair St.
RPI            "29"    4-0 / 1.000    0.556    16.7    WPI
Carleton      22     5-0 / 1.000    0.542    13.8    Augsburg
Curry         "28"    6-0 / 1.000    0.483    19.8   
Willamette    19     6-0 / 1.000    0.435    25.8    @CA Lutheran
CWRU         15      5-0 / 1.000    0.429    29.4    Wooster
Trine          "30"    5-0 / 1.000    0.429    17       Franklin
Huntingdon  "44"    4-0 / 1.000    0.421    28.3   
Otterbein     21      5-0 / 1.000    0.350    25.2    @Ohio Northern

This type of analysis appears to justify Cortland's and Huntingdon's relative poll positions, but it does seem to call into question why the same method that helped explain CWRU's place has kept Monmouth off the voters' radars.  The big picture for Otterbein might even be worse than the numbers indicate, since their marquee win is against a struggling 1-4 Ohio Northern.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:32:29 PM
Quote from: Daily Dose
Triple Take: Don't look too far ahead
With a win this weekend, which unbeaten team will most deserve a place in the Top 25: Curry, Monmouth, Trine or RPI?
Ryan's take: Monmouth. It's not just that the Scots have already beaten the Nos. 3 through 6 teams in the Midwest Conference, it's that in most instances, they've manhandled the bunch. Ripon is Monmouth's last big threat – and a win here against the 5-1 Red Hawks would give Monmouth an impressive win and vote of confidence toward the Top 25.

* * *

Keith's take: Trine. You could make a pretty good case for all of them, to be honest, but if the Thunder improves to 6-0, it will include a win over then-No. 14 Franklin and the defending MIAA champ/playoff representative in Olivet.


(italics added.) 

I should say so.  Oh wait--I did say so, in chart form:

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 14, 2008, 11:47:31 AM
Warning!  D-III Geeky Analysis Ahead!

Okay, so it appears that W-L Record, Strength of Schedule, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins (bonus for road marquee wins) are useful factors in poll evaluations.

I don't know how to identify or evaluate Marquee Wins, so I included wins against former national champions, pre-season Top 25 ranked teams, and teams who currently have an SoS winning percentage of .800 or higher.

So let's see how these undefeated teams look in descending order of SoS:

Team          Rank    W-L / Pct.     SoS      MofV     Marquee Wins
Monmouth   "36"   6-0 / 1.000    0.607    33.2    @St. Norbert, Carroll
Cortland      13     5-0 / 1.000    0.600    10.4    Rowan, Montclair St.
RPI            "29"    4-0 / 1.000    0.556    16.7    WPI
Carleton      22     5-0 / 1.000    0.542    13.8    Augsburg
Curry         "28"    6-0 / 1.000    0.483    19.8   
Willamette    19     6-0 / 1.000    0.435    25.8    @CA Lutheran
CWRU         15      5-0 / 1.000    0.429    29.4    Wooster
Trine          "30"    5-0 / 1.000    0.429    17       Franklin
Huntingdon  "44"    4-0 / 1.000    0.421    28.3   
Otterbein     21      5-0 / 1.000    0.350    25.2    @Ohio Northern

This type of analysis appears to justify Cortland's and Huntingdon's relative poll positions, but it does seem to call into question why the same method that helped explain CWRU's place has kept Monmouth off the voters' radars.  The big picture for Otterbein might even be worse than the numbers indicate, since their marquee win is against a struggling 1-4 Ohio Northern.

Still, I don't see how Monmouth has been kept so far away for so long.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2008, 01:44:56 PM
Monmouth's OOWP is 0.498. (At least, in regional games, but that's going to cover the vast majority of those possible games.)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:59:47 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2008, 01:44:56 PM
Monmouth's OOWP is 0.498. (At least, in regional games, but that's going to cover the vast majority of those possible games.)

I see.  I haven't sorted out the relative importance of OWP v. OOWP v. Winning Percentage.  Maybe I can get Frank Rossi to post a treatise on the subject.   :D

Do you include OOWP in the team resume info that you send the voters each week, or is that something they need to get from the NCAA themselves?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2008, 08:56:05 PM
It's not included. For the most part I think our voters know that the Midwest Conference tends to have low OOWPs and they adjust accordingly.

Our numbers are what the NCAA uses for selections, so just in-region. Not appropriate for a Top 25 as not all games are regional.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 18, 2008, 12:09:03 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:32:29 PM
Still, I don't see how Monmouth has been kept so far away for so long.

Easy. Carroll is not a marquee win anywhere but on your chart, and the Midwest is one of the least-strong conferences, and the numbers don't necessarily account for that. As with teams from other less-strong conferences (see Curry, Trine, etc.), it takes some time and several wins before they creep into the 20s. Generally.

I think the St. Norbert win is the first one that thrust them onto most voters' watch lists.

The numbers are certainly helpful to voters, but it's safe to say a lot of them probably prefer to use common sense to huge charts. Right or wrong, it's likely how it works.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 18, 2008, 10:09:38 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 18, 2008, 12:09:03 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:32:29 PM
Still, I don't see how Monmouth has been kept so far away for so long.

Easy. Carroll is not a marquee win anywhere but on your chart, and the Midwest is one of the least-strong conferences, and the numbers don't necessarily account for that. As with teams from other less-strong conferences (see Curry, Trine, etc.), it takes some time and several wins before they creep into the 20s. Generally.

I think the St. Norbert win is the first one that thrust them onto most voters' watch lists.

The numbers are certainly helpful to voters, but it's safe to say a lot of them probably prefer to use common sense to huge charts. Right or wrong, it's likely how it works.

Easy.  Sure.
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:32:29 PMI don't know how to identify or evaluate Marquee Wins, so I included wins against former national champions, pre-season Top 25 ranked teams, and teams who currently have an SoS winning percentage of .800 or higher.

I know (and appreciate!) how to learn the definitions of ironic, coincidental and apropos, but I don't know how Marquee Win is defined.

This is all a heck of a lot of fun, and I understand that it's all based on very inexact science.  However, d3football.com has advertised its Top 25 poll as the result of more exact science than any of the alternatives.

I would guess that the AFCA poll voters believe that they are using common sense.  "Common sense" is more often discussed when it's missing than when it's present, so I don't really know how to recognize when common sense is being used in lieu of huge charts.

However, I do know how to read thoughtful explanations offered by poll voters.  My list was as near as I could get to an objective rendering of Pat's rather thorough explanation of the relative positions of Cortland St. and Case Western after week 5.  Pat mentioned SoS/OWP, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins.  Recently it appears that OOWP is implicated, but I'm not sure if OOWP was used in the Week 5 poll.

I can understand the temptation to use perceived relative conference strength, but that would really be a stretch to apply to an undefeated team that has not been in the playoffs recently, e.g. Monmouth.  Sure, you can point out that its conference mates don't do well out of the conference in regular season or playoffs, but that argument can't be applied directly to the undefeated playoff-stranger team in question--not logically, at least. . . . but I understand that to many people, logic is different than common sense.   ;)

I can also understand (sort of) why voters want to look at SoS/OWP and OOWP, but common sense dictates that those statistics are secondary to Winning Percentage.  An 0-5 team could have an OWP/OOWP of .750/550, but does that mean it should be ranked higher than a 5-0 team?

Is Franklin a Marquee win for Trine?  If so, why?  And if Franklin is a Marquee win for Trine, why isn't Carroll a Marquee Win for Monmouth?

My head is starting to spin--and this stuff is a LOT easier to try and figure out than Empire 8 what-ifs.   :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 18, 2008, 08:15:57 PM
I didn't say anything about "marquee wins," but at the beginning of this process I did mention who the best win was on a couple of teams' schedules.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 18, 2008, 09:22:33 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 18, 2008, 08:15:57 PM
I didn't say anything about "marquee wins," but at the beginning of this process I did mention who the best win was on a couple of teams' schedules.

I coined the term after you mentioned Cortland's road victory v. Rowan (then 3-1) as partial justification for Cortland leapfrogging Case Western:

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 14, 2008, 11:47:31 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 07, 2008, 12:16:50 AM
(I)t's important to remember that the entire season resume can be re-evaluated each week. (We make sure the voters see this data so they can decide whether to use it. . . .)

Here's the entire season resume for both teams:

No. 15 Case Western Reserve (4-0):
Sep 06   AWAY   Kenyon (1-4)    W  26-62
Sep 13   HOME   Rochester (1-3) W 38-6
Sep 20   AWAY   Oberlin  (1-3)    W  21-48
Oct 04   HOME   Denison   (1-3)  W  45-14

No. 14 Cortland State (4-0):
Sep 06   AWAY   Morrisville State (0-4)   W 37-51
Sep 20   AWAY   Rowan           (3-1)  W  20-27
Sep 27   AWAY   Kean              (3-1)  W  28-32
Oct 04   HOME   Buffalo State   (0-4)  W  35-14

Case has been pounding teams, yes, but all they've proven is that they're better than four bad teams. Cortland has proven its better than Rowan, and that's a road game as well.

Okay, so it appears that W-L Record, Strength of Schedule, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins (bonus for road marquee wins) are useful factors in poll evaluations.

Is there a better term?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 18, 2008, 09:37:46 PM
7, 9, 14, and 22 lose and 6 just survives.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 18, 2008, 09:50:27 PM
Quote from: cwru70 on October 18, 2008, 09:37:46 PM
7, 9, 14, and 22 lose and 6 just survives.

Yeah, no. 9 Capital's loss spoiled my whole bit.  I was going to note that in Week 7, the multiples of 7 lost:


thus proving that Carleton had been ranked one position too low.    :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: CobberFvr on October 18, 2008, 10:49:16 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 18, 2008, 09:50:27 PM
Quote from: cwru70 on October 18, 2008, 09:37:46 PM
7, 9, 14, and 22 lose and 6 just survives.

Yeah, no. 9 Capital's loss spoiled my whole bit.  I was going to note that in Week 7, the multiples of 7 lost:


  • 7 UW-Eau Claire;
  • 14 DelVal; and
  • 22 Carleton

thus proving that Carleton had been ranked one position too low.    :D

Not sure they (Carleton) should have been ranked at all.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on October 18, 2008, 11:31:33 PM
I don't know if it's refreshing or disturbing, that after all the analytical analysis (or at least a reasonable facsimile) over the past few pages, BF comes in and puts his opinion out there without any backup data or explanation. As someone once said, "Opinions are like a$$h0les, everybody has at least one."
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 18, 2008, 10:09:38 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 18, 2008, 12:09:03 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:32:29 PM
Still, I don't see how Monmouth has been kept so far away for so long.

Easy. Carroll is not a marquee win anywhere but on your chart, and the Midwest is one of the least-strong conferences, and the numbers don't necessarily account for that. As with teams from other less-strong conferences (see Curry, Trine, etc.), it takes some time and several wins before they creep into the 20s. Generally.

I think the St. Norbert win is the first one that thrust them onto most voters' watch lists.

The numbers are certainly helpful to voters, but it's safe to say a lot of them probably prefer to use common sense to huge charts. Right or wrong, it's likely how it works.

Easy.  Sure.
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 17, 2008, 01:32:29 PMI don't know how to identify or evaluate Marquee Wins, so I included wins against former national champions, pre-season Top 25 ranked teams, and teams who currently have an SoS winning percentage of .800 or higher.

I know (and appreciate!) how to learn the definitions of ironic, coincidental and apropos, but I don't know how Marquee Win is defined.

This is all a heck of a lot of fun, and I understand that it's all based on very inexact science.  However, d3football.com has advertised its Top 25 poll as the result of more exact science than any of the alternatives.

I would guess that the AFCA poll voters believe that they are using common sense.  "Common sense" is more often discussed when it's missing than when it's present, so I don't really know how to recognize when common sense is being used in lieu of huge charts.

However, I do know how to read thoughtful explanations offered by poll voters.  My list was as near as I could get to an objective rendering of Pat's rather thorough explanation of the relative positions of Cortland St. and Case Western after week 5.  Pat mentioned SoS/OWP, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins.  Recently it appears that OOWP is implicated, but I'm not sure if OOWP was used in the Week 5 poll.

I can understand the temptation to use perceived relative conference strength, but that would really be a stretch to apply to an undefeated team that has not been in the playoffs recently, e.g. Monmouth.  Sure, you can point out that its conference mates don't do well out of the conference in regular season or playoffs, but that argument can't be applied directly to the undefeated playoff-stranger team in question--not logically, at least. . . . but I understand that to many people, logic is different than common sense.   ;)

I can also understand (sort of) why voters want to look at SoS/OWP and OOWP, but common sense dictates that those statistics are secondary to Winning Percentage.  An 0-5 team could have an OWP/OOWP of .750/550, but does that mean it should be ranked higher than a 5-0 team?

Is Franklin a Marquee win for Trine?  If so, why?  And if Franklin is a Marquee win for Trine, why isn't Carroll a Marquee Win for Monmouth?

My head is starting to spin--and this stuff is a LOT easier to try and figure out than Empire 8 what-ifs.   :D

Well,
Without a doubt polling is an inexact science.

With regard to the remark about D3football.com boosting it's brand of inexactness as more exact, I think that comes from the pollsters' focus on strength of schedule and strong conferences; leading to the theory that not all undefeated records are the same, for instance.

Monmouth has made the playoffs recently, they lost 62-3 to St. John's. I was going to add "but that's beside the point," but it's exactly the point. If you look at the history of results between top MWC teams and top 25 teams, the scores generally aren't even close, although St. Norbert has had a couple good playoff showings.

In that sense, I don't blame people for going beyond the numbers a bit to make sure their ballots accurately reflect how they feel about the strength of the teams they rank. On the other hand, too much subjectivity on conference strength is why I hated the old 16-team playoff system. At least in the 32-team system, every conference champion gets a shot (at least now that the NWC AQ kicks in) so teams aren't prohibited from winning the championship because of the perception of their league's strength. But their top 25 ranking can be affected, and with reason.

QuoteOkay, so it appears that W-L Record, Strength of Schedule, Margin of Victory, and Marquee Wins (bonus for road marquee wins) are useful factors in poll evaluations.

Everything you mentioned is a factor. But there's also the human element, which is on one hand a welcome dose of inexactness. We've seen what numbers by themselves can produce in the BCS, and in Massey Ratings, Laz Index, et. al. Numbers alone can be very helpful, but also can be manipulated, which is why there are usually safeguards for margin of victory, etc., in mathematical ratings.

On the other hand, if you try hard enough, you can find flaws in the mash-up of numbers and human reasoning that constitutes the poll. There are 25 voters, and we probably don't all use the same system, so it's hard to pinpoint sometimes why certain movements in the poll happen. Maybe 11 of us are thinking one way and the other 14 aren't. Its not really possible to know without going way too far in depth.

My personal rule is to have a reason for why each team is where they are relative to someone else. It might not bear out over the course of the season, but at least I can rest comfortably knowing that at the time, I was using something and not randomly slotting teams whereever or on "gut feel" alone.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM

Without a doubt polling is an inexact science.

Inexact science is one thing.  Art dressed up as science is another.  I'm simply trying to figure out where the science ends and the art begins--and I recognize that it's a grey area, not a bright line.  But I am trying to determine if the grey area extends over the entire field of study.

Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM
With regard to the remark about D3football.com boosting it's brand of inexactness as more exact, I think that comes from the pollsters' focus on strength of schedule and strong conferences; leading to the theory that not all undefeated records are the same, for instance.

I think I've mentioned before that it's dangerous to focus on strength of schedule ahead of winning percentage.  SoS is necessarily secondary to winning percentage.  If I were to get all statistigeekical about it, I suppose I'd try to describe how W-L records and SoS each have their individual bell curve distributions, and there's considerable overlap, but that the mean "value" of W-L record is higher than the mean "value" of SoS.  By "value" I mean usefulness in gauging relative team strength.

If you assign SoS a higher priority than winning percentage, then a team with a losing record is likely to be ranked higher than a team with a winning record, by virtue of a higher SoS.

(This is math - the average SoS of teams with losing records is necessarily higher than the average SoS of teams with winning records.)

Thus SoS has its place, but its best place is in breaking ties between teams with identical records.

Strong conferences.  If I recall your recent re-evaluation of the conferences, you described a big middle 14 or so conferences whose strengths were so close as to be indistinguishable as a practical matter.  I doubt that's the analysis that poll voters use if they're factoring in conference strength.  Rather, I suspect that they're applying the results of different teams playing in different years, in order to evaluate teams this year.  That might be art, but it ain't pretty.

Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM

Monmouth has made the playoffs recently, they lost 62-3 to St. John's. I was going to add "but that's beside the point," but it's exactly the point. If you look at the history of results between top MWC teams and top 25 teams, the scores generally aren't even close, although St. Norbert has had a couple good playoff showings.

Here's where I'll frustrate many, including myself, for being so damned literal.

If it is indeed exactly the point today, that four seasons ago St. John's beat Monmouth, then Monmouth should be ranked behind St. John's today.  I don't think anyone would defend such a nonsensical analysis, but what do you know: there's 4-2 St. John's with 9 poll votes, the same total as 6-0 Monmouth.

St. Norbert has had a couple good playoff showings, but Monmouth isn't entitled to St. Norbert's successful record, despite the fact that Monmouth beat St. Norbert this season?

I appreciate your insights, but you've posited contradictions that can't be reconciled.

How Monmouth did against anyone four seasons ago really has nothing to do with how strong Monmouth is today relative to anyone else today.  How non-Monmouth teams in Monmouth's conference performed against Top 25 teams in different years is even less relevant to Monmouth's relative strength today.

Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM

I don't blame people for going beyond the numbers a bit to make sure their ballots accurately reflect how they feel about the strength of the teams they rank. . . . Everything you mentioned is a factor.  But there's also the human element, which is on one hand a welcome dose of inexactness. . . . at the time, I was using something and not randomly slotting teams whereever or on "gut feel" alone.

I don't blame people either.  I'm just trying to figure out where the"using something" ends and where the feeling starts.  (Wait--"where the feeling starts" . . . I heard that at a rock concert, didn't I?  Foo Fighters?  Rush?  Wyclef Jean?  :P )
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2008, 01:53:05 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
Thus SoS has its place, but its best place is in breaking ties between teams with identical records.

I disagree. Similar records, perhaps. Definitely not identical records.

What would Monmouth's record be if it had played UW-La Crosse's schedule? How about if it had played Hardin-Simmons' schedule? Or even St. Norbert's schedule? Would Monmouth have beaten Wartburg the way it beat Loras?

These two facets are so intertwined that I don't think you can generate an accurate poll if you ignore one or the other.

Who would beat whom on a neutral field: That's what we're trying to measure. And 25 voters may well take 25 different paths to fill out their ballot, but the end result is pretty darn good. If you want a 100% subjective ranking, you need a computer. Computers are alright, but I wouldn't want my ranking solely decided by them.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 02:20:33 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2008, 01:53:05 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
Thus SoS has its place, but its best place is in breaking ties between teams with identical records.

I disagree. Similar records, perhaps. Definitely not identical records.

I said best.  I think that SoS is good1 for breaking ties/evaluating teams with similar records, but I think it's better for breaking ties between teams with identical records.

1I think that head-to-head competition is better than SoS, and I think that common opponent analysis is better than SoS.  I recognize that h2h and common opponents are less available data than SoS.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2008, 01:53:05 AM
Who would beat whom on a neutral field: That's what we're trying to measure. And 25 voters may well take 25 different paths to fill out their ballot, but the end result is pretty darn good. If you want a 100% subjective ranking, you need a computer. Computers are alright, but I wouldn't want my ranking solely decided by them.

I agree.  Who would beat whom on a neutral field.  That's what you're trying to measure.  And yet, the McMillan Paradox occurs every year at some point.  The end result is pretty darned good--not flawless, and some of the flaws can't be explained.

As far as different paths go, you've gone a step farther in explaining your path on occasion, that's great.

I don't want rankings decided solely by computers either, but neither do I want them decided solely by people who are so invested in tradition and history and reputation that they don't have any objective means of explaining their paths.

(I think you meant "if you want a 100% objective ranking, you need a computer.")
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2008, 02:24:56 AM
LOL, yes.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on October 19, 2008, 12:17:43 PM
Let me ask swarm to consider a team, team "A", that played 6 games against opponents who were all 6 -0 at that point in a season, and had lost to those teams by a margin of 10 points or less. Let's further assume that the teams that those six undefeated teams played were all 5 - 1 at that point in the season. Then consider team "B" that was 6 - 0, but had played teams that were 0 -6, and had a margin of victory of 10 points or less. If then, team "A" faced team "B", who would he pick as a winner. Also, let's say team "A" beat team "B", how would he rank them relative to each other?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on October 19, 2008, 12:29:15 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 19, 2008, 01:53:05 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
Thus SoS has its place, but its best place is in breaking ties between teams with identical records.

I disagree. Similar records, perhaps. Definitely not identical records.

What would Monmouth's record be if it had played UW-La Crosse's schedule? How about if it had played Hardin-Simmons' schedule? Or even St. Norbert's schedule? Would Monmouth have beaten Wartburg the way it beat Loras?

These two facets are so intertwined that I don't think you can generate an accurate poll if you ignore one or the other.

Who would beat whom on a neutral field: That's what we're trying to measure. And 25 voters may well take 25 different paths to fill out their ballot, but the end result is pretty darn good. If you want a 100% subjective ranking, you need a computer. Computers are alright, but I wouldn't want my ranking solely decided by them.

I believe you meant 100% objective. :)

Anyways, I think SoS has its place.  It is one of many tools that should be used to determine rankings.  But there are many others, one of which has to be common sense.  Even MoV can't take into account blowouts where the subs played the second half.  Beating a bad team 42-14 where it was 42-0 at halfitme and all starters were pulled and not a pass was thrown in the second half should show more about the strength of a team than a 42-14 win where it was 28-14 in the 4th quarter and two late scores were tacked on by the starters when the team that was behind was playing desperately.  Also, SoS surely has its limitations.  Yes, it means a team has or has not "proven" itself, but a poll should be measuring how good one thinks a team is, not what a team has so far proven.  If Mount Union played a weak schedule would it make them any less of a powerhouse than with their current schedule?  A team is either good or not, regardless of who they have played, and that is where the human judgement must come in.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:12:00 PM
Quote from: retagent on October 19, 2008, 12:17:43 PM
Let me ask swarm to consider a team, team "A", that played 6 games against opponents who were all 6 -0 at that point in a season, and had lost to those teams by a margin of 10 points or less. Let's further assume that the teams that those six undefeated teams played were all 5 - 1 at that point in the season. Then consider team "B" that was 6 - 0, but had played teams that were 0 -6, and had a margin of victory of 10 points or less. If then, team "A" faced team "B", who would he pick as a winner. Also, let's say team "A" beat team "B", how would he rank them relative to each other?

Ignoring the practical impossibility of your hypothetical situation (and maybe even theoretical impossibility), SoS is a tool.  Tools have proper uses and improper uses.

Milton Friedman once visited India, where construction of a large canal was underway.  The Minister of Public Works proudly showed Milton Friedman the thousands of laborers who were digging the canal with shovels.  The Minister explained that they could use more efficient equipment such as backhoes and skip loaders, but by using shovels, they were able to employ more workers.

Friedman asked "Then why aren't you using spoons?"
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on October 19, 2008, 03:13:36 PM
Not to confuse things even further but there are many other things that influence rankings throughout a season. In ranking teams you are trying to "paint the train while its moving". Teams are often not the same during the course of a season. As a Wheaton fan we were reminded of that last year when the team that began the season was completely different (literally) than the one that ended the season. They were ranked #4 and 8-0 but after the 4th week they were without 6 all conference performers (including 7th round draft pick Andy Studebaker). By the time they played their last game of the season they had lost over half of their 22 starters that began the season (only 4 starters remained on offense).

The team that lost to unranked Carthage and vote getting IWU was completely different than the team that beat North Central in week 5, not even close. The team that started the season for Wheaton was the best team they ever had, certainly a top 5 team. The team that finished was not top 25 IMO, but the pollsters didn't know that till they saw results. There was a string of weeks where Wheaton was ranked way too high but were playing teams they could beat easily.

Similarly, teams with young stars are often at their best later in the season when those players have further playing time.

Its an inexact science at best.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 11:18:24 PM
I don't know red. I think we're kind of reaching the point where you're mincing just to keep the argument going. Because the longer this back-and-forth gets, the less it seems we're moving toward establishing anything new or answering any questions you might have. Perhaps it might serve you well to ask a few direct questions and I'll respond with direct answers.

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
I don't blame people either.  I'm just trying to figure out where the "using something" ends and where the feeling starts.

Well, how's it going? Are you figuring anything out? Do you want me to try to speak for the entire process as I view it from afar, or just to how I vote? What have I been saying that's unclear?

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
I think I've mentioned before that it's dangerous to focus on strength of schedule ahead of winning percentage. 

I don't think anyone has advocated that, yet you keep coming back to it. I certainly don't believe not winning is more important than winning when trying to determine which teams are "best." But I think it's equally dangerous to focus on winning percentage alone as a means of determining which team is best. Using SoS as a factor is helpful in sorting out teams with similar records, especially ones who have no h2h, common opponents or any kind of crossover to speak of. (i.e. Occidental, Curry and Case Western Reserve, for example).

* I was actually thinking about this on my own time this week while compiling my vote. The best way I can explain the effective use of SoS, or at least one use of it, is in the cases of Hardin-Simmons and Montclair State. And UW-Eau Claire and Capital.

In the case of the former two, their losses (by 2 to UMHB and 6 to Cortland State) should not preclude them from being included alongside an undefeated team that hasn't played anyone nearly as strong as UMHB or Cortland. (like the three mentioned above). However, I think when teams begin to get into the territory of their second loss (sometimes third once 9 or 10 games are played) voters stop "excusing" one loss to a powerful team. In the cases of UWEC and Capital, even though their schedules are still stronger than the three teams mentioned, if your winning percentage in those games is not high enough, voters tend not to give you support over a team with a much greater winning percentage.

The opposite argument one must keep in mind is that if a team is undefeated, even against a weak schedule, there is no relative indication of their limits. You might be left with an absence of data instead of conclusive data.

I have to get back to work, so forgive me for being able to touch on these next things only very quickly:

Quote from: usee on October 19, 2008, 03:13:36 PM
Not to confuse things even further but there are many other things that influence rankings throughout a season. In ranking teams you are trying to "paint the train while its moving". Teams are often not the same during the course of a season.

I agree with usee's post almost wholeheartedly, but especially this part. We can only work with the data we have at the time. I assume you understand his post and won't rehash the 'evolving teams over the course of the season' aspect.

But also what happens is sometimes the data doesn't make perfect sense. (you might have mentioned this). Like how come Del Val lost to Iona but beat Wesley who beat Iona. What do you do with that? I'm not a huge home field guy, but some people like to factor that in.

St. John Fisher, Ithaca and Hartwick have played a 1-1 3-way triangle. With their opponents ranging from Mount Union to Lycoming to Salisbury, and then those teams' opponents ranging from Christopher Newport to Capital to whoever, you could work yourself into a frenzy comparing results and their meanings.

And then how much weight to give each individual result, knowing that each team doesn't necessarily play to its potential (up or down) each time out, and that some teams match up better with others.

Injuries. Growth. Different points in the season.

Win Pct., SOS, OOWP.

You know, I'm not sure I care whether the poll is perceived as science or art. I think you're getting a little carried away with your nitpicking because it's understood that a poll is 25 people's (hopefully well-researched) opinions of the "best" teams in the country.

I could very easily nitpick the definition "best."

Look at a computer rating ... if win pct. and (O)OWP are the only factors, you'll likely see the MIAC and CCIW at the top of the polls. In the Massey Ratings, WIAC and OAC teams often seem to dominate the top of the rankings.

And there is some truth to that. If Huntingdon sweeps the SLIAC and Capital loses three OAC games but they somehow had an h2h game at the end of the season, who would you expect to win? Even if Huntingdon is ranked 25th and Capital is unranked?

I agree you can't get carried away with conference strength (although just for the record, you brought up Monmouth making the playoffs in the past, and we weren't talking about the middle bunch of conferences I referenced in my article, we were talking about one of the best, the MIAC, and one of the worst, the MWC, between which there most certainly is a difference). Conference history has been a reliable factor in predicting future results over the past 8-10 years. I can't say to what percentage it produces but it most certainly is relevant. And at least in the case of Pat and I, a lot of our opinions are formed by the eye test -- seeing the level of play within a certain conference, though it's not humanly possible for us or any other pollster to see every team in D3.

I love to make long posts and mince as much as anybody here, but I think we all more or less agree on the basic point.

It's understood (at least by readers informed as yourself) that a poll is a collection of opinions (and some collections have the potential to be more informed than others) and not infallible gospel. I don't even agree with it each week (I didn't like Wesley ahead of Del Val despite their h2h result). I'm lucky I can agree on my ballot when I submit it, but even then I realize it's my best approximation of reality and not necessarily reality itself. Four or five of my top 25 teams lose each week, I am used to being proven wrong by what happens on the field. I take delight in the fact that my poll vote is used only to produce a best guess as to the "best" teams each week and isn't a determining factor in crowning a national champion.

Call it art. Call it science. Call it artscience if you want. I'm not sure it really matters so long as people keep the poll itself in proper perspective.

P.S. What's the McMillan paradox again? I'm not sure I'm comfortable having a term named after me if I can't remember what it means.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 20, 2008, 12:00:03 AM
Maybe I'm being a little too blunt, but don't mistake that for a reluctance to be challenged on the merits of my particular voters or an unwillingness to discuss my particular thought process.

But if this ...

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM

I don't blame people for going beyond the numbers a bit to make sure their ballots accurately reflect how they feel about the strength of the teams they rank. . . . Everything you mentioned is a factor.  But there's also the human element, which is on one hand a welcome dose of inexactness. . . . at the time, I was using something and not randomly slotting teams whereever or on "gut feel" alone.

I don't blame people either.  I'm just trying to figure out where the"using something" ends and where the feeling starts. 

... is what you're trying to determine, I don't know how I'm supposed to answer that on behalf of everybody. My guess is it varies from voter to voter.

And I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing. We've seen what computer ratings alone can do. Helpful but not without flaws either.

I had a problem with conference reputation and SOS reliance being a major factor in barring teams, especially undefeated ones or ones whose losses came to teams rated higher than another team had played, from the playoffs under the old 16-team system. In light of the AQ system, I advocate the use of those factors in the creation of a top 25 poll.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on October 20, 2008, 07:17:31 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 11:18:24 PM
.......Call it art. Call it science. Call it artscience if you want. I'm not sure it really matters so long as people keep the poll itself in proper perspective.........

What about the "Dart Board Method"?  That's my personal favorite.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 04:45:47 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 20, 2008, 12:00:03 AM
Maybe I'm being a little too blunt, but don't mistake that for a reluctance to be challenged on the merits of my particular voters or an unwillingness to discuss my particular thought process.

But if this ...

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 19, 2008, 01:39:36 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 12:29:28 AM

I don't blame people for going beyond the numbers a bit to make sure their ballots accurately reflect how they feel about the strength of the teams they rank. . . . Everything you mentioned is a factor.  But there's also the human element, which is on one hand a welcome dose of inexactness. . . . at the time, I was using something and not randomly slotting teams whereever or on "gut feel" alone.

I don't blame people either.  I'm just trying to figure out where the"using something" ends and where the feeling starts. 

... is what you're trying to determine, I don't know how I'm supposed to answer that on behalf of everybody. My guess is it varies from voter to voter.

Of course it varies from voter to voter, and I'm not asking or expecting you to answer on behalf of every voter.  However, with you and I being two committed pontificators, and especially with you being both willing and able to explain the often complicated reasoning behind your poll voting, I end up asking the often complicated questions primarily of you, and not of the other 24.

It varies from voter to voter, and I suspect that there are several voters who do a lot more "gut feeling" and a lot less "using something" than you do.

As I know I've mentioned elsewhere, e.g. on the East Region Fan Poll page, I are A en-guh-neer, and as such I am trained to abhor an unbalanced equation--that's why I'm prone to point out inconsistencies in the lengths of blades of grass, even when the lawn is freshly mowed.  And yes, polling is conducted by humans, whose emotion chips cannot be easily disabled.

Quote from: K-Mack on October 20, 2008, 12:00:03 AM

I had a problem with conference reputation and SOS reliance being a major factor in barring teams, especially undefeated ones or ones whose losses came to teams rated higher than another team had played, from the playoffs under the old 16-team system. In light of the AQ system, I advocate the use of those factors in the creation of a top 25 poll.

BUT--and this is a compliment--you don't advocate the use of those factors so much as, for example, to give St. John's a presumptive top ten ranking, as it's obvious many other poll voters have sometimes done.

I think for the most part you've explained your approach to poll voting as one that has a lot of merit, and is quite defensible.  I mean, after all, you're credited with identifying the "McMillan Paradox" where Team A, which has defeated Team B head-to-head, is ranked below Team B, despite the teams having the same or similar records.

Where you and I might differ on this particular forum topic--besides the fact that I'll never have the patience (or the obsessive-compulsive interest, frankly ;) ) to participate in something like the d3football.com Top 25 Poll--is you're more willing than I am to accept subjective analysis techniques when objective data are available.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2008, 04:52:49 PM
But, redswarm, if 'objective' is the over-riding concern, just copy out Massey.  (Of course, some human had to program the computer, and decide WHICH objective facts receive HOW MUCH weight.)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 05:47:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 20, 2008, 04:52:49 PM
But, redswarm, if 'objective' is the over-riding concern, just copy out Massey.  (Of course, some human had to program the computer, and decide WHICH objective facts receive HOW MUCH weight.)

You answered your own question, the same way that I would have.  Thanks.

Ultimately, and I might have mentioned this before, the only immutable law in college football is

On any given Saturday . . .

As such, polls can never be completely reliable in predicting which team would win on a neutral field.  For that matter, even playoffs don't necessarily determine the theoretical best team based on all available evidence, they only determine the team that strung together the most given Saturdays with favorable outcomes.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 22, 2008, 12:59:28 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 04:45:47 PM
I mean, after all, you're credited with identifying the "McMillan Paradox" where Team A, which has defeated Team B head-to-head, is ranked below Team B, despite the teams having the same or similar records.

I regret missing an opportunity to go all OCD on a Week 2 - 6 McMillan Paradox, when Delaware Valley was ranked several spots lower than Wesley, whom DelVal had beaten head to head.

The McMillan Paradox was complicated in Week 6, when Wesley beat Iona, thus introducing the Common Opponent Dilemma, since DelVAl's one loss was to Iona.

(Any other PPers suffer from the affliction of reflexively thinking "kappa, lambda, mu, nu, xi, omicron, . . ." every time he hears or reads "Iona?")
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2008, 01:01:39 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 22, 2008, 12:59:28 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 04:45:47 PM
I mean, after all, you're credited with identifying the "McMillan Paradox" where Team A, which has defeated Team B head-to-head, is ranked below Team B, despite the teams having the same or similar records.

I regret missing an opportunity to go all OCD on a Week 2 - 6 McMillan Paradox, when Delaware Valley was ranked several spots lower than Wesley, whom DelVal had beaten head to head.

The McMillan Paradox was complicated in Week 6, when Wesley beat Iona, thus introducing the Common Opponent Dilemma, since DelVAl's one loss was to Iona.

(Any other PPers suffer from the affliction of reflexively thinking "kappa, lambda, mu, nu, xi, omicron, . . ." every time he hears or reads "Iona?")
That is geekiness unparalleled, even down to the "teal" font color!  +1!   :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 23, 2008, 12:10:58 PM
Quote from: hscoach on October 20, 2008, 07:17:31 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 19, 2008, 11:18:24 PM
.......Call it art. Call it science. Call it artscience if you want. I'm not sure it really matters so long as people keep the poll itself in proper perspective.........

What about the "Dart Board Method"?  That's my personal favorite.

So that's how Principia got that No. 1 vote.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 23, 2008, 12:31:23 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 04:45:47 PMOf course it varies from voter to voter, and I'm not asking or expecting you to answer on behalf of every voter.  However, with you and I being two committed pontificators, and especially with you being both willing and able to explain the often complicated reasoning behind your poll voting, I end up asking the often complicated questions primarily of you, and not of the other 24.

It varies from voter to voter, and I suspect that there are several voters who do a lot more "gut feeling" and a lot less "using something" than you do.

That makes sense, since yes, I am often here to explain.

And I suspect the same.

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 04:45:47 PMAs I know I've mentioned elsewhere, e.g. on the East Region Fan Poll page, I are A en-guh-neer, and as such I am trained to abhor an unbalanced equation--that's why I'm prone to point out inconsistencies in the lengths of blades of grass, even when the lawn is freshly mowed.  And yes, polling is conducted by humans, whose emotion chips cannot be easily disabled.
Quote from: K-Mack on October 20, 2008, 12:00:03 AM

Ah yes. I am a journalist, trained to examine the matter from all possible angles, taking into account the emotion of the story, but when necessary suppressing my own.

Quote from: redswarm81 on October 20, 2008, 04:45:47 PMBUT--and this is a compliment--you don't advocate the use of those factors so much as, for example, to give St. John's a presumptive top ten ranking, as it's obvious many other poll voters have sometimes done.

I think for the most part you've explained your approach to poll voting as one that has a lot of merit, and is quite defensible.  I mean, after all, you're credited with identifying the "McMillan Paradox" where Team A, which has defeated Team B head-to-head, is ranked below Team B, despite the teams having the same or similar records.

Where you and I might differ on this particular forum topic--besides the fact that I'll never have the patience (or the obsessive-compulsive interest, frankly ;) ) to participate in something like the d3football.com Top 25 Poll--is you're more willing than I am to accept subjective analysis techniques when objective data are available.

OK, so we're clear, I hate the paradox that is named after me.

And I do prefer the use of objective data when available. But a lot of data seems to fall somewhere between objective and subjective, for instance, it's objectively true that Team A beat Team B by 14, and Team B beat Team C by 7, but it's subjective to assume Team A is 21 points better than Team C, is it not?

Polling is rather obessive-compulsive, isn't it? :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 23, 2008, 09:16:32 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 23, 2008, 12:31:23 PM

And I do prefer the use of objective data when available. But a lot of data seems to fall somewhere between objective and subjective, for instance, it's objectively true that Team A beat Team B by 14, and Team B beat Team C by 7, but it's subjective to assume Team A is 21 points better than Team C, is it not?

Actually no, that is objective--but it's highly unreliable, since it's objectively extrapolating from two tenuously related data points.  Not to mention the countless other variables (e.g. weather, location of games, injuries) that are being overlooked.

Quote from: K-Mack on October 23, 2008, 12:31:23 PM
Polling is rather obessive-compulsive, isn't it? :)

Rather?  Yes, I suppose it is, just as without anesthesia, tooth extraction is rather painful.   :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on October 25, 2008, 10:16:52 PM
Who is the new #2?

North Central?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 25, 2008, 10:18:56 PM
Quote from: hscoach on October 25, 2008, 10:16:52 PM
Who is the new #2?

North Central?

Don't speak too quickly - Wheaton has scored two quick tds and cut the lead to 37-21 with nearly 13 minutes to play.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 25, 2008, 11:04:07 PM
Final AT Wheaton: NCC 44, Wheaton 21.

With UWW and UMHB both going down, and Muhlenberg apparently struggling to beat underwhelming F&M, I'll stick my neck out with MUC now unanimously #1, then a dogfight for #2 among a number of teams - I'll say (all within a few points of one another) 2. NCC, 3. Wabash, 4. Muhlenberg, 5. UWW, 6. UMHB.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on October 26, 2008, 03:05:23 AM
I always enjoy seeing what teams take the place of the teams that fall out of the top 25.  I would guess Capital, Delaware Valley, & Linfield will drop out, & they will be replaced (in no particular order) UW-Stevens Point, Montclair State, & Monmouth.  Maybe Franklin or Trine has a shot, but less than stellar victories I doubt it.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on October 26, 2008, 04:36:30 PM
Mates,

The 2,3,4 teams lost. Muhlenberg won. The torrential downpour, the 30-40 mph gusting winds, and a team

hell bent on pulling off the conference upset of the year could not beat them down. The CC conference is much improved, truly giving meaning to the truth that "any given Saturday" any team can win.See the league upsets this year and  the near upsets, every week. Let's give this proven team (2nd round play off  contender last year) and an improved stronger CC a fair shake in the poll voting this week...only what
the continued unbeaten Mules (with a 300lb O line, a 64% qb, and a national top 10 RB)..truly deserve and have earned.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on October 26, 2008, 04:46:12 PM
The NAIA should have an impact today.  It did for me, MHB lost by 12, 40-28 to NAIA So. Oregon.  Earlier in the season, Willamette beat So. Oregon 31-23, and Linfield beat So. Oregon 14-7.  Usually out of DIII games, may or may not have impact on the top 25, but this time, at least for me, it made Willamette look really good.  I moved them up and over some teams.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on October 26, 2008, 04:50:43 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on October 26, 2008, 04:36:30 PM
Mates,

The 2,3,4 teams lost. Muhlenberg won. The torrential downpour, the 30-40 mph gusting winds, and a team

hell bent on pulling off the conference upset of the year could not beat them down. The CC conference is much improved, truly giving meaning to the truth that "any given Saturday" any team can win.See the league upsets this year and  the near upsets, every week. Let's give this proven team (2nd round play off  contender last year) and an improved stronger CC a fair shake in the poll voting this week...only what
the continued unbeaten Mules (with a 300lb O line, a 64% qb, and a national top 10 RB)..truly deserve and have earned.



Beat some teams outside the conference with a winning records before you upgrade the whole conference
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on October 26, 2008, 05:10:21 PM

PaWesley,

                 I guess we will have to wait until November to  beat some out of conference winners...

oh, yeah....we have 9 in our conference, not four....seeya in Nov....maybe
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on October 26, 2008, 05:17:20 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on October 26, 2008, 05:10:21 PM

PaWesley,

                 I guess we will have to wait until November to  beat some out of conference winners...

oh, yeah....we have 9 in our conference, not four....seeya in Nov....maybe

  OUCH :(  Try something original..
If the league that was supposed to have been formed had happened then every one would be bitching that Wesley and Salisbury have it too easy.. None of the schools in the ACFC DUCK anyone!!! Two from the MAC backed out of oral commitments for next year after Wesley smoked Widener.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on October 26, 2008, 05:29:29 PM

PaWesley,

Sorry to hear about the scheduling problems...did DelVal back out?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on October 26, 2008, 05:42:00 PM
I know that Lyco did the Monday after Wesley beat Widener because they wanted to play Rowan instead and according to Gordon they agreed to a four year deal. And the word was that Del Val wanted out too
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on October 27, 2008, 12:11:15 AM
I also hope that the men and women that I interviewed from Willamette who were in Hawaii during the attack on Pearl Harbor are still around to see this run by the football team.  Last I heard, they still get together on Saturday's at the local diner before games.  I last heard from one of the group last year.

If they make it to the NCAA's I'd be happy to revisit this story.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 27, 2008, 01:09:28 AM
The most recent Top 25 breaks out into some distinct groups.  To me, I see these rankings.

1)
2)
3-4)  #3 Wabash has DePauw.
5-9)  Much uncertainty at this level.  #5 Millsaps is at #14 Trinity.  #7 Cortland St still has Ithaca.  #9 W&J is at Thomas More.
10)  Wesley at #16 Salisbury this week.  Must win game for both teams.
11-15)  More uncertainty
16)
17)
18)
19-20)
21-22)
23-25)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 27, 2008, 03:15:04 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 27, 2008, 01:09:28 AM
The most recent Top 25 breaks out into some distinct groups.  To me, I see these rankings.

1)
2)
3-4)  #3 Wabash has DePauw.
5-9)  Much uncertainty at this level.  #5 Millsaps is at #14 Trinity.  #7 Cortland St still has Ithaca.  #9 W&J is at Thomas More.
10)  Wesley at #16 Salisbury this week.  Must win game for both teams.
11-15)  More uncertainty
16)
17)
18)
19-20)
21-22)
23-25)

Don't forget the converses:

1)
2)
3-4)  #3 Wabash has DePauw.
5-9)  Much uncertainty at this level.  #5 Millsaps is at #14 Trinity.  #7 Cortland St still has Ithaca.  #9 W&J is at Thomas More.
10)  Wesley at #16 Salisbury this week.  Must win game for both teams.
11-15)  More uncertainty, #14 Trinity hosts #5 Millsaps.
16) Salisbury has #10 Wesley this week.
17)
18)
19-20)
21-22) #21 Ithaca still has #7 Cortland St.
23-25)

There's plenty more uncertainty to boot:

#17 UW-Stevens Point still has #19 UW-Eau Claire;
#18 Otterbein still has #1 Mount Union and John Carroll;
#19 UW-Eau Claire still has #17 UW-Stevens Point;
#20 Occidental is at Cal Lutheran;
#22 RPI still has Union and Hobart;
#23 Montclair St. still has Rowan;
#24 Franklin has Rose-Hulman this week;
#25 Trine still has Adrian.

Halloween's coming up--potential bloodbath to come, it appears.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: betty52 on October 27, 2008, 02:18:33 PM
The Bearcats should be ranked higher than MHB.  The polls should reflect SO's loss to Willamette and Linfield, and also the fact that Willamette handled Linfield.  MHB should be lower than Willamette regardless of where Willamette is ranked!!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 27, 2008, 05:19:32 PM
I'm struck by the fact that two consecutive d3football.com Top 25 Polls have zero MIAC teams.  That must be a first, no?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: CobberFvr on October 27, 2008, 05:52:38 PM
Yeah there's usually one at least. But Concordia and Saint John's both keep winning. And Concordia is only 2 spots away.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 28, 2008, 09:17:37 AM
In evaluating UMHB's loss to S Ore shouldn't consideration be given to the fact the S Ore played a diferent QB against the Crusaders?  He had a 66% completion rate and 3 tds.  The QB who faced Linfield and Willamette completed fewer than half of his passes in those games and threw only one td in each.  The new QB started and got a win against Azusa Pacific the week before.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on October 28, 2008, 09:51:48 AM
How would one factor that in? It could mean that the QB who played against Linfield and Willamette was inferior to the one who played against UMHB, or it could mean that the Defenses of Linfield and Willamette are superior to the UMHB Defense. Flip a coin?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 10:40:13 AM
Quote from: retagent on October 28, 2008, 09:51:48 AM
How would one factor that in? It could mean that the QB who played against Linfield and Willamette was inferior to the one who played against UMHB, or it could mean that the Defenses of Linfield and Willamette are superior to the UMHB Defense. Flip a coin?
You could also factor in travel, an uncharacteristic bad pitch into the end zone, major pass interference penalties that kept SOU drives alive leading to td's for SOU, one that negated a int, the relative health and uncertainty at the RB position for UMHB, the fact that UMHB ran the ball 31 times and passed 24 (if you don't follow UMHB football that is NOT normal) or any other number of things.  The end result was UMHB played one of the worst games I have ever seen it play, and paid the price.  On Saturday, SOU wanted it more and out performed UMHB.  UMHB did not execute its game plan and lost.  You could see the SOU defense grow in confidence with every drive, and ultimately did the job necessary to win.  It was a good win for SOU. 

That said, I don't think you should compare the common opponent here.  Linfield and UMHB have a common opponent in HSU.  Linfield lost, UMHB won.  Is that due to travel? or any other number of circumstances?  What it boils down to is that the game is irrelevant.  It has no impact on the way the playoffs shake out other than to reduce the number of D3 games for UMHB.  Sure the loss dropped UMHB 5 places in the poles, I don't like it but with all the injuries it's probably right.  This isn't the same UMHB I'm used to watching week in and out, but I wouldn't count on the SOU common opponent as a measure of the Crusader football team.  On that given Saturday,  SOU was the dominant team an many other Saturdays they likely would not be..   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 28, 2008, 10:59:08 AM
I'm not suggsting figuring it in, except to say thatUMHB did not play the same SOU team as Linfield and Willamette.  To me that calls in question the validity of down-rating UMHB based on results v SOU.

8904, are any of the injured RBs expected to return? 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wally_wabash on October 28, 2008, 11:45:45 AM
I think it was Keith in the podcast that mentioned something to the effect that UMHB is obviously better than what they've shown recently due to the fact that their team is a MASH unit right now, but unfortunately when it comes to balloting, the guys with the votes have to evaluate the team that they have and not the team that they could have if we could go into the game settings and turn injuries off. 

UMHB is fine...the loss wasn't D-III, it doesn't hurt their chances to get into the playoffs and shouldn't hurt their seed at all.  I just hope they had a good time in Ashland...lots of cool stuff to see and do in that little town.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 12:16:04 PM
Quote from: cwru70 on October 28, 2008, 10:59:08 AM
I'm not suggsting figuring it in, except to say thatUMHB did not play the same SOU team as Linfield and Willamette.  To me that calls in question the validity of down-rating UMHB based on results v SOU.

8904, are any of the injured RBs expected to return? 
A few weeks ago they said Daniels may be able to return for the Nov. 8th game.  That's homecoming so it would be nice, and that would also give him 2 weeks before the playoffs.  I haven't heard anything about Hurst.  THe injury was first reported as a stinger, but he hasn't played RB since.  The projected started for this week is a Freshman  who has had pretty good success, and number 2 is likely to be a sophomore converted LB who has had several really strong runs.  The knock on the Freshman is he only weighs 175, program weight, but at least has a burst when he gets in the secondary.

Quote from: wally_wabash on October 28, 2008, 11:45:45 AM
UMHB is fine...the loss wasn't D-III, it doesn't hurt their chances to get into the playoffs and shouldn't hurt their seed at all.  I just hope they had a good time in Ashland...lots of cool stuff to see and do in that little town.   :)
They should be fine.  They have to lose 2 of 3 to not get the AQ, and if they lose 3 of the last 4 they shouldn't be in the playoffs anyway.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on October 28, 2008, 05:33:54 PM

Mates,

Mules hit no 2 in AFCA today. Nobody jumping over them without getting kicked, unlikeD3.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 05:46:37 PM
Of course that poll's pretty much a joke... 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DadofBashWarrior.. on October 28, 2008, 06:29:14 PM
Quote from: DadofBashWarrior.. on July 14, 2008, 02:19:14 PM
I think North Central is underrated in all the polls.

NOTICE THE DATE OF THE ABOVE POST


I am glad to see North Central getting the respect they are due....Congrats to them!!!

WABASH ALWAYS FIGHTS
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on October 28, 2008, 07:42:32 PM


K-Mack/Pat,

Nice to see Mules getting a little respect from AFCA...no. 2 ranking...I guess the coaches see it a

tad diferently than the Gurus, who inexplicably hopped 2 teams over the Mules when they were

continuing to win in the rain and the wind while theteams above them were busy losing. Go figure...a poll is just a guess, I guess????????? Certainly improbable inadmissible speculation, right?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 28, 2008, 07:55:30 PM
There are 23 other voters who felt the same way, that Muhlenberg, playing zero ranked teams and nobody getting any votes, merited the No. 4 spot. That's still very high praise for a team with the 2008 resume of Muhlenberg.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 07:56:26 PM
Well #2 North Central thoroughly handled #4 Wheaton on the road and #3 Handled a pretty good Wooster team so I would suggest the jumps are legitimate... Plus you are only down on #3 by 10 voter points.  

I would ask a different question... What exactly have the mules done to actually deserve a #2 or even a #4 ranking?  
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on October 28, 2008, 07:58:19 PM
Thank you Pat and pg04

+1k to you both
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: d-train on October 28, 2008, 08:01:26 PM
Quote from: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 07:56:26 PM
Well #2 North Central thoroughly handled #4 Wheaton on the road and #3 Handled a pretty good Wooster team so I would suggest the jumps are legitimate... Plus you are only down on #3 by 10 voter points.  

I would ask a different question... What exactly have the mules done to actually deserve a #2 or even a #4 ranking?  

Also, a close look at the AFCA poll shows that the 2, 3, and 4 spots are bunched closely together (in terms of voter points).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 08:11:00 PM
Why exactly does UW-Whitewater have a number 1 vote in the AFCA poll when they just lost to an unranked team? LOL
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: old ends on October 28, 2008, 10:21:38 PM
We have tried to explain to the muledaddy how it works\
as I responded to him the other day.

The winning record for Muhlenberg looks good on paper but the fact that teams they have beaten are not winning hurts them on the same paper.

It is not that Centennial is a week conference it just that the teams out of conference, for Muhlenberg, are not helping them.
Wilkes  2 - 5, Alfred 3 - 3, non conference,

Gettysburg 3-5, Juniata 1 - 7, McDaniel 2 - 5, F & M 3 - 4. conference
Of the games left Dickinson and Moravian are the only two left that have winning records and that could change.

I am hoping that Muhlenberg keeps winning, but I think Dickinson and Moravian may be two possible stumbling blocks for thier program. Only the team's Victories could prove me wrong

So we let him rant until he his fingers get tired.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 10:40:18 PM
likewise, this probably belongs here:

Quotepresidents Says:

October 26th, 2008 at 11:04 pm e

three teams lose in the top 4 and W&J stays at 9

have any of you actaully seen them play this year?

D3Keith Says:
October 28th, 2008 at 10:36 pm e

Yeah, sorry I couldn't make it to the big showdowns with Oberlin and Frostburg State.

That's the price you pay for playing the schedule you do; You can't help the conference part of course, but when No. 7 North Central plays No. 4 Wheaton, you saw what it did to their ranking.

There's a team about an hour or so to the Northwest that will be looking for a non-conference game in 2010. If W&J schedules it, I will come.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 10:43:49 PM
Quote from: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 08:11:00 PM
Why exactly does UW-Whitewater have a number 1 vote in the AFCA poll when they just lost to an unranked team? LOL

Two words.

Larry.

Kehres.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 10:54:51 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 10:43:49 PM
Quote from: pg04 on October 28, 2008, 08:11:00 PM
Why exactly does UW-Whitewater have a number 1 vote in the AFCA poll when they just lost to an unranked team? LOL

Two words.

Larry.

Kehres.

Ah-ha! A logical answer! 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 10:57:14 PM
Quote from: mhb8904 AKA Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 10:40:13 AMWhat it boils down to is that the game is irrelevant. 

You make some good points in your post, but this was not one of them. In regards to the top 25, common opponents tend to be relevant, especially in the absence of other, more conclusive data.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 11:46:24 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 10:57:14 PM
Quote from: mhb8904 AKA Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 10:40:13 AMWhat it boils down to is that the game is irrelevant.

You make some good points in your post, but this was not one of them. In regards to the top 25, common opponents tend to be relevant, especially in the absence of other, more conclusive data.
Sorry if I made myself unclear.  I was responding to what seemed to me to be the suggestion that willamette is the better team given the common opponent as much as the idea that the circumstances in the games specifics shouldn't be accounted for.  I think for drawing conclusions about relative strength of the two teams, the game was irrelevant.  The reality of the game was that what mattered most was coming out healthier on the other side, or at least not more injured.  UMHB has to lose 2 of the last 3 to not get the AQ, so I think consideration has to be given to the relative irrelevance of the game to UMHB.  Did they play the full game to their peak?  Try their hardest?  I'd like to think so, but with the mistakes they made I have to think their heads were elsewhere opening the door for the monkey stomping they got.  And it was a monkey stomping.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on October 28, 2008, 05:33:54 PMMates,

Mules hit no 2 in AFCA today. Nobody jumping over them without getting kicked, unlikeD3.

Quote from: muledaddy on October 28, 2008, 07:42:32 PMK-Mack/Pat,

Nice to see Mules getting a little respect from AFCA...no. 2 ranking...I guess the coaches see it a tad diferently than the Gurus, who inexplicably hopped 2 teams over the Mules when they were continuing to win in the rain and the wind while theteams above them were busy losing. Go figure...a poll is just a guess, I guess????????? Certainly improbable inadmissible speculation, right?

If you're trying to bait me into a board war, and it certainly looks like you are when you put my name in a post and post on the same topic more than once, be advised I grew up a long time ago.

If you want to have a grown man's discussion on the likely reasons why Muhlenberg is not ranked No. 2, I'm game.

I like Coach Donnelly and Santagato and those guys, and I think Muhlenberg's got a nice team, so I have no interest in insulting them.

But being someone who doesn't have a son on the team (although I do have an aunt and uncle that met there) or at least doesn't have the team's mascot in my board name, I personally can separate the emotion from the information we have to evaluate the teams.

Your slander is sort of off-base anyway; you don't know if Pat or I ranked Muhlenberg second or not. (I moved North Central up to No. 2, but I had them ahead of Muhlenberg to begin with, they were only coming from No. 4 for me anyway.)

The 25 voters saw enough reason to rank North Central No. 2, and I think they (we) made the right choice. I think if you took an objective look at it, you'd agree.

But my sense is you're not interested in objectivity, you're just interested in Muhlenberg. So enjoy the AFCA poll. Theirs means about as much as ours when it comes to what you should be getting worked up about instead: playoff positioning.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 29, 2008, 12:01:21 AM
Quote from: mhb8904 AKA Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 11:46:24 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 10:57:14 PM
Quote from: mhb8904 AKA Toby Taff on October 28, 2008, 10:40:13 AMWhat it boils down to is that the game is irrelevant.

You make some good points in your post, but this was not one of them. In regards to the top 25, common opponents tend to be relevant, especially in the absence of other, more conclusive data.
Sorry if I made myself unclear.  I was responding to what seemed to me to be the suggestion that willamette is the better team given the common opponent as much as the idea that the circumstances in the games specifics shouldn't be accounted for.  I think for drawing conclusions about relative strength of the two teams, the game was irrelevant.  The reality of the game was that what mattered most was coming out healthier on the other side, or at least not more injured.  UMHB has to lose 2 of the last 3 to not get the AQ, so I think consideration has to be given to the relative irrelevance of the game to UMHB.  Did they play the full game to their peak?  Try their hardest?  I'd like to think so, but with the mistakes they made I have to think their heads were elsewhere opening the door for the monkey stomping they got.  And it was a monkey stomping.

I think your insight from UMHB's perspective is valuable.

Every year we have a case study or two where a strong team has key injuries, and I'm not sure all voters approach them the same way.

Actually, Pat and I don't always see it the same way, so I guess I am sure.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 29, 2008, 09:01:15 AM
Competing philosphies ?: vote where the team is now or where the team will be at the end of the season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on October 29, 2008, 11:12:30 AM
K-Mack,

I don't think it would be timely for us  to debate Muhlenberg's strength, especially since you have  long been aware of our Coach , qb Santagato, and rb DeLuca.I
think we can defer such a discussion in favor of the more positive and possibly beneficial topic you have raised...where do the Mules fit in the playoff picture...
do we leave them home in the South or move them to the East, and why?This assumes,
solely for the sake of discussion, that they are successful in running the gauntlet in these last 3 games of the regular season, 2 of which are away games
against real quality opponents, leading to a 2nd straight undefeated regular season.10 of 11 offensive starters from last year are back, as are 6 of 11 defenders..what seed, which area, and why?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 29, 2008, 11:23:35 AM
That's a discussion for a different board, then.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 01:12:57 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 28, 2008, 11:53:46 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on October 28, 2008, 05:33:54 PM
Mules hit no 2 in AFCA today. . . . the coaches see it a tad diferently than the Gurus, . . . blah blah blah . . . , I guess?????????

If you want to have a grown man's discussion on the likely reasons why Muhlenberg is not ranked No. 2, I'm game.

I like Coach Donnelly (RedSwarm81's former coach) and Santagato and those guys, and I think Muhlenberg's got a nice team, so I have no interest in insulting them.

So enjoy . . . what you should be getting worked up about instead: playoff positioning.

So this week, the following ranked teams lost:

No. 9 Washington & Jefferson
No. 14 Trinity (TX) (to No. 5 Millsaps)
No. 15 Wheaton
No. 16 Salisbury (to No. 10 Wesley)
No. 19 UW-Eau Claire (to No. 6 UW-Whitewater)

In my exceptionally cloudy crystal ball, I see Trinity dropping a bit, if voters notice their dismal OWP/OOWP.
I'm guessing Salisbury drops a bit on account of this being their second loss, even though it's to a higher ranked team.
Normally I'd guess UW-Eau Claire wouldn't drop out, but this is their third loss.

Nos. 1, 2, and 3 won handily.
No. 4 Muhlenberg clinched a Pool A bid with a 6 point win over Dickinson, who gave them quite a game after it looked early on as if Muhlenberg was going to run away with the game.
No. 5 Millsaps won by a margin that seems bigger than the seesawish game that K-Mack blogged.
No. 6 UW-W made something of a statement in the WIAC, although this wasn't a WIAConference game--it was just a game between two WIAC member teams.
No. 7 Cortland St. came from behind to beat New Jersey by 6, welcome to Pool A.

My predictions:

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: roocru on November 02, 2008, 01:37:26 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 01:12:57 AM


  • Thomas More will never recant his testimony.


+k
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on November 02, 2008, 04:42:01 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 01:12:57 AM
No. 4 Muhlenberg clinched a Pool A bid with a 6 point win over Dickinson, who gave them quite a game after it looked early on as if Muhlenberg was going to run away with the game.

Just a small correction in an otherwise well thought out analyisis:

If Muhlenberg loses its final two games (Ursinus and Moravian), that could bump them out of Pool A -- and probably out of Pool C. Moravian is a two-loss Centennial team, and they could wind up owning the head-to-head edge over the Mules.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on November 02, 2008, 04:58:59 PM

Ryan,
I will try to make swarm's anaysis merely premature, rather than inaccurate, by putting away Ursinus

next saturday, clinching CC and Pool A automatic qualifier.Where do the Mules get a better shot at 3 home playoff games, by staying home in the South, or being shipped to the East?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 05:00:59 PM
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on November 02, 2008, 04:42:01 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 01:12:57 AM
No. 4 Muhlenberg clinched a Pool A bid with a 6 point win over Dickinson, who gave them quite a game after it looked early on as if Muhlenberg was going to run away with the game.

Just a small correction in an otherwise well thought out analyisis:

If Muhlenberg loses its final two games (Ursinus and Moravian), that could bump them out of Pool A -- and probably out of Pool C. Moravian is a two-loss Centennial team, and they could wind up owning the head-to-head edge over the Mules.

That's not a prediction, is it, Ryan?  Given the laser-like accuracy of your recent Triple Take predictions, if that were your actual prediction, muledaddy might have trouble sleeping for the next couple of weeks.   :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on November 02, 2008, 06:05:32 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 05:00:59 PM
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on November 02, 2008, 04:42:01 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2008, 01:12:57 AM
No. 4 Muhlenberg clinched a Pool A bid with a 6 point win over Dickinson, who gave them quite a game after it looked early on as if Muhlenberg was going to run away with the game.

Just a small correction in an otherwise well thought out analyisis:

If Muhlenberg loses its final two games (Ursinus and Moravian), that could bump them out of Pool A -- and probably out of Pool C. Moravian is a two-loss Centennial team, and they could wind up owning the head-to-head edge over the Mules.

That's not a prediction, is it, Ryan?  Given the laser-like accuracy of your recent Triple Take predictions, if that were your actual prediction, muledaddy might have trouble sleeping for the next couple of weeks.   :D

So I can give muledaddy fits for the next few nights just by making this prediction? Talk about getting to have my cake and eat it too  ;D ;D

Just kidding, muledaddy. ;)

Nah, I was merely pointing out that Muhlenberg isn't quite a lock yet -- they're likely -- but not a lock. I don't see Ursinus beating the Mules, though I do see Moravian doing better than the 35-7 pasting that happened last season. Overall, I'd bank on Muhlenberg to run the table.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 02, 2008, 11:59:46 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on October 29, 2008, 11:12:30 AM
K-Mack,

I don't think it would be timely for us  to debate Muhlenberg's strength, especially since you have  long been aware of our Coach , qb Santagato, and rb DeLuca.I
think we can defer such a discussion in favor of the more positive and possibly beneficial topic you have raised...where do the Mules fit in the playoff picture...
do we leave them home in the South or move them to the East, and why?This assumes,
solely for the sake of discussion, that they are successful in running the gauntlet in these last 3 games of the regular season, 2 of which are away games
against real quality opponents, leading to a 2nd straight undefeated regular season.10 of 11 offensive starters from last year are back, as are 6 of 11 defenders..what seed, which area, and why?

Very classy response.

Even though this is technically for another board, I think Muhlenberg is a "swing team" as far as which region they'll be placed in, and here's why:

if Cortland State beats Ithaca, the East won't need a 1 seed shipped in (i.e. Mount Union). But if they fall short on teams, and the South is loaded (3 Texas teams, Millsaps, Huntingdon or LaGrange, ODAC champ, USAC champ) then either Wesley or Muhlenberg could move. Maybe host a MAC team in the first round. Same deal with sending W&J to the North if they are a Pool C.

Anyway, lots of time to sort that out ... and Mules are probably a hot topic sticking with this board's theme again, based on today's poll. I haven't moved them up or down in two weeks, I think ... I hope you can understand why Millsaps would move up.

UWW put up a statement win against a pretty good team and the Mules likewise played a decent team, but the tight score must have cost them some votes. I think the top of the D3 poll is just that clogged at this point. The Mules took a hit in points this week, from 540 to 496, but that 496 is just a shade behind UWW's 499 and Millsaps' 508. So it's not a distant 6th if you look beyond the numbers.

And yeah, clinching the Pool A bid is where it's at.

I wonder if the Mules move in the AFCA poll.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 03, 2008, 12:06:05 AM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 02, 2008, 04:58:59 PM
Where do the Mules get a better shot at 3 home playoff games, by staying home in the South, or being shipped to the East?

answered on the playoff speculation thread. will cc: my other answer too.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on November 03, 2008, 12:42:53 AM
Quote from: K-Mack3 Texas teams

I'd guesstimate the chance of three Texas teams at being 20-25% tops.  UMHB and HSU are in; with Trinity's best W being against DePauw and crummy opponents (record-wise) otherwise, they really don't have the credentials that many of the other one-loss teams bring to the tables.  If they'd lost, oh, maybe 49-34 instead of 56-27, I might feel a little better.  Margin of victory's not supposed to count but when you put team A against team B and team B has a 30-point loss on the table ... yeesh.  My guys are gonna need some help.

I hope you had a good dinner last night, Keith, and that you enjoyed your brief visit to South Texas.  It was good to see you again after all these years.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on November 03, 2008, 10:36:08 AM
Otterbein beats Capital amd moves up 1 spot gaining but 40 votes in a week in which three or four top ten teams lose.  This week the beat Marietta (2 wins) and move up 6 spots, gain 144 points, and leapfrog # 13 and 14.    ???
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on November 03, 2008, 11:04:27 AM
Well....Otterbein beat a 2-6 team in a much better conference 55-0 while CWRU beat a 2-5 team by a margin of 14 points.  Also, #14 Trinity lost & #16 Salsibury lost, plus #17 UW Stevens Point went to OT against a 3-4 team & barely got by Oshkosh.  Based upon those games it only helped them move up from 18 to 12.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: tv112 on November 03, 2008, 01:46:20 PM
OTT plays in a tough OAC conf., Just looking at the standings this week and I see Thomas More clinched a play-off birth, but if you look at their loss it was to John Carrol, the OAC's 3rd place team by a score of 41-14. You can also look at the W&J's games and see they only beat Theil by a score of 34-24 and then look at Theil vs. Marietta where the last place OAC team beat Theil by a score of 21-18, very comparable. The OAC is pretty solid from top to bottom. There are no winless teams in the OAC this year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: tv112 on November 03, 2008, 02:09:02 PM
Just some other OAC comparisons. 6th place Ohio Northern lost to #2 in the Nation North Central 20-3. Capital which is currently tied for 3rd in the OAC beat Adrian by a score of 34-14 which is currently 2nd MIAA at 7-1. Baldwin Wallace lost to #22 Franklin and currently #1 in the HCAC  by a score of 42-35. Some of the other conferences best teams could not go 500 in the OAC.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 03, 2008, 05:13:35 PM
^  Yup.  What he said.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 03, 2008, 05:25:58 PM
I don't think cwru70 was trying to say anything about CWRU's ranking, but that it makes no sense for Otterbein to not have moved up by beating Capital so soundly.  They deserved the points they gained a week earlier, not from beating Marietta, who is a bad team no matter what conference they play in.  (And for the record, yes, the OAC is a VERY tough football conference.)

And, yes, it was quite a disappointing game from CWRU this past weekend.  Five turnovers for a team that had five total on the year coming into the game.  But I guess it was the right week to have one of those games.  They just better come ready to play these next two weeks.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on November 03, 2008, 09:26:09 PM
Exactly.  Nor do I deny Otterbein's claim to #12.  Just strange that they moved little by beating Capital.  Of course this past week there were losses in the 9-17 teams.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 03, 2008, 11:42:47 PM
Quote from: cwru70 on November 03, 2008, 09:26:09 PM
Exactly.  Nor do I deny Otterbein's claim to #12.  Just strange that they moved little by beating Capital.  Of course this past week there were losses in the 9-17 teams.
I am confused.

Otterbein beat Marietta this week.  They gained 144 votes in the week #9 vote  as teams around them were losing.  The win over Capital in Week #8 suggested that Capital was slipping, but gave Otterbein an extra 40 votes.

I think that there may be an unconscious slotting by the voters that the #2 team in the OAC is a "#7 - #16" type of team at this time of the season.

Year.....Team......Week #9.....Final
2007Capital#12#13
2006Capital#5#3
2005ONU#19#5
2005Capital#21#19
2004Capital#16#12
2003BWC#7#3

In 2005 the voters may have "split the love" for the 2nd best team in the OAC.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 04, 2008, 12:51:26 AM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on November 03, 2008, 12:42:53 AM
Quote from: K-Mack3 Texas teams

I'd guesstimate the chance of three Texas teams at being 20-25% tops.  UMHB and HSU are in; with Trinity's best W being against DePauw and crummy opponents (record-wise) otherwise, they really don't have the credentials that many of the other one-loss teams bring to the tables. 

Well, don't count them out just yet. I've made a list of Pool C candidates, with their loss and their significant wins, if any, and a handful of them look like Trinity. W&J, Redlands, UW-Stevens Point maybe ... RPI if they lose and drop into Pool C.

More in ATN, of course.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 04, 2008, 01:01:41 AM
Quote from: cwru70 on November 03, 2008, 10:36:08 AM
Otterbein beats Capital amd moves up 1 spot gaining but 40 votes in a week in which three or four top ten teams lose.  This week the beat Marietta (2 wins) and move up 6 spots, gain 144 points, and leapfrog # 13 and 14.    ???

I don't know if the movement in a particular poll is necessarily reflective of only that team's result that week. As silly as that might sound on the surface, it might take a few weeks for the move a team deserves to make to reflect in the poll, based on who else loses. Also, previous wins that looked very good might not look as good and for those voters who re-evaluate the whole thing, that could be a factor.

Sometimes it's a matter of who around them loses and/or spots opening up. You reference a bunch of top ten teams losing last week, but that doesn't necessarily help a team in the teens, because those teams that fall from the top 10 might not drop far enough to fall behind a team in the low teens. But if you're in the teens and a lot of teams around you in the teens lose, that could open up more spots ... and you'd move up by default, not necessarily saying your win over a bad team suddenly makes you five spots better.

With respect to Otterbein, me personally, they were a big mover because I had them 18 last week and my 11, 13, 15 and 17 lost. So while I had Case at 14 and they moved up to 12 with two spots in front of them opening up, I had Otterbein at 18 and they moved up to 13 with four teams in front of them losing.

So they gained more spots as a reflection of me revising my feelings on the teams htat lost and slotting more teams behind them rather than as a reflection of their win over Marietta.

That might not explain the leapfrogging, but it could help explain the massive point gain.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 04, 2008, 01:08:28 AM
For me it was a partial re-evaluation of my ballot. I looked at OWP and OOWP for Otterbein and Case, both unbeaten teams in the North Region, and saw Otterbein with slightly better OWP numbers. (Remember these are overall numbers, not the regional only numbers on the site for NCAA selection purposes.) But Otterbein's stronger conference is reflected in the OOWP.

For that reason, Otterbein got a big boost on my ballot to get ahead of Case.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 04, 2008, 01:13:51 AM
Yeah, I re-evaluated Willamette a lot this week, and they didn't even play.

If voters are re-evaluting with all the available info each week, that stuff happens.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 04, 2008, 09:29:26 AM
Understood, and I don't think cwru70 was arguing that Otterbein shouldn't be ahead of CWRU.  In my opinion, Otterbein should have been around #10 a few weeks ago.  They look to be a very good team this year while the rest of the teams in the OAC that looked like they may be good (BW, JCU, Capital) seem to be slipping into the "average" category.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 04, 2008, 02:32:58 PM
jam40jeff: Otterbein has beaten those "average" teams and also Bethany. It's not a strong schedule for either Otterbein or Case so far.

I think Case is living off 2007.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 04, 2008, 02:47:52 PM
Let me reiterate (for a third time now), my arguments (and cwru70's) about Otterbein's have nothing to do with CWRU.  In fact, neither of us mentioned CWRU until K-Mack brought them up.

As far as your last comment...have you seen CWRU play this year?  I have been in attendance of every home game (excluding Chicago, which I watched online), attended the game at Oberlin, and have listened to two others on the radio.  Last year, I attended 4 games as well and listened to and watched a few more online.  I would definitely be willing to say that CWRU is substantially better than last year, regardless of the weakness of their schedule.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bill McCabe on November 04, 2008, 02:48:27 PM
In my opinion, the team being overlooked is Willamette.  I don't think I would want to play them any time soon.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on November 04, 2008, 08:41:08 PM
Technically I mentioned CWRU (#13). 

But this year's CWRU team is better than last year's.  If in depth alone.  Nine or ten starters and a handfull of impact back-ups have missed at least one game.  Three different players have started at center.  The schedule is a tad more difficult with Hiram for Galludent (a push) and Rochester for St. Vincent.  Nonetheless the Spartans have unleashed an onslaught in the first half of each and every game.  The average halftime score is 31-2.  Starters have played little in third quarter of most games and hardly any in the fourth quarter.

The Spartans have risen in the poll as far as any UAA team can, at least until one wins a second round game.  If it hadn't been for last year, the Spartans would be languishing down near the bottom with Trine and Monmouth.  So that extent they are "living off 2007."
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 04, 2008, 09:52:10 PM
I see your point.  I guess I got caught up in a bad day at work.  Re-reading my post, it seems a bit rash.  I also forgot that last year it took until week 11 before CWRU even cracked the top 25 (at #25 no less).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 12:31:58 AM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 04, 2008, 02:47:52 PM
As far as your last comment... have you seen CWRU play this year?  I have been in attendance of every home game (excluding Chicago, which I watched online)

If you want to pull out that argument, Pat or I could just as easily ask you if you've seen any ranked team besides CWRU play this year? Doesn't sound like it.

You and everyone else who tries/has tried to pull that one can more or less save it.

I'm just going to guess seeing several ranked teams beats seeing one over and over any day, with respect to opinions about the top 25.

You know we can't see every team, however, if Case played an interesting opponent, D3 staff would be a lot more likely to show up.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 12:32:57 AM
Quote from: Bill McCabe on November 04, 2008, 02:48:27 PM
In my opinion, the team being overlooked is Willamette.  I don't think I would want to play them any time soon.

If it helps any, I re-evaluated them quite favorably this past week. Very strong resume by comparison to other teams with similar records.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 12:35:09 AM
Quote from: cwru70 on November 04, 2008, 08:41:08 PMThe Spartans have risen in the poll as far as any UAA team can, at least until one wins a second round game.  If it hadn't been for last year, the Spartans would be languishing down near the bottom with Trine and Monmouth.  So that extent they are "living off 2007."

I agree with that. As good as Case probably is, I can't see moving them ahead of a one-loss UW-W or UMHB under any circumstance, really. You hate to have your mind made up before you process the data, but I think that's probably common sense unless we see something that proves otherwise.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 06, 2008, 07:54:33 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 12:31:58 AM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 04, 2008, 02:47:52 PM
As far as your last comment... have you seen CWRU play this year?  I have been in attendance of every home game (excluding Chicago, which I watched online)

If you want to pull out that argument, Pat or I could just as easily ask you if you've seen any ranked team besides CWRU play this year? Doesn't sound like it.

You and everyone else who tries/has tried to pull that one can more or less save it.

I'm just going to guess seeing several ranked teams beats seeing one over and over any day, with respect to opinions about the top 25.

You know we can't see every team, however, if Case played an interesting opponent, D3 staff would be a lot more likely to show up.

You took my comment completely out of context.  I wasn't arguing that CWRU should be ranked higher.  I was responding to Pat's comment about them living off of 2007.  I originally took him to mean that they weren't as good this year as last year.  But I see now that he was saying they may be ranked higher than they otherwise would be due in part to last year's success.

I know that my argument that I have seen CWRU play many times does not qualify me to argue Top 25 positions.  But I believe it does qualify me to comment on whether or not this year's team is better than last year's.

As far as watching other ranked teams play...I have seen Wabash, Mount Union, and Capital (who was ranked #9 at the time).  I know that's not many, especially compared to you guys, but I do watch a lot of football, not just CWRU football.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 01:34:29 PM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 06, 2008, 07:54:33 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 12:31:58 AM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 04, 2008, 02:47:52 PM
As far as your last comment... have you seen CWRU play this year?  I have been in attendance of every home game (excluding Chicago, which I watched online)

If you want to pull out that argument, Pat or I could just as easily ask you if you've seen any ranked team besides CWRU play this year? Doesn't sound like it.

You and everyone else who tries/has tried to pull that one can more or less save it.

I'm just going to guess seeing several ranked teams beats seeing one over and over any day, with respect to opinions about the top 25.

You know we can't see every team, however, if Case played an interesting opponent, D3 staff would be a lot more likely to show up.

You took my comment completely out of context.  I wasn't arguing that CWRU should be ranked higher.  I was responding to Pat's comment about them living off of 2007.  I originally took him to mean that they weren't as good this year as last year.  But I see now that he was saying they may be ranked higher than they otherwise would be due in part to last year's success.

I know that my argument that I have seen CWRU play many times does not qualify me to argue Top 25 positions.  But I believe it does qualify me to comment on whether or not this year's team is better than last year's.

As far as watching other ranked teams play...I have seen Wabash, Mount Union, and Capital (who was ranked #9 at the time).  I know that's not many, especially compared to you guys, but I do watch a lot of football, not just CWRU football.

OK. I wasn't trying to be a pee-pee head, I just see that thrown around a lot, especially the past couple weeks, and yours was the straw that broke the camel's back. I sometimes respond to stuff a little out of context because my mind works in disjointed ways like that. I feel like if I don't write it then it gets lost forever ... and better to make a point out of context than never to have made it at all. Yeah? Maybe?

In any case, I value the insights of the people on the board who have seen other teams or have the insight you can get seeing a team several times.

And I do stand by everything I said, with the "directed at you" feeling replaced by me speaking generally.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 06, 2008, 02:20:30 PM
Fair enough.  I enjoy this board and being able to discuss football rationally.  You guys all do a very good job of that.  I just felt that my comments were being misconstrued as all being CWRU propaganda, when I actually haven't mentioned there ranking as of late because I know they need to prove something, and that chance probably won't come until the playoffs (which they hopefully will be in).  I think my comments reflect my work mood some days as well, and you'll see the ones that are posted in the afternoon are usually the saltiest. :)

I also have a friend who currently starts for JCU (which is also my wife's alma mater).  So I see my fair share of OAC football as well.  I would never try to argue that CWRU's schedule is tough after seeing the games those teams play week in and week out.  But I still do believe they are a very good football team (and of course I am biased, being proud of my own alma mater).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 06, 2008, 02:26:13 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 01:34:29 PM
In any case, I value the insights of the people on the board who have seen other teams or have the insight you can get seeing a team several times.

Uh, Mount Union is pretty good.

How's that for some insight? ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 06, 2008, 02:29:45 PM
That's truth, not insight. :)

(Actually, it would probably be more truthful if you replaced "pretty" with "ridiculously".)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on November 09, 2008, 11:25:24 AM
Taking the risk of being misconstrued, as jam40 appears to have been, I'm just wondering whether either Carleton or St John's will get into the top 25 this week. I guess it all depends on whether you see the MIAC glass as being half-full or half empty. It goes without saying that parity has come to that league. Whether the voters believe that means that all teams have gone down, or that the traditional lesser teams have risen, is the question.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on November 09, 2008, 01:15:07 PM
Well, I know there's going to be room for at least one new team, retagent.  My Thomas More Saints didn't handle their 5 days in the top 25 very well.   :-[
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 09, 2008, 03:05:11 PM
Quote from: retagent on November 09, 2008, 11:25:24 AM
Taking the risk of being misconstrued, as jam40 appears to have been, I'm just wondering whether either Carleton or St John's will get into the top 25 this week. I guess it all depends on whether you see the MIAC glass as being half-full or half empty. It goes without saying that parity has come to that league. Whether the voters believe that means that all teams have gone down, or that the traditional lesser teams have risen, is the question.
I think that the assessment of the MIAC is how the MIAC Pool A bid fares in the playoffs.

I can imagine all of the MIAC boats rising if the Pool A wins the first round of the playoffs.  That bespeaks at least the #7 conference in all D-III.

Pat and Keith will re-rank the conferences after the playoffs. ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JT on November 09, 2008, 03:11:05 PM
Quote from: hscoach on November 06, 2008, 02:26:13 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 06, 2008, 01:34:29 PM
In any case, I value the insights of the people on the board who have seen other teams or have the insight you can get seeing a team several times.

Uh, Mount Union is pretty good.

How's that for some insight? ;)

Going out on a limb there coach, or are you sure about this one  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on November 09, 2008, 07:42:14 PM
I guess I have my answer. I wish I could be sure that they have it wrong, but the fact is, I'm not sure myself. It could be that the Pool A MIAC team gets to play UWW at UWW, or UWSP at Stevens Point. Not a trip I would want to take.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 09, 2008, 08:16:14 PM
Look at the way the top 11 moved their vote totals from week 9 to week 10.  There was no change in the order, only a change in the vote totals.

Team............Position.....Votes #10.....Votes #9
MUC1625625
NCC2582583
Wabash3533558
M'saps4521508
UWW5507499
Muhl6504496
Cort7465467
UMHB8464459
Wesley9421418
W'lam10420389
HSU11383364

Net vote gainers are in bold.



Wabash lost 25 votes or the equivalent of 1 ranking after their 27-7  60-7 win over Oberlin.  Wabash plays DePauw this week.  It looks like Millsaps, UWW and Muhlenberg picked up some of those votes.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wesleydad on November 09, 2008, 09:13:05 PM
ralph, thanks for the breakdown.  looks like voters are readjusting which is how it should be this late in the season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: labart96 on November 09, 2008, 10:56:48 PM
nice to see hobart back in the top 25.  could have been earlier if not for the slip up vs. union.  still - given it's been 2 years - this hobart fan is enjoying seeing the statesmen up there.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: WAF78 on November 10, 2008, 12:27:53 AM
Ralph...not to nit pick...but Wabash beat Oberlin 60-7...not 27-7....and that was in week 9.  Also...we dropped votes this week after beating Hiram 63-0 in week 10. Our second team played all but one series in the second half...on the road...so maybe we should have left the first team in and beaten them 94-0...maybe then we wouldn't have lost any votes?  Yes...we play DePauw this week for the Monon Bell. Looking forward to a great game.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 10, 2008, 12:32:22 AM
Quote from: WAF78 on November 10, 2008, 12:27:53 AM
Ralph...not to nit pick...but Wabash beat Oberlin 60-7...not 27-7.
My bad!  I got the "27-7" off the Wooster page on this site!

http://www.d3football.com/school/WOO/2008

Thanks!  :)



:D :D :D Maybe Wooster loaded the score wrong!


:D :D :D Boink! 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2008, 12:42:37 AM
I doubt any Hiram score would've made a difference.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 10, 2008, 12:49:13 AM
Quote from: retagent on November 09, 2008, 11:25:24 AM
Taking the risk of being misconstrued, as jam40 appears to have been, I'm just wondering whether either Carleton or St John's will get into the top 25 this week. I guess it all depends on whether you see the MIAC glass as being half-full or half empty. It goes without saying that parity has come to that league. Whether the voters believe that means that all teams have gone down, or that the traditional lesser teams have risen, is the question.

Strangely, I think the quality of play in that league has been up this year, and I don't think that's always the case in a league with a close race. The MIAC was pretty good in non-conference play this year, which is a good indicatior.

Still, I didn't vote for a MIAC team this week. It might still be too difficult to tell which is the one that's top 25 worthy, although we have narrowed the title picture down to two.

How odd if the MIAC had knocked SJU down a peg and they still rebounded to win the conference?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 01:37:22 AM
I have a (granted, very trivial) question about #20 and #21: Franklin and Trine.  Since Trine is undefeated, while Franklin's only loss is at Trine, they have two common opponents (Defiance and Manchester) that Franklin dispatched by a combined 61-34 but Trine downed by a combined 83-27, and both have pretty mediocre schedules (signature wins probably being Franklin over RHIT [and perhaps BW, but that was before Trine beat them, so IMO should be discounted] and Trine over Adrian), why is Franklin ahead of Trine?

As I said, trivial - but these sort of obscure anomalies pique my interest! ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2008, 01:42:14 AM
I can only speak for myself -- Trine's struggles to put Kalamazoo, Hope and Olivet away made it difficult for me to vote for them very highly.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 02:33:14 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2008, 01:42:14 AM
I can only speak for myself -- Trine's struggles to put Kalamazoo, Hope and Olivet away made it difficult for me to vote for them very highly.

Yeah, that's what I figured, too - but I can't lay ALL my cards on the table when I'm lodging a 'protest'! :D

I still would have figured that h-to-h and common opponents ought to lead to 1-slot away the other way.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Superfoot Wallace on November 10, 2008, 02:59:56 AM
That logic seems to say Franklin wouldn't have issue putting those same teams away.  Should place some value, if any, on an ability to win the close game. 

Franklin has let some big early leads slip, but this might be attributable to the way the FC defense is tailored to fit their offense.

For some reason these two Indiana teams' compositions are remniscent of championship teams from the far West and Northwest, whereas the dynamic of Indiana's third playoff representative appears more akin to those of the nearer West and East recent championship teams.

Weather very well might play a significant role in these teams' fortunes.  There is a significant argument why Big Ten teams don't perform as well in the sunshine weather of bowl games where the fair weather conferences' teams might not be built for the plodding style of ball found to be most frequented in the colder climes.

signed,
Frosty the Snowman
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: criswyly on November 10, 2008, 03:40:17 AM
I suspect that Willamette is the most underated team....and will make a big statement in the playoffs....and may have not even peaked as yet.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 10, 2008, 08:43:59 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 01:37:22 AM
I have a (granted, very trivial) question about #20 and #21: Franklin and Trine.  Since Trine is undefeated, while Franklin's only loss is at Trine, they have two common opponents (Defiance and Manchester) that Franklin dispatched by a combined 61-34 but Trine downed by a combined 83-27, and both have pretty mediocre schedules (signature wins probably being Franklin over RHIT [and perhaps BW, but that was before Trine beat them, so IMO should be discounted] and Trine over Adrian), why is Franklin ahead of Trine?

As I said, trivial - but these sort of obscure anomalies pique my interest! ;D

I would bet name recognition also has something to do with it.  Plus the HCAC has shown pretty well with Franklin and Mt. St. Joe recently.  When was the last time a MIAA team has made any noise in the playoffs?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on November 10, 2008, 08:50:12 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 10, 2008, 12:49:13 AM
How odd if the MIAC had knocked SJU down a peg and they still rebounded to win the conference?

Ha, if any St. John's fan said this BEFORE playing Carleton to decide the conference title next weekend they would be hen-pecked off this board for being an arrogant a-hole.  But I know what you're saying, the Johnnies are very fortunate to be in the position they are in after dropping two games and struggling with St. Olaf and St. Thomas the way they did.  And upon rereading what you wrote, I see that I misread it.  Most likely because I'm an arrogant Johnnie a-hole.

With the disclaimer that I haven't seen anyone besides MIAC teams, UW-River Falls, and East Texas Baptist this season, I feel confident that St. John's (and Concordia and maybe Carleton and possibly Bethel and Gustavus and Augsburg) would be able to beat some of the teams near the bottom of the Top 25 more than half the time.  (Monmouth and Redlands, for instance, going off of past playoff results when those teams had similar records and rankings.) 

That said, I'm also of the opinion that if the Top 25 was an accurate representation of who the best 25 teams are (based on who would beat who) there would be about 5 WIAC teams in the poll.  At a certain point I guess you can't justify listing a 4-6 WIAC team over a 9-1 team that didn't play anyone...

In the end, it doesn't much matter because we have The Tournament.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on November 10, 2008, 09:55:27 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 10, 2008, 12:32:22 AM
Quote from: WAF78 on November 10, 2008, 12:27:53 AM
Ralph...not to nit pick...but Wabash beat Oberlin 60-7...not 27-7.
My bad!  I got the "27-7" off the Wooster page on this site!

http://www.d3football.com/school/WOO/2008

Thanks!  :)



Wooster did beat Oberlin 27-7

:D :D :D Maybe Wooster loaded the score wrong!


:D :D :D Boink! 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 10, 2008, 10:57:36 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 01:37:22 AM
I have a (granted, very trivial) question about #20 and #21: Franklin and Trine.  Since Trine is undefeated, while Franklin's only loss is at Trine, they have two common opponents (Defiance and Manchester) that Franklin dispatched by a combined 61-34 but Trine downed by a combined 83-27, and both have pretty mediocre schedules (signature wins probably being Franklin over RHIT [and perhaps BW, but that was before Trine beat them, so IMO should be discounted] and Trine over Adrian), why is Franklin ahead of Trine?

As I said, trivial - but these sort of obscure anomalies pique my interest! ;D

The McMillan Paradox.

Not all evaluation criteria are alike.  Head-to-head results are the most directly relevant: (substantial, meaningful) advantage Trine.

Common opponent results are the next most relevant, and those come out pretty much a push.  Trine retains its advantage.

I don't see how Trine's close wins v. unrelated opponents overcomes the head-to-head and common opponent analysis when comparing Trine to Franklin.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2008, 10:59:32 AM
Because the poll is a current snapshot, and what has Trine done lately? That's what I'm looking at.

I'm also looking at the fact that it was a three-point game on Trine's home field, and trying to figure out what that means on a neutral field.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: bbaddict on November 10, 2008, 11:50:49 AM
Quote from: criswyly on November 10, 2008, 03:40:17 AM
I suspect that Willamette is the most underated team....and will make a big statement in the playoffs....and may have not even peaked as yet.

From your lips to God's ears -- sure hope you're right.  I'd rather Willamette be under rated and perform better than be over rated! 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 10, 2008, 11:53:04 AM
Quote from: criswyly on November 10, 2008, 03:40:17 AM
I suspect that Willamette is the most underated team....and will make a big statement in the playoffs....and may have not even peaked as yet.

That might be the case, but I still expect Whitewater to come rolling out of the West Region. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM

Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 10, 2008, 10:09:17 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM

Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?
Yes, a natural #1 in geographic proximity to 7 other schools to comprise one bracket.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 10, 2008, 10:25:19 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 10, 2008, 10:09:17 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM

Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?
Yes, a natural #1 in geographic proximity to 7 other schools to comprise one bracket.

Assuming Moravian cooperates.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 10:44:22 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM

Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?

I'll say maybe, bordering on no.  With FIVE undefeated teams in the North (including #1, #2, and #3 in the poll (though officially that is irrelevant), some thinning may be necessary.  I'm betting on MUC going East (again) if Cortland loses.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on November 10, 2008, 10:54:21 PM
I'm with Mr Y here, with all those unbeatens a north to east move seems almost ineveitable.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on November 11, 2008, 07:40:40 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 10:44:22 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM

Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?

I'll say maybe, bordering on no.  With FIVE undefeated teams in the North (including #1, #2, and #3 in the poll (though officially that is irrelevant), some thinning may be necessary.  I'm betting on MUC going East (again) if Cortland loses.

I think MUC going "East" is going to happen regardless of the Cortland outcome due to the same reasons you pointed out and the fact that there is no strong #2 in the region due to the RPI loss...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on November 11, 2008, 08:23:52 PM


Mates,
           Assuming the Mules get by Moravian, think Ralph has  hit the nail on the head,

a geographic natural sends the Mules Eastbound. I know if I was in the East, I would want this scenario

instead of another dose of MUC coming to town.....at least one is an unknown quantity.....
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 11, 2008, 08:38:43 PM
Quote from: Upstate on November 11, 2008, 07:40:40 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 10:44:22 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM
Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?

I'll say maybe, bordering on no.  With FIVE undefeated teams in the North (including #1, #2, and #3 in the poll (though officially that is irrelevant), some thinning may be necessary.  I'm betting on MUC going East (again) if Cortland loses.

I think MUC going "East" is going to happen regardless of the Cortland outcome due to the same reasons you pointed out and the fact that there is no strong #2 in the region due to the RPI loss...

Quote from: muledaddy on November 11, 2008, 08:23:52 PM
Mates,
           Assuming the Mules get by Moravian, think Ralph has  hit the nail on the head,

a geographic natural sends the Mules Eastbound. I know if I was in the East, I would want this scenario

instead of another dose of MUC coming to town.....at least one is an unknown quantity.....

If Cortland wins on Saturday, I don't see how the Selection Committee could justify moving either Muhlenberg or Mount Union to the East as a number 1 seed.

It's possible that both Muhlenberg and Millsaps "deserve" to be number 1 seeds.

It's also possible that Mount Union, North Central, and Wabash "deserve" to be number 1 seeds.

But it would be improper to demote a 10-0 Cortland St. to a number 2 seed, to make room for an out-of-region team.

If Ithaca wins on Saturday and Muhlenberg wins on Saturday, I also agree with Ralph - the geography makes too much sense too easily to be overlooked.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:42:34 AM
Quote from: hscoach on November 10, 2008, 08:43:59 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 01:37:22 AM
I have a (granted, very trivial) question about #20 and #21: Franklin and Trine.  Since Trine is undefeated, while Franklin's only loss is at Trine, they have two common opponents (Defiance and Manchester) that Franklin dispatched by a combined 61-34 but Trine downed by a combined 83-27, and both have pretty mediocre schedules (signature wins probably being Franklin over RHIT [and perhaps BW, but that was before Trine beat them, so IMO should be discounted] and Trine over Adrian), why is Franklin ahead of Trine?

As I said, trivial - but these sort of obscure anomalies pique my interest! ;D

I would bet name recognition also has something to do with it.  Plus the HCAC has shown pretty well with Franklin and Mt. St. Joe recently.  When was the last time a MIAA team has made any noise in the playoffs?

Albion in 94?

I think h2h should trump the comparative values of other things, but I also don't much by the +3 home field argument either, which would suggest Trine and Franklin are even. Also the circumstances of that game were a little flukey.

In any case, I think Trine should be ahead. But others don't agree.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:45:23 AM
Quote from: TC on November 10, 2008, 08:50:12 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 10, 2008, 12:49:13 AM
How odd if the MIAC had knocked SJU down a peg and they still rebounded to win the conference?

Ha, if any St. John's fan said this BEFORE playing Carleton to decide the conference title next weekend they would be hen-pecked off this board for being an arrogant a-hole.  But I know what you're saying, the Johnnies are very fortunate to be in the position they are in after dropping two games and struggling with St. Olaf and St. Thomas the way they did.  And upon rereading what you wrote, I see that I misread it.  Most likely because I'm an arrogant Johnnie a-hole.

With the disclaimer that I haven't seen anyone besides MIAC teams, UW-River Falls, and East Texas Baptist this season, I feel confident that St. John's (and Concordia and maybe Carleton and possibly Bethel and Gustavus and Augsburg) would be able to beat some of the teams near the bottom of the Top 25 more than half the time.  (Monmouth and Redlands, for instance, going off of past playoff results when those teams had similar records and rankings.) 

That said, I'm also of the opinion that if the Top 25 was an accurate representation of who the best 25 teams are (based on who would beat who) there would be about 5 WIAC teams in the poll.  At a certain point I guess you can't justify listing a 4-6 WIAC team over a 9-1 team that didn't play anyone...

In the end, it doesn't much matter because we have The Tournament.

Wise words all around.

I have said that same thing before about the WIAC ... I think describing the top 25 as part science, part art. That you might not bet on Monmouth against UW-Oshkosh, but you would rank them and not the other.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:47:37 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:42:34 AM
Quote from: hscoach on November 10, 2008, 08:43:59 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 01:37:22 AM
I have a (granted, very trivial) question about #20 and #21: Franklin and Trine.  Since Trine is undefeated, while Franklin's only loss is at Trine, they have two common opponents (Defiance and Manchester) that Franklin dispatched by a combined 61-34 but Trine downed by a combined 83-27, and both have pretty mediocre schedules (signature wins probably being Franklin over RHIT [and perhaps BW, but that was before Trine beat them, so IMO should be discounted] and Trine over Adrian), why is Franklin ahead of Trine?

As I said, trivial - but these sort of obscure anomalies pique my interest! ;D

I would bet name recognition also has something to do with it.  Plus the HCAC has shown pretty well with Franklin and Mt. St. Joe recently.  When was the last time a MIAA team has made any noise in the playoffs?

Albion in 94?

I think h2h should trump the comparative values of other things, but I also don't much by the +3 home field argument either, which would suggest Trine and Franklin are even. Also the circumstances of that game were a little flukey.

In any case, I think Trine should be ahead. But others don't agree.

Hah, wrote that before reading these:

Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 10, 2008, 10:59:32 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 10, 2008, 10:57:36 AM

The McMillan Paradox.

Not all evaluation criteria are alike.  Head-to-head results are the most directly relevant: (substantial, meaningful) advantage Trine.

Common opponent results are the next most relevant, and those come out pretty much a push.  Trine retains its advantage.

I don't see how Trine's close wins v. unrelated opponents overcomes the head-to-head and common opponent analysis when comparing Trine to Franklin.

Because the poll is a current snapshot, and what has Trine done lately? That's what I'm looking at.

I'm also looking at the fact that it was a three-point game on Trine's home field, and trying to figure out what that means on a neutral field.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:48:57 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 11, 2008, 08:38:43 PM
Quote from: Upstate on November 11, 2008, 07:40:40 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 10, 2008, 10:44:22 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on November 10, 2008, 10:03:12 PM
Mates,

If Ithaca whacks Cortland on Saturday, do the Mules take a hike to the East on Sunday, yes,no, or maybe,

and why?

I'll say maybe, bordering on no.  With FIVE undefeated teams in the North (including #1, #2, and #3 in the poll (though officially that is irrelevant), some thinning may be necessary.  I'm betting on MUC going East (again) if Cortland loses.

I think MUC going "East" is going to happen regardless of the Cortland outcome due to the same reasons you pointed out and the fact that there is no strong #2 in the region due to the RPI loss...

Quote from: muledaddy on November 11, 2008, 08:23:52 PM
Mates,
           Assuming the Mules get by Moravian, think Ralph has  hit the nail on the head,

a geographic natural sends the Mules Eastbound. I know if I was in the East, I would want this scenario

instead of another dose of MUC coming to town.....at least one is an unknown quantity.....

If Cortland wins on Saturday, I don't see how the Selection Committee could justify moving either Muhlenberg or Mount Union to the East as a number 1 seed.

It's possible that both Muhlenberg and Millsaps "deserve" to be number 1 seeds.

It's also possible that Mount Union, North Central, and Wabash "deserve" to be number 1 seeds.

But it would be improper to demote a 10-0 Cortland St. to a number 2 seed, to make room for an out-of-region team.

If Ithaca wins on Saturday and Muhlenberg wins on Saturday, I also agree with Ralph - the geography makes too much sense too easily to be overlooked.

I agree with Red here ... but you all make good points.

It may be that there is no perfect answer.

It might also be that a bunch of teams lose Saturday and sort things out for us.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 12, 2008, 07:08:49 AM
Isn't it great to be discussing where playoff teams are going to be seeded instead of the crap we have in D1?

YEAH!  PLAYOFFS!  ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Bob.Gregg on November 12, 2008, 10:06:38 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:48:57 AM
It might also be that a bunch of teams lose Saturday and sort things out for us.

OR, confuse them even more....
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: labart96 on November 15, 2008, 11:49:20 PM
Quote from: Bob.Gregg on November 12, 2008, 10:06:38 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 12, 2008, 03:48:57 AM
It might also be that a bunch of teams lose Saturday and sort things out for us.

OR, confuse them even more....

what that said....and then some!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 16, 2008, 12:15:06 AM
1   Mount Union (25)   
2   North Central (Ill.)   
3   Wabash lost vs. DePauw
4   Millsaps   
5   UW-Whitewater
6   Muhlenberg  lost at Moravian
7   Cortland State  lost vs. Ithaca
8   Mary Hardin-Baylor
9   Wesley
10   Willamette   
11   Hardin-Simmons   
12   Case Western Reserve   
13   UW-Stevens Point   
14   Otterbein   
15   Occidental   
16   Salisbury   
17   Ithaca  beat Cortland State
18   Montclair State    lost at Kean
19   Washington and Jefferson   
20   Franklin   
21   Trine   
22   Monmouth   
23   Christopher Newport   
24   Hobart   
25   Redlands lost vs Cal Lutheran
Title: Re: Updated TOP 25 thru Nov. 22
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 23, 2008, 03:34:54 PM


#   School (1st votes)Reg seasonPts   Prev.Week #11Outcome in the playoffs
1   Mount Union (25)10-0 6251   Def Marietta 49-0Def Randolph-Macon 56-0, Hobart 42-7
2   North Central (Ill.)10-0 5872Def Elmhurst 35-28Def  Thomas More 44-23, Lost to Franklin 28-38
3   Millsaps10-0553 4Def Birmingham-Southern 31-14 Def. LaGrange 51-26, lost to W&J 20-35
4   UW-Whitewater9-1  545  5   Def UW-Platteville 52-13Def #25 St. John's 37-7, Won at Willamette 30-27
5   UMHB 9-1 4958   Def Sul Ross State 42-20 Def #8 Hardin-Simmons 38-35, #7 Wesley 46-14
6   Willamette10-048110Def Menlo 28-3 Def #13 Occidental 48-33, lost to UWW 27-30
7   Wesley8-14729Def Gallaudet 55-7Won at #14 Muhlenberg  20-0, lost at UMHB 14-46
8   Hardin-Simmons9-144111Open DateLost at #5 UMHB 35-38
9   UW-Stevens Point9-142613Def UW-La Crosse 21-7 Lost to Wartburg 21-26
10   Otterbein9-137214Def John Carroll 20-17Lost to #18 Franklin 62-45
11   CWRU10-037112Def Washington U. 17-0Lost to #15 Wabash 17-20
12   Ithaca9-132117Def No. 16 Cortland State 35-13Lost to Curry 21-26
13   Occidental9-030915Def Whittier 48-14Lost at #6 Willamette  33-48
14   Muhlenberg9-12956Lost to Moravian 27-24Lost to #7 Wesley 0-20
15   Wabash9-12793Lost to DePauw 36-14Won at #11 Case Western Reserve 20-17, lost to #25 Wheaton 28-59
16   Cortland State9-12607Lost to No. 12 Ithaca 35-13Def Plymouth State  31-14, Curry 42-0
17   Salisbury8-219216Def Frostburg State 55-14Won at Moravian (ECAC) 21-17
18   Franklin9-1168 20Def Hanover 34-0Won at #10 Otterbein 62-45, at #2 N.Central 38-28
19   W&J9-116319Def Waynesburg 42-9Def  #21 CNU  35-29, won at #3 Millsaps 35-20
20   Trine10-015321Def Ky. Christian 34-12Lost to #25 Wheaton (Ill.)  0-14
21   CNU8-113023Def Ferrum 13-10Lost at #19 W&J 29-35
22   Monmouth10-010622Open DateDef Aurora 42-13, lost to Wartburg 28-30
23   Hobart8-110024Def Rochester 10-7Def Lycoming  33-15, lost at #1 MUC 7-42
24   St. John's8-259-- Def Carleton 14-10Lost at #4 UW-Whitewater  7-37
25   Wheaton (Ill.)8-251--Def Carthage 51-24Won at #21 Trine  14-0, at #15 Wabash 59-28
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 28, 2008, 10:45:17 PM
Well at least the top 7 is still alive ... although we lose two of those Saturday.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 04, 2008, 12:18:24 AM
Updated thru November 29th.  (Corrections are appreciated.)



#   School (1st votes)Reg seasonPts   Prev.Week #11Outcome in the playoffs
1   Mount Union (25)10-0 6251   Def Marietta 49-0Def Randolph-Macon 56-0, Hobart 42-7
2   North Central (Ill.)10-0 5872Def Elmhurst 35-28Def  Thomas More 44-23, Lost to Franklin 28-38
3   Millsaps10-0553 4Def Birmingham-Southern 31-14 Def. LaGrange 51-26, lost to W&J 20-35
4   UW-Whitewater9-1  545  5   Def UW-Platteville 52-13Def #25 St. John's 37-7, Won at Willamette 30-27
5   UMHB 9-1 4958   Def Sul Ross State 42-20 Def #8 Hardin-Simmons 38-35, #7 Wesley 46-14
6   Willamette10-048110Def Menlo 28-3 Def #13 Occidental 48-33, lost to UWW 27-30
7   Wesley8-14729Def Gallaudet 55-7Won at #14 Muhlenberg  20-0, lost at UMHB 14-46
8   Hardin-Simmons9-144111Open DateLost at #5 UMHB 35-38
9   UW-Stevens Point9-142613Def UW-La Crosse 21-7 Lost to Wartburg 21-26
10   Otterbein9-137214Def John Carroll 20-17Lost to #18 Franklin 62-45
11   CWRU10-037112Def Washington U. 17-0Lost to #15 Wabash 17-20
12   Ithaca9-132117Def No. 16 Cortland State 35-13Lost to Curry 21-26
13   Occidental9-030915Def Whittier 48-14Lost at #6 Willamette  33-48
14   Muhlenberg9-12956Lost to Moravian 27-24Lost to #7 Wesley 0-20
15   Wabash9-12793Lost to DePauw 36-14Won at #11 Case Western Reserve 20-17, lost to #25 Wheaton 28-59
16   Cortland State9-12607Lost to No. 12 Ithaca 35-13Def Plymouth State  31-14, Curry 42-0
17   Salisbury8-219216Def Frostburg State 55-14Won at Moravian (ECAC) 21-17
18   Franklin9-1168 20Def Hanover 34-0Won at #10 Otterbein 62-45, at #2 N.Central 38-28
19   W&J9-116319Def Waynesburg 42-9Def  #21 CNU  35-29, won at #3 Millsaps 35-20
20   Trine10-015321Def Ky. Christian 34-12Lost to #25 Wheaton (Ill.)  0-14
21   CNU8-113023Def Ferrum 13-10Lost at #19 W&J 29-35
22   Monmouth10-010622Open DateDef Aurora 42-13, lost to Wartburg 28-30
23   Hobart8-110024Def Rochester 10-7Def Lycoming  33-15, lost at #1 MUC 7-42
24   St. John's8-259-- Def Carleton 14-10Lost at #4 UW-Whitewater  7-37
25   Wheaton (Ill.)8-251--Def Carthage 51-24Won at #21 Trine  14-0, at #15 Wabash 59-28

Legend:  Pool B bids are italicized.  CWRU and LaGrange are unranked.  Pool C bids are in bold.  Curry is unranked.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on December 04, 2008, 04:13:20 AM
Ralph,
solid work as always. If no one else appreciates it, I do.

Looks like we have
16 at 1
25 at 18
19 at 5
UNR at 4

24 playoffs teams plus Salisbury were ranked ... not sure if that says a lot about the poll or the committee or means nothing.

It does remind me that even on our best day, the poll still wouldn't be able to rank 7 playoff teams :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on December 04, 2008, 01:59:49 PM
K-Mack,

I posted this earlier this fall on the ATN board, but given your discussion I thought I would repost it here. I think it gives the D3 Poll more credibility (not that it needs it)

Quote from: USee on October 06, 2008, 12:38:12 PM
Another analysis I did, FWIW, is to look at the validity of the TOP 10 in the D3 poll. I looked at teams ranked in the TOP 10 of the D3 poll after week 1 of the poll (2003 through 2007). I looked to see where these teams were ranked after week 16 (which takes into account playoff performance) and how many of them ended up in the playoffs. Here is what I found:

2003:
6 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 week 16
8 out of 10 made playoffs

2004:
3 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
5 out of 10 made playoffs

2005:
6 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
8 out of 10 made playoffs

2006:
6 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
9 out of 10 made playoffs

2007:
7 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
7 out of 10 made playoffs

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 04, 2008, 02:47:14 PM
Quote from: USee on December 04, 2008, 01:59:49 PM
K-Mack,

I posted this earlier this fall on the ATN board, but given your discussion I thought I would repost it here. I think it gives the D3 Poll more credibility (not that it needs it)

Quote from: USee on October 06, 2008, 12:38:12 PM
Another analysis I did, FWIW, is to look at the validity of the TOP 10 in the D3 poll. I looked at teams ranked in the TOP 10 of the D3 poll after week 1 of the poll (2003 through 2007). I looked to see where these teams were ranked after week 16 (which takes into account playoff performance) and how many of them ended up in the playoffs. Here is what I found:

2003:
6 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 week 16
8 out of 10 made playoffs

2004:
3 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
5 out of 10 made playoffs

2005:
6 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
8 out of 10 made playoffs

2006:
6 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
9 out of 10 made playoffs

2007:
7 out of 10 still ranked in TOP 10 in week 16
7 out of 10 made playoffs


Great post...

One benefit that we get in D3 is that Pool C bids were expanded from 3 to 6 bids  in 2005.  The main place for discrepancy between "playoffs" and "Top 25" will be that those two "populations" are different.  The extra Pool C bids have made a difference because 3 of the 8 playoff teams left are Pool C bids, and maybe Wheaton and W&J don't make it 2004.    :)

#4 UWW, #7 HSU, and #10 Otterbein are Pool C bids, and were solid favorites to earn Pool C bids in 2008.  #8 Wesley is Pool B.
Title: Re: TOP 25 -- Updated thru December 6th games
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 06, 2008, 06:23:00 PM
Updated thru December 13th...



#   School (1st votes)Reg seasonPts   Prev.Week #11Outcome in the playoffs
1   Mount Union (25)10-0 6251   Def Marietta 49-0Def Randolph-Macon 56-0, #23 Hobart 42-7, #16 Cortland St 41-14, #25 Wheaton 45-24
2   North Central (Ill.)10-0 5872Def Elmhurst 35-28Def  Thomas More 44-23, lost to #18 Franklin 28-38
3   Millsaps10-0553 4Def Birmingham-Southern 31-14 Def. LaGrange 51-26, lost to #19 W&J 20-35
4   UW-Whitewater9-1  545  5   Def UW-Platteville 52-13Def #25 St. John's 37-7, won at #6 Willamette 30-27, def Wartburg 34-17, won at #5 UMHB 39-13
5   UMHB 9-1 4958   Def Sul Ross State 42-20 Def #8 Hardin-Simmons 38-35, #7 Wesley 46-14, #19 W&J 63-7, lost to #4 UWW 13-39
6   Willamette10-048110Def Menlo 28-3 Def #13 Occidental 48-33, lost to #4 UWW 27-30
7   Wesley8-14729Def Gallaudet 55-7Won at #14 Muhlenberg  20-0, lost at #5 UMHB 14-46
8   Hardin-Simmons9-144111Open DateLost at #5 UMHB 35-38
9   UW-Stevens Point9-142613Def UW-La Crosse 21-7 Lost to Wartburg 21-26
10   Otterbein9-137214Def John Carroll 20-17Lost to #18 Franklin 62-45
11   CWRU10-037112Def Washington U. 17-0Lost to #15 Wabash 17-20
12   Ithaca9-132117Def #16 Cortland State 35-13Lost to Curry 21-26
13   Occidental9-030915Def Whittier 48-14Lost at #6 Willamette  33-48
14   Muhlenberg9-12956Lost to Moravian 27-24Lost to #7 Wesley 0-20
15   Wabash9-12793Lost to DePauw 36-14Won at #11 Case Western Reserve 20-17, lost to #25 Wheaton 28-59
16   Cortland State9-12607Lost to No. 12 Ithaca 35-13Def Plymouth State  31-14, Curry 42-0, lost at MUC 14-41
17   Salisbury8-219216Def Frostburg State 55-14Won at Moravian (ECAC) 21-17
18   Franklin9-1168 20Def Hanover 34-0Won at #10 Otterbein 62-45, at #2 N.Central 38-28, lost to #25 Wheaton 28-45
19   W&J9-116319Def Waynesburg 42-9Def  #21 CNU  35-29, won at #3 Millsaps 35-20, lost at #5 UMHB 7-63
20   Trine10-015321Def Ky. Christian 34-12Lost to #25 Wheaton (Ill.)  0-14
21   CNU8-113023Def Ferrum 13-10Lost at #19 W&J 29-35
22   Monmouth10-010622Open DateDef Aurora 42-13, lost to Wartburg 28-30
23   Hobart8-110024Def Rochester 10-7Def Lycoming  33-15, lost at #1 MUC 7-42
24   St. John's8-259-- Def Carleton 14-10Lost at #4 UW-Whitewater  7-37
25   Wheaton (Ill.)8-251--Def Carthage 51-24Won at #21 Trine  14-0, at #15 Wabash 59-28, at #18 Franklin 45-28, lost at #1 MUC 24-45
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on December 07, 2008, 08:42:37 AM
If you go back and look at the D3 poll from week #7 you have:

1. Mount Union
2. Wisconsin Whitewater
3. Mary Hardin Baylor
4. Wheaton

That was right before Wheaton went on a 2 week holiday that it took the rest of the season and 3 rounds of the playoffs to recover from!  ;) ;D

All is right with the world now though.  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mugsy on December 07, 2008, 03:13:17 PM
Quote from: USee on December 07, 2008, 08:42:37 AM
If you go back and look at the D3 poll from week #7 you have:

1. Mount Union
2. Wisconsin Whitewater
3. Mary Hardin Baylor
4. Wheaton

That was right before Wheaton went on a 2 week holiday that it took the rest of the season and 3 rounds of the playoffs to recover from!  ;) ;D

All is right with the world now though.  ;)

Incredible observation...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on December 21, 2008, 04:29:48 PM
Quote from: Mugsy on December 07, 2008, 03:13:17 PM
Quote from: USee on December 07, 2008, 08:42:37 AM
If you go back and look at the D3 poll from week #7 you have:

1. Mount Union
2. Wisconsin Whitewater
3. Mary Hardin Baylor
4. Wheaton

That was right before Wheaton went on a 2 week holiday that it took the rest of the season and 3 rounds of the playoffs to recover from!  ;) ;D

All is right with the world now though.  ;)

Incredible observation...

I think it's pretty interesting.

I know my final top 25 didn't look anything like my Week 11 one either. The playoffs really do have a great effect on the final assessment of things, as they should.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 22, 2008, 10:59:59 PM
There are some distinct groupings in the final Top 25.

#   School (1st votes)   Rec.   Pts   Prev.   
1   Mount Union (25) 15-0 625   1   Perfect #1
2   UW-Whitewater 13-2 600    4   Perfect #2

3   Mary Hardin-Baylor 12-2 563   5   (550 = perfect # "4")

4   Willamette 11-1      508    6   (500 = perfect # "6")

5   Wheaton (Ill.) 11-3 482    25   (475 = perfect # "7")

6   Cortland State 11-2 445    16   (450 = perfect # "8")

7   Hardin-Simmons 9-2 422     8   (425 = perfect # "9")
8   Franklin       11-2    418    18   

9   North Central (Ill.) 11-1 390    2    (375 = perfect # "11")
10   Wartburg      10-3  374           --   

11   Wash. & Jeff.   11-2 342      19   (325 = perfect #"13")
12   Millsaps           11-1 341     3   
13   Wesley            9-2  336    7   

14   UW-Stevens Point 9-2 278     9    (275 = perfect "#15"   
15   Occidental          9-1   274     13   

16   Monmouth         11-1 213     22   (225 = perfect "#17")
17   Hobart         9-2    211   23   

18   Wabash     10-2  192     15   (200 = perfect "#18)
19   Otterbein     9-2  182     10   

20  Trine   10-1  153     20     (150 = perfect "#20)

21  Case Western Reserve 10-1 133    11   (125 points is a perfect "#21")
22   Curry    10-2 126     --   
23   Ithaca  9-2  121     12   
24   Salisbury   9-2 114     17   


25   Muhlenberg   9-2  103     14   (100 pts = perfect "#22")
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 24, 2008, 01:51:46 PM
Here are the Top 25 teams broken out as ranking in their respective regions.  Pool B are italicized; Pool C bids are bolded; Salisbury did not make the playoff.)




#/Team..............................VotesNorthWestSouthEast
1 Mount Union6251***
2 UW-Whitewater600*1**
3 UMHB563**1*
4 Willamette508*2**
5 Wheaton IL.......................4822***
6 Cortland St445***1
7 Hardin-Simmons422**2*
8 Franklin4183***
9 North Central IL3904***
10 Wartburg.........................390*3**
11 Wash & Jeff 342**3*
12  Millsaps341**4*
13  Wesley336**5*
14  UW-Stevens Point278*4**
15  Occidental.....................274*5**
16  Monmouth213*6**
17  Hobart211***2
18  Wabash1925***
19  Otterbein1826***
20  Trine.............................1537***
21  Case Western Reserve1338***
22  Curry126***3
23  Ithaca121***4
24  Salisbury114**6*
25  Muhlenberg.....................103**7*
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: MonroviaCat on December 27, 2008, 06:19:27 PM
Not that it really matters but it is interesting to see MHB ranked ahead of Willamette seeing as Willamette and MHB both played Southern Oregon and Willamette won while MHB lost (though I do know they were suffering from injuries and a long trip for that game).  Then, they both played and lost to UW-WW but Willamette lost by 3 while MHB lost by 26.  I'm assuming this must be a strength of schedule or "reputation" issue....  Any thoughts out there?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 27, 2008, 07:24:06 PM
Quote from: MonroviaCat on December 27, 2008, 06:19:27 PM
Not that it really matters but it is interesting to see MHB ranked ahead of Willamette seeing as Willamette and MHB both played Southern Oregon and Willamette won while MHB lost (though I do know they were suffering from injuries and a long trip for that game).  Then, they both played and lost to UW-WW but Willamette lost by 3 while MHB lost by 26.  I'm assuming this must be a strength of schedule or "reputation" issue....  Any thoughts out there?
Float up!?!

Both teams moved up from 5th and 6th to 3rd and 4th.

However, the thing that surprised me was how much vote-margin UMHB opened over Willamette, from 495/481 to 563/508.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on December 28, 2008, 12:07:30 PM
One hit wonder vs. consistent top 5 program.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 28, 2008, 12:32:23 PM
I doubt that was a determining factor, but there are definitely voters who tend to vote solely on how far a team advances in the playoffs. I try to remind them that the seeding of the D-III bracket doesn't make that a great factor in measuring strength of a team, but it's hard to avoid noting that Willamette didn't have the opportunity to beat the teams UMHB did in its extra two playoff games.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on December 28, 2008, 11:19:13 PM
Quote from: MonroviaCat on December 27, 2008, 06:19:27 PMNot that it really matters but it is interesting to see MHB ranked ahead of Willamette seeing as Willamette and MHB both played Southern Oregon and Willamette won while MHB lost (though I do know they were suffering from injuries and a long trip for that game).  Then, they both played and lost to UW-WW but Willamette lost by 3 while MHB lost by 26.  I'm assuming this must be a strength of schedule or "reputation" issue....  Any thoughts out there?

As Pat likes to say, it's not who you lost to, it's who you beat.

In that respect, even if you take away the extra playoff games UMHB had and don't count wins against No. 11 W&J and No. 13 Wesley, they still beat No. 7 Hardin-Simmons twice.

Willamette beat No. 15 Occidental and certainly had the favorable results against common opponents, including No. 2 UW-Whitewater.

I think there are arguments for both, and probably not everyone thinks far enough outside the box to consider a team ousted in the second round alongside one ousted in the semis, even if against the same time. Or maybe they do and had other reasons for UMHB.
Title: Re: TOP 25 -- Week #11 -- How they performed
Post by: Ralph Turner on January 01, 2009, 09:19:03 PM
Here is how the week #11 "Top 25" teams performed in the playoffs.



#   School (1st votes)Reg seasonPtsPrev.Week #11Outcome in the playoffs
1   Mount Union (25)10-0 6251   Def Marietta 49-0Def Randolph-Macon 56-0, #23 Hobart 42-7, #16 Cortland St 41-14, #25 Wheaton 45-24, #4 UWW 31-26
2   North Central (Ill.)10-0 5872Def Elmhurst 35-28Def  Thomas More 44-23, lost to #18 Franklin 28-38
3   Millsaps10-0553 4Def Birmingham-Southern 31-14 Def. LaGrange 51-26, lost to #19 W&J 20-35
4   UW-Whitewater9-1  545  5   Def UW-Platteville 52-13Def #25 St. John's 37-7, won at #6 Willamette 30-27, def Wartburg 34-17, won at #5 UMHB 39-13, lost in Stagg to #1 MUC 31-26
5   UMHB 9-1 4958   Def Sul Ross State 42-20 Def #8 Hardin-Simmons 38-35, #7 Wesley 46-14, #19 W&J 63-7, lost to #4 UWW 13-39
6   Willamette10-048110Def Menlo 28-3 Def #13 Occidental 48-33, lost to #4 UWW 27-30
7   Wesley8-14729Def Gallaudet 55-7Won at #14 Muhlenberg  20-0, lost at #5 UMHB 14-46
8   Hardin-Simmons9-144111Open DateLost at #5 UMHB 35-38
9   UW-Stevens Point9-142613Def UW-La Crosse 21-7 Lost to Wartburg 21-26
10   Otterbein9-137214Def John Carroll 20-17Lost to #18 Franklin 62-45
11   CWRU10-037112Def Washington U. 17-0Lost to #15 Wabash 17-20
12   Ithaca9-132117Def #16 Cortland State 35-13Lost to Curry 21-26
13   Occidental9-030915Def Whittier 48-14Lost at #6 Willamette  33-48
14   Muhlenberg9-12956Lost to Moravian 27-24Lost to #7 Wesley 0-20
15   Wabash9-12793Lost to DePauw 36-14Won at #11 Case Western Reserve 20-17, lost to #25 Wheaton 28-59
16   Cortland State9-12607Lost to No. 12 Ithaca 35-13Def Plymouth State  31-14, Curry 42-0, lost at MUC 14-41
17   Salisbury8-219216Def Frostburg State 55-14Won at Moravian (ECAC) 21-17
18   Franklin9-1168 20Def Hanover 34-0Won at #10 Otterbein 62-45, at #2 N.Central 38-28, lost to #25 Wheaton 28-45
19   W&J9-116319Def Waynesburg 42-9Def  #21 CNU  35-29, won at #3 Millsaps 35-20, lost at #5 UMHB 7-63
20   Trine10-015321Def Ky. Christian 34-12Lost to #25 Wheaton (Ill.)  0-14
21   CNU8-113023Def Ferrum 13-10Lost at #19 W&J 29-35
22   Monmouth10-010622Open DateDef Aurora 42-13, lost to Wartburg 28-30
23   Hobart8-110024Def Rochester 10-7Def Lycoming  33-15, lost at #1 MUC 7-42
24   St. John's8-259-- Def Carleton 14-10Lost at #4 UW-Whitewater  7-37
25   Wheaton (Ill.)8-251--Def Carthage 51-24Won at #21 Trine  14-0, at #15 Wabash 59-28, at #18 Franklin 45-28, lost at #1 MUC 24-45
RV"32" Wartburg8-25--Open dateWon at #9 UW-SP 26-21, won at #22  Monmouth 30-28, lost at #4 UW-W 17-34

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on January 20, 2009, 09:16:47 PM

Numbers,

                8-6-5-4-6-9-14-25........quite a ride for my son's senior year....a bit of a roller coaster......

exciting, but leaving you wanting more.......2 years in the top 25 represents 1  great experience

for kids, coaches, fans, and, most of all, for parents...thanks D3...no coulda, woulda, or shoulda...it just was
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on April 07, 2009, 11:38:34 PM
Quote from: muledaddy on January 20, 2009, 09:16:47 PM
thanks D3...no coulda, woulda, or shoulda...it just was

Hey, that's got potential!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: muledaddy on April 20, 2009, 08:13:17 PM


K-man,

Thanks, I needed that.....maybe I can get to work and produce something worth reading.....after all....

we will have to wait and see.....
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: @d3jason on May 29, 2009, 11:02:37 PM
Sporting News 2009 Preseason Top 25. Let the bashing begin!! :D


1. Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. St. John's
4. UMHB
5. Delaware Valley
6. Rowan
7. Hardin-Simmons
8. North Central
9. Wartburg
10. Wabash
11. Monmouth
12. Curry
13. W & J
14. Christopher Newport
15. Wesley
16. Bridgewater
17. Hobart
18. John's Hopkins
19. Wheaton
20. Case Western
21. Cortland
22. Redlands
23. UW-Lacrosse
24. Lycoming
25. Otterbein


Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on May 30, 2009, 08:00:44 AM
Quote from: Conrad on May 29, 2009, 11:02:37 PM
Sporting News 2009 Preseason Top 25. Let the bashing begin!! :D
1. Whitewater
2. Mount Union

I think they have #1 & #2 correct.  UWW has more returning than MUC.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on May 30, 2009, 06:59:00 PM
Rowan in someone's preseason top 10?  Wow, that's never happened before.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on May 30, 2009, 08:52:15 PM
Bridgewater 16 is a bit of a stretch. For 2009, anyway.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on May 30, 2009, 10:02:22 PM
As is Dem Spicy Boys at 12.  20-25 I don't think there would be an issue but Dem Spicy Boys at 12 is pretty high for them...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on June 02, 2009, 04:11:34 PM
Quote from: kirasdad on May 30, 2009, 08:00:44 AM
Quote from: Conrad on May 29, 2009, 11:02:37 PM
Sporting News 2009 Preseason Top 25. Let the bashing begin!! :D
1. Whitewater
2. Mount Union

I think they have #1 & #2 correct.  UWW has more returning than MUC.

I agree 100%.  Whitewater is absolutely loaded for 2009.  Mount returns good numbers overall, especially on defense, but is missing the Big Two in Micheli & Kmic.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: frank uible on June 02, 2009, 04:29:52 PM
By the time Mount hits Whitewater in December Mount will have found a high quality RB and a high quality QB.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: gordonmann on June 03, 2009, 05:14:42 PM
Del Val at No. 5 is a big stretch, too.

They could be good (see wins over Wesley, Salisbury).  They could be bad (see loses to FDU-Florham, 7 points against Lyco).  But that kind of inconsistency is not the markings of a Top 5 team.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: d-train on June 03, 2009, 05:36:29 PM
Willamette? Linfield? Oxy? #11 Monmouth?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: footballfan413 on June 03, 2009, 06:49:10 PM
The holes in the logic are endless.  UW-LaCrosse at #23 with a 3-4 WIAC record and 3-7 overall?  Pretty damn good ranking for the 5th place WIAC team in 08.    How do you make a mistake like that?  WIAC Co-Champs, UW-Steven Point, (6-1, 9-2,) doesn't even make the top 25?   ??? ??? ::)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: gordonmann on June 04, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
While No. 11 is high for Monmouth, I think they could be really good this year.  There are a lot of parallels between this year's Scots team and last year's Franklin team.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mugsy on June 04, 2009, 02:16:04 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on June 04, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
While No. 11 is high for Monmouth, I think they could be really good this year.  There are a lot of parallels between this year's Scots team and last year's Franklin team.

Oh I wish I could say the parallels would include a QuarterFinal loss to Wheaton. ;)  Wheaton will have a solid team, but I fear having to replace 9 starters on defense will be a challenge.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on June 04, 2009, 08:51:17 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on June 04, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
While No. 11 is high for Monmouth, I think they could be really good this year.  There are a lot of parallels between this year's Scots team and last year's Franklin team.

except they don't play a competitive OAC team in their non-conference schedule to help get them ready for the conference season and post season.  I know travel is problem for the Scots (especially if they were to go to Ohio) but with that in mind... where is the Wisconsin teams or even someone in the top half of the CCIW or SOMEONE..

Franklin had played Wabash two straight years and then Baldwin Wallace while Rupp (QB) was there.  Their conference schedule was as weak as Monmouths (with the exception of 2007 playoff participant MSJ) but they got ready for the postseason with these non conference games.

11 is much too high for them.. they have to earn it in the postseason this year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: rams1102 on July 01, 2009, 07:46:01 PM
Does anybody have the full listing of the Lindys or USA Poll? Just need a D3 fix. :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on July 01, 2009, 08:17:12 PM
Quote from: rams1102 on July 01, 2009, 07:46:01 PM
Does anybody have the full listing of the Lindys or USA Poll? Just need a D3 fix. :)

I'm sure there's a more direct source out there somewhere for the USA Today poll, but here's where I first saw it:

http://www.suseagulls.com/sports/fball/2009-10/news/usatodaypoll0629
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on July 01, 2009, 08:24:45 PM
Some surprises there ... thanks for the link!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: rams1102 on July 01, 2009, 09:09:52 PM
Ryan : Thanks for the heads-up !!!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on July 07, 2009, 11:46:59 PM
Quote from: kirasdad on May 30, 2009, 08:00:44 AM
Quote from: Conrad on May 29, 2009, 11:02:37 PM
Sporting News 2009 Preseason Top 25. Let the bashing begin!! :D
1. Whitewater
2. Mount Union

I think they have #1 & #2 correct.  UWW has more returning than MUC.

Agree.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on July 07, 2009, 11:48:00 PM
Quote from: gordonmann on June 04, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
While No. 11 is high for Monmouth, I think they could be really good this year.  There are a lot of parallels between this year's Scots team and last year's Franklin team.

True.

I feel like I read that somewhere.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on July 08, 2009, 12:22:48 AM
Quote from: Ron Boerger on July 01, 2009, 08:24:45 PM
Some surprises there ... thanks for the link!

I thought it was pretty good.

Wouldn't be surprised if UW-SP doesn't end up anywhere close to No. 6, but that's a justified starting position.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 06, 2009, 10:53:30 PM
Some interesting 'head-scratchers' in the second ten:

Apparently beating kickoff's #206 by 12 is much more impressive than beating #100 by 19, as Case rose 3 spots and jumped Monmouth who fell 2 slots. ???

Not all open dates are created equal - Wabash, Hobart, and Montclair St. are now 16-18, with Wabash rising 2, Hobart falling 2, and Montclair rising 3, all while not playing. ???

But the ultimate indignity goes to Bald-Wally - beating them is apparently WORSE than not playing, as Franklin was jumped by idle Montclair St! :o ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on September 07, 2009, 01:08:47 AM
Here is where I have a problem ???.  I know Ohio Northern beat North Central.  But how do they go from receiving 0 votes to 9th in the top 25?  Really?  I think DIII should just abolish the top 25 poll & just have the top two poll & regional rankings.  MUC & UWW can sit at the top & everyone else can be judged based upon record & strength of schedule in their region. 
I know & understand North Central was number 4 in the top 25, but they were ranked that high based on previous years not by their potential for this year.  Yes I know their top qb, rb, & wr are back from last year too.
If ONU hangs with MUC for game 2 then I'll stand corrected, but other than that I will have 0 faith in the top 25!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2009, 01:10:52 AM
Alright. I think you're overreacting -- the poll did a great job reacting to a good indicator game.

By the way, I think you've seen before that being No. 9 going against Mount Union doesn't mean very much. They can be blown out by Mount Union and still be No. 9 in the country. Heck, even higher.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mugsy on September 07, 2009, 01:13:58 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2009, 01:10:52 AM
By the way, I think you've seen before that being No. 9 going against Mount Union doesn't mean very much. They can be blown out by Mount Union and still be No. 9 in the country. Heck, even higher.

Sigh... don't we know it.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 07, 2009, 01:30:44 AM
Quote from: dc_has_been on September 07, 2009, 01:08:47 AM
Here is where I have a problem ???.  I know Ohio Northern beat North Central.  But how do they go from receiving 0 votes to 9th in the top 25?  Really?  I think DIII should just abolish the top 25 poll & just have the top two poll & regional rankings.  MUC & UWW can sit at the top & everyone else can be judged based upon record & strength of schedule in their region. 
I know & understand North Central was number 4 in the top 25, but they were ranked that high based on previous years not by their potential for this year.  Yes I know their top qb, rb, & wr are back from last year too.
If ONU hangs with MUC for game 2 then I'll stand corrected, but other than that I will have 0 faith in the top 25!

Early season polls are (and should be) quite volatile, as 'potential' gets actually tested on the field.  (BTW, your contention that NCC's ranking was based on previous years and "not by their potential for this year" is belied by your next sentence - rightly or wrongly, their potential looked, and looks, mighty good.)  While I think the voters may have gone a bit TOO far (with both ONU and NCC), to say the poll has "0 credibility" is going WAY too far.

As I indicated in my earlier post, there are always some things that seem odd, but generally d3football.com gets the forecasts and polls a helluva lot better than any alternative media!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on September 07, 2009, 01:38:59 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2009, 01:10:52 AM
Alright. I think you're overreacting -- the poll did a great job reacting to a good indicator game.

By the way, I think you've seen before that being No. 9 going against Mount Union doesn't mean very much. They can be blown out by Mount Union and still be No. 9 in the country. Heck, even higher.
I know I'm overreacting....some ;) & I know if ONU keeps it within 4 or 5 scores they'll bump up to the top 5 too.  It is just bugs me when you see ONU make such a huge leap when there are teams like Capital that beat a school like Adrian (8-2 last year) & lose 18 points.  That is just one example.  
Does that mean BYU is going to be a top 5 team now in DI b/c they beat Oklahoma?   Maybe they'll work their way up, but not in just one week.  Again, we'll see what kind of team ONU pans out to be when they work their way through OAC action.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2009, 03:41:07 AM
Quote from: dc_has_been on September 07, 2009, 01:38:59 AM
I know if ONU keeps it within 4 or 5 scores they'll bump up to the top 5 too.

I challenge you to find one real-life example of a team losing by four or five scores, even to Mount Union, and jumping up anything like from No. 9 to the top five.

I doubt that would happen for BYU in beating Oklahoma, especially considering what shape Oklahoma was in. But Ohio Northern isn't a BYU, from a non-power conference. Ohio Northern is in the second-best conference in Division III.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: rams1102 on September 07, 2009, 09:23:05 AM
Pat :

Something has been bothering me and need some insight. As you know I am a Montclair fan and confused as to why we were ranked 21st in the Pre-Season and jumped to 18th this week. I know we went from 158 to 190 votes. Rowan was picked to win the NJAC with Montclair 3rd. They even got a mention for possible playoffs in the Preview. Montclairs "D" will be OK, the "O" will be I hope OK, but the jury is still out on our QB IMHO. I realize it's the end of week #1 but a loss to Wilkes and we will never be heard of again. Await your response.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Teamski on September 07, 2009, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: rams1102 on September 07, 2009, 09:23:05 AM
Pat :

Something has been bothering me and need some insight. As you know I am a Montclair fan and confused as to why we were ranked 21st in the Pre-Season and jumped to 18th this week. I know we went from 158 to 190 votes. Rowan was picked to win the NJAC with Montclair 3rd. They even got a mention for possible playoffs in the Preview. Montclairs "D" will be OK, the "O" will be I hope OK, but the jury is still out on our QB IMHO. I realize it's the end of week #1 but a loss to Wilkes and we will never be heard of again. Await your response.


I'm sure that is because some teams ahead of Montclair lost and were dropped down the chart.  Teams not playing weren't necessarily penalized for not playing.  Just my 2 cents.


-Ski
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: rams1102 on September 07, 2009, 11:03:40 AM
Quote from: Teamski on September 07, 2009, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: rams1102 on September 07, 2009, 09:23:05 AM
Pat :

Something has been bothering me and need some insight. As you know I am a Montclair fan and confused as to why we were ranked 21st in the Pre-Season and jumped to 18th this week. I know we went from 158 to 190 votes. Rowan was picked to win the NJAC with Montclair 3rd. They even got a mention for possible playoffs in the Preview. Montclairs "D" will be OK, the "O" will be I hope OK, but the jury is still out on our QB IMHO. I realize it's the end of week #1 but a loss to Wilkes and we will never be heard of again. Await your response.


I'm sure that is because some teams ahead of Montclair lost and were dropped down the chart.  Teams not playing weren't necessarily penalized for not playing.  Just my 2 cents.


-Ski

Rowan (believe me I'm not in love them) picked 1st in the NJAC, mentioned in the preview as maybe in the playoffs and D3 has Montclair 7-2 in conference. I love the recognition, but trying to figure out why. I know, shut my mouth and take the bow. ;) By the way nice monkey stomp on CNU. ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on September 07, 2009, 12:45:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 07, 2009, 03:41:07 AM
Quote from: dc_has_been on September 07, 2009, 01:38:59 AM
I know if ONU keeps it within 4 or 5 scores they'll bump up to the top 5 too.

I challenge you to find one real-life example of a team losing by four or five scores, even to Mount Union, and jumping up anything like from No. 9 to the top five.

I doubt that would happen for BYU in beating Oklahoma, especially considering what shape Oklahoma was in. But Ohio Northern isn't a BYU, from a non-power conference. Ohio Northern is in the second-best conference in Division III.
I was being sarcastic. BYU is also from a conference that has 3 teams currently ranked in the top 25.  Not bad considering they have 9 teams. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 08, 2009, 11:43:17 AM
Regardless, not a BCS conference and in a D-I voter's mind, not analogous to the OAC in a D-III voter's mind.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on September 08, 2009, 11:50:22 AM
The last 10 to 15 years has shown that the 2nd place OAC team usually good enough to be ranked somewhere around 10th.  Not always the case, but it's happened enough times that I think the D3 voter just assumes that whichever OAC team finishes 2nd behind Mount is good enough to be ranked ahead of teams like Case, Monmouth, W&J, Wooster, etc even those teams might be undefeated.

Then you couple that with beating #4 in convincing fashion early in the season when there isn't a big enoough sample to get a good read on the teams, you get a big jump in polls.  Honestly, I figured ONU would jump into the poll somewhere around 15th to 20th, but I can understand why people voted them higher than that after running the ball down NCC's throat.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2009, 12:42:58 PM
Since the comparison of ONU and BYU has been made above, I find it an amazing coincidence that BYU is now also ranked ninth!

Granted, they didn't jump from zero points, but jumping from #20 is still quite a leap. ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: dc_has_been on September 09, 2009, 04:27:31 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2009, 12:42:58 PM
Since the comparison of ONU and BYU has been made above, I find it an amazing coincidence that BYU is now also ranked ninth!

Granted, they didn't jump from zero points, but jumping from #20 is still quite a leap. ;)

I agree.  OU was w/o their stud qb too for a large part of the game.  I do think though that BYU could go undefeated but do have a tough schedule w/ Flordia State, TCU & Utah.

In regard to ONU, I guess we'll see where they rank considering they will have to face Mount, Ott, Capital, & so on in the OAC.  Time will tell.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on September 09, 2009, 05:36:17 PM
Quote from: dc_has_been on September 09, 2009, 04:27:31 PM
I agree.  OU was w/o their stud qb too for a large part of the game.  I do think though that BYU could go undefeated but do have a tough schedule w/ Flordia State, TCU & Utah.

I hear they also have Florida State on the schedule...

Don't be mad at Dean Paul's team, has_been!!!!!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2009, 06:02:08 PM
Quote from: SaintsFAN on September 09, 2009, 05:36:17 PM
Quote from: dc_has_been on September 09, 2009, 04:27:31 PM
I agree.  OU was w/o their stud qb too for a large part of the game.  I do think though that BYU could go undefeated but do have a tough schedule w/ Flordia State, TCU & Utah.

I hear they also have Florida State on the schedule...

Don't be mad at Dean Paul's team, has_been!!!!!

Yeah, but Flordia State has been sanctioned less than Florida State. ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on September 13, 2009, 10:33:24 PM
In the Week 2 Poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-2), I'm a little bit confused by St. John's leapfrogging Washington & Jefferson and ONU, especially considering that by all accounts, St. John's' game at home v. unranked UW-Eau Claire was touch-and-go pretty much right down to the wire.

Dickinson has the makings of a major sleeper.  With a season-opening loss to UW-Whitewater and a convincing win v. well-regarded Hobart, they could be pretty darned good for all we know.

D'oh!!  Thanks for setting the record straight, ADL.   :P
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: John McGraw on September 13, 2009, 10:47:29 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 13, 2009, 10:33:24 PM
In the Week 2 Poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-2), I'm a little bit confused by St. John's leapfrogging Washington & Jefferson and ONU, especially considering that by all accounts, St. John's' game at home v. unranked UW-Eau Claire was touch-and-go pretty much right down to the wire.

Dickinson has the makings of a major sleeper.  With a season-opening loss to UW-Whitewater and a convincing win v. well-regarded Hobart, they could be pretty darned good for all we know.

This week was obviously a very difficult week to be a pollster with a lot of ranked teams that were fairly high losing. It's still very early and you could have some people just throwing out what they have and starting over since after the top five, it's almost a crap shoot in the upper half of the poll.

I don't necessarily have a problem with the Johnnies jumping over W&J. While W&J is a historically strong team, they play in a weaker conference and haven't been completely overpowering in wins over Oberlin and Frostburg State while St. John's has played and beaten two WIAC teams with one win at home and one on the road. The Johnnies have earned IMO a higher ranking and we'll get a great look at what they can do in the league this week at Concordia Moorhead.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on September 13, 2009, 11:34:08 PM
redswarm

Whitewater beat NAIA Dickinson (ND) State.  Dickinson (PA) beat Grove City in week 1.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: repete on September 14, 2009, 01:12:38 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 13, 2009, 10:33:24 PM
In the Week 2 Poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-2), I'm a little bit confused by St. John's leapfrogging Washington & Jefferson and ONU, especially considering that by all accounts, St. John's' game at home v. unranked UW-Eau Claire was touch-and-go pretty much right down to the wire.

Dickinson has the makings of a major sleeper.  With a season-opening loss to UW-Whitewater and a convincing win v. well-regarded Hobart, they could be pretty darned good for all we know.

D'oh!!  Thanks for setting the record straight, ADL.   :P

I was a bit surprised by the SJU jump, but a couple of factors: the MIAC is having another strong NC run (11-3) with some solid wins against the NWC, IIAC and WIAC, plus a rout of a top-15 NAIA school. One of the losses was a final play loss to No. 4 Wheaton.

And how many programs open their season with two NC games against the WIAC as SJU did again this year? It's the toughest top-to-bottom conference in d3's toughest region.

That said, there's a real chance that SJU could drop its rivalry game with Concordia up on the prairie this Saturday.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 14, 2009, 10:21:48 AM
Quote from: repete on September 14, 2009, 01:12:38 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 13, 2009, 10:33:24 PM
In the Week 2 Poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-2), I'm a little bit confused by St. John's leapfrogging Washington & Jefferson and ONU, especially considering that by all accounts, St. John's' game at home v. unranked UW-Eau Claire was touch-and-go pretty much right down to the wire.

Dickinson has the makings of a major sleeper.  With a season-opening loss to UW-Whitewater and a convincing win v. well-regarded Hobart, they could be pretty darned good for all we know.

D'oh!!  Thanks for setting the record straight, ADL.   :P

I was a bit surprised by the SJU jump, but a couple of factors: the MIAC is having another strong NC run (11-3) with some solid wins against the NWC, IIAC and WIAC, plus a rout of a top-15 NAIA school. One of the losses was a final play loss to No. 4 Wheaton.

And how many programs open their season with two NC games against the WIAC as SJU did again this year? It's the toughest top-to-bottom conference in d3's toughest region.

That said, there's a real chance that SJU could drop its rivalry game with Concordia up on the prairie this Saturday.

Yes SJU has had a good NC season as well as the MIAC I don't see why they wouldn't be ranked that high.  There is one school in D3 though that scheduled one of the defending WIAC CoChamps and beat them in the NC.   ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 14, 2009, 02:53:23 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 13, 2009, 10:33:24 PM
In the Week 2 Poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-2), I'm a little bit confused by St. John's leapfrogging Washington & Jefferson and ONU, especially considering that by all accounts, St. John's' game at home v. unranked UW-Eau Claire was touch-and-go pretty much right down to the wire.

The Johnnies confound me a little bit too. They could easily be 0-2, but with regard to comparisons with W&J (who I have much lower), I think even two close losses against WIAC teams would tell us more about potential strength relative to the top 25 than wins against Oberlin and Frostburg State would.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on September 14, 2009, 10:56:18 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 14, 2009, 02:53:23 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on September 13, 2009, 10:33:24 PM
In the Week 2 Poll (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-2), I'm a little bit confused by St. John's leapfrogging Washington & Jefferson and ONU, especially considering that by all accounts, St. John's' game at home v. unranked UW-Eau Claire was touch-and-go pretty much right down to the wire.

The Johnnies confound me a little bit too. They could easily be 0-2, but with regard to comparisons with W&J (who I have much lower), I think even two close losses against WIAC teams would tell us more about potential strength relative to the top 25 than wins against Oberlin and Frostburg State would.

Okay, so this is probably one of those nitpicky poll voter psychology issues that triggers my OCD.  ONU had 60 points on St. John's in the Week 1 (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-1) Poll.  St. John's plays an unranked team (from a studly conference) at home, and comes away with a win that every poll voter had to know could pretty easily have gone the other way.

For that, St. John's winds up 43 points ahead of idle Ohio Northern, a total swing of over 100 poll points.  That much movement would seem to mean that it wasn't just a case of voters swapping St. John's and ONU between adjacent spots on their ballots.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SJSUPhil on September 24, 2009, 05:57:20 AM
Redlands is the highest ranked SCIAC team as of week 3. Way to go Bulldogs!
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2009/week-3
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mugsy on September 27, 2009, 03:34:55 PM
It'll be interesting to see, but I suspect we'll see Wesley jump ahead of Wheaton in the top 25 standings.  Wheaton had it's hands full with Hope, while Wesley spanked LaGrange.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 04:18:30 PM
Wesley just keeps making every team on their schedule look bad.  They are a very good team. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 07:09:28 PM
Why would someone rank Courtland State over Delaware Valley?  Delaware Valley has beaten Kean and their only loss was to Wesley.  Courtland State just got beat by two touchdowns by Kean.  It just seems when a team that is already in the poll loses the votes are still coming for them.  I even saw where a team that is 1-3 still got a vote.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 27, 2009, 07:49:09 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 07:09:28 PM
Why would someone rank Courtland State over Delaware Valley?  Delaware Valley has beaten Kean and their only loss was to Wesley.  Courtland State just got beat by two touchdowns by Kean.  It just seems when a team that is already in the poll loses the votes are still coming for them.  I even saw where a team that is 1-3 still got a vote.

I would love to see 4-0 HSC and 1-3 HSU play on a neutral field...   ;)   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 07:59:12 PM
Mr. Turner,

I am not even talking about Hampden-Sydney.  I feel they are getting too many votes now and I have seen all of their games.  They have plenty of time to earn their way into the poll or out of the poll.  I am talking about the D3 top 25 poll.  I am just trying to understand the logic of ranking Courtland State over Delaware Valley and other votes that do not seem to be backed up by results on the field.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 27, 2009, 08:02:50 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 07:59:12 PM
Mr. Turner,

I am not even talking about Hampden-Sydney.  I feel they are getting too many votes now and I have seen all of their games.  They have plenty of time to earn their way into the poll or out of the poll.  I am talking about the D3 top 25 poll.  I am just trying to understand the logic of ranking Courtland State over Delaware Valley and other votes that do not seem to be backed up by results on the field.

Sorry...

I was bringing the South Region Fan Poll discussions onto this board.

You have a good point.  I think that most South Region Fans realize that the stars are not aligned for HSU this season.  HSU probably finishes 6-4.

+1!   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 08:09:12 PM
No problem.  All of the polls are for discussion purposes only anyway.  I am glad to have the opportunity to follow D3 football this way.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on September 27, 2009, 08:43:01 PM
HSC85

You have to remember that the coaches are voting for 1-25 only and that the teams in the other recieving votes are actually top 25 votes but their totals aren't as high
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 27, 2009, 08:48:40 PM
Quote from: PA_wesleyfan on September 27, 2009, 08:43:01 PM
HSC85

You have to remember that the coaches are voting for 1-25 only and that the teams in the other recieving votes are actually top 25 votes but their totals aren't as high

And YOU need to remember that only a minority of d3football.com voters are coaches!  Which to me is good - any coach who knows diddly-squat during the season about any team he won't be facing is not doing the job he's paid to do!

While former coaches may be among the ideal voters, current coaches voting has always struck me as weird. :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: golden_dome on October 04, 2009, 02:24:24 PM
A few notes on Mississippi College and their chances of moving into the top 25 this week. There are a lot of good teams out there and plenty not ranked, but MC is right there.

They are 4-1 and 3-0 in the ASC, arguably one of the nation's toughest conferences. Their only loss was to NAIA #6 Cumberlands who has won 14 straight regular season games. Wins over Millsaps and Hardin-Simmons. Millsaps could still win the SCAC, and HSU is still a good win. HSU has had plenty of injuries, but you don't go from preseason #5 to a bad team that fast. HSU's 23-7 loss to #3 UMHB this weekend was competitive.

MC is led by senior quarterback Adam Shaffer who has thrown 16 touchdowns and just one interception. Junior tailback Steven Knight leads the ASC in total rushing yards with 429 and is second with five rushing touchdowns.

I think the ASC is deserving of two ranked teams, but like I said, I realize there are a lot of good teams out there. It's a tough job for voters to separate the top 25 teams.

We'll find out how good MC is in two weeks when they host #3 UMHB, but I thought I'd drop them a mention on here.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 04, 2009, 05:22:09 PM
No reflection on Mississippi College, but didn't all of the Top 25 teams that played win this week ?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on October 04, 2009, 09:13:38 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 04, 2009, 05:22:09 PM
No reflection on Mississippi College, but didn't all of the Top 25 teams that played win this week ?

Yep (see front page).  The biggest upset this week may have been DePauw handling Millsaps, neither of which were in the top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 04, 2009, 10:03:27 PM
Deep in the ORV's (so of no real importance, but curious nonetheless), undefeated IWU beat previously undefeated Carthage, 42-16, and (understandably) gained 13 points to 18 total.  But Carthage ROSE 15 points, from 2 to 17!  Did some voters go dyslexic on the score??! :o ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 04, 2009, 10:04:22 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 04, 2009, 10:03:27 PM
Deep in the ORV's (so of no real importance, but curious nonetheless), undefeated IWU beat previously undefeated Carthage, 42-16, and (understandably) gained 13 points to 18 total.  But Carthage ROSE 15 points, from 2 to 17!  Did some voters go dyslexic on the score??! :o ;D

Naw...CCIW bias!    ;D    :D    ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 04, 2009, 10:07:34 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on September 27, 2009, 07:59:12 PM
Mr. Turner,

I am not even talking about Hampden-Sydney.  I feel they are getting too many votes now and I have seen all of their games.  They have plenty of time to earn their way into the poll or out of the poll.  I am talking about the D3 top 25 poll.  I am just trying to understand the logic of ranking Courtland State over Delaware Valley and other votes that do not seem to be backed up by results on the field.

My best guess on that is that many voters maybe start with a team ranked in a certain spot and feel that a loss is maybe only "worth" five or 10 spots. So if Willamette and Cortland were top 10 teams at the start of the year, certainly one loss can't knock them all the way out of the top 25 ... Or can it? Cortland lost to unranked Kean and the strength of the wins against Morrisville, Rowan and Buff State are debateable; How is 3-1 Kean's loss to Del Val plus wins over TCNJ, W. Conn. and Cortland make them less worthy of a top 25 vote than 3-1 Cortland?

I no longer have Cortland ranked and can't understand it either. Even though they started up high for me, I have since found teams more worthy of the votes, based on what we've seen to date. That can change in a hurry, of course.

See the following post which kind of addresses my theory on it a little more.

I can't bring myself to vote for North Central (No. 14) over Ohio Northern either because of their h2h result, so everything ONU does is a reflection on No. Central ... and if they go on to beat Wheaton later in the year, we'll have a real conundrum on our hands.

I'll hone these theories for ATN this week.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 04, 2009, 10:08:09 PM
cc'ed from the Around the Nation thread ... I think it's more germane to the discussion here.

Quote from: Wabash Fiji on October 03, 2009, 11:31:07 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 03, 2009, 11:24:25 PM
Quote from: Wabash Fiji on October 03, 2009, 11:19:18 PM
I do not understand why Case Western Reserve is ranked so high.... They have an EASY schedule, and their wins have not been that impressive. Wabash should be ranked higher than Case.... especially because Wabash has a tougher schedule (because of Wittenberg) and the fact that Wabash has eliminated Case from the playoffs for the past 2 years... just a thought

WAF!

To be fair, Wabash hasn't played anybody yet either.  Case has the fish stringer game against Wooster next weekend and Wabash gets Wittenberg the week after.  We're all excited, WF.  Be patient, friend...It'll sort itself out. 

Yes, I agree... We have not played anyone either. I just believe we are the better team.... guess we'll have to knock them out for the 3rd year in a row!

WAF!

Well since you're posting here and not on Top 25, I assume you're asking me ... I have the two pinned together in the top 25 pretty much since the start of the season, with Wabash one spot ahead. I think they were 14/15 this week ... I guess not all that far from 10/11.

Honestly I don't think either of you play the caliber of opponents of a lot of the teams in the top 10, and even if you go unbeaten, I'm going to have a hard time moving you up higher than teams with similar records but playing against better competition.

... If I had to guess why so high, I think a lot of these early rankings seem to be a reaction to where teams start off the season, and some kind of belief that you can't drop a team from 10th to out of the poll on a single loss. I don't really function that way, I try to re-evaluate everything as often as I can.

So if Case starts the season, say, 18th, and then eight teams ahead of them lose a game in the first five weeks, does that automatically make Case the 10th best team in the country? That's the question we have to ask ourselves.

To be quite honest, there are cases like Bethel at 2-2 with a last-second loss to No. 4 Wheaton and a two-point loss to No. 6 St. John's where Case and Wabash and Washington & Jefferson haven't played (and won't play) one team that good. Ohio Northern is 2-2 with losses to No. 1 Mount Union and No. 13 Otterbein (I think). Millsaps' losses are by a hair to Mississippi College and DePauw.

Winning games is the ultimate goal, but strength of schedule is a difficult thing to evaluate, and it's important to keep in mind when comparing teams. On one hand you can only play the teams you schedule. But on the other, I'm not necessarily going to reward a team for being 4-0 against a much-less challenging schedule than someone else is 3-1 against.

And then there's this Pat-ism ... it's not who you lost to, it's who you beat.

I could go on ...

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 04, 2009, 10:14:57 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 04, 2009, 10:04:22 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 04, 2009, 10:03:27 PM
Deep in the ORV's (so of no real importance, but curious nonetheless), undefeated IWU beat previously undefeated Carthage, 42-16, and (understandably) gained 13 points to 18 total.  But Carthage ROSE 15 points, from 2 to 17!  Did some voters go dyslexic on the score??! :o ;D

Naw...CCIW bias!    ;D    :D    ;)

You're channeling your basketball mode! ;D

The heck with the CCIW - I'm figuring maybe those Carthage votes belong to IWU! ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 04, 2009, 10:16:05 PM
K-Mack,

Thanks for addressing some of the confusing voting patterns in the Top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: gordonmann on October 04, 2009, 10:27:06 PM
This was a very weird poll if you look at the margins.  Kean picks up 12 votes following a really nice win over TCNJ and last week's victory over Cortland State.  But Delaware Valley, who beat Kean at their place, loses nine votes.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on October 04, 2009, 10:36:48 PM
 
I agree gordonmann. It appears that some voters are having trouble deciding which close teams should be above or below another and that  can shift points up or down a bit.. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on October 04, 2009, 10:56:48 PM
One interesting change this week: Another voter has picked UWW as the No. 1 team. That makes three people now.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 05, 2009, 12:25:18 AM
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on October 04, 2009, 10:56:48 PM
One interesting change this week: Another voter has picked UWW as the No. 1 team. That makes three people now.

Listen to the podcast. I have inside information that leads me to believe this will be a topic discussed.

Of course, some people I know don't have to switch their No. 1 votes because they already had UWW up top.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on October 05, 2009, 12:44:40 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 05, 2009, 12:25:18 AM
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on October 04, 2009, 10:56:48 PM
One interesting change this week: Another voter has picked UWW as the No. 1 team. That makes three people now.

Listen to the podcast. I have inside information that leads me to believe this will be a topic discussed.

Of course, some people I know don't have to switch their No. 1 votes because they already had UWW up top.

How true that is :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 06, 2009, 05:56:37 PM
Here's a thought:


If I were a voter who put St. John's and Wesley in the top ten, I'd have a heck of a time putting Bethel much lower than 11.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 06, 2009, 09:06:18 PM
I agree redswarm81.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 11, 2009, 07:16:35 PM
I am curious on any thoughts of ranking Centre over Hampden Sydney.  They have one common opponent in Sewanee and HSC beat them 51-7 in the rain on the road and Centre beat them 20 - 0 at home.  It seems that all the votes that Milsaps and Trinity were getting went to Centre. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on October 11, 2009, 08:11:03 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 11, 2009, 07:16:35 PM
I am curious on any thoughts of ranking Centre over Hampden Sydney.  They have one common opponent in Sewanee and HSC beat them 51-7 in the rain on the road and Centre beat them 20 - 0 at home.  It seems that all the votes that Milsaps and Trinity were getting went to Centre. 

HCS85

Depends on the voters. But conference strengths sway voters, owp and oowp will come into play once those stats are released. Pat or Keith would  be able to tell you how they go about the process. That's not to say other voters don't have other ideas on how they decide on teams strengths
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 11, 2009, 08:39:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Ooh, I lost my bet on the East Region Fan Poll page (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=6576.msg1106765#msg1106765).

Good thing nobody took me up on it.   :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 09:26:10 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 11, 2009, 08:39:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Ooh, I lost my bet on the East Region Fan Poll page (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=6576.msg1106765#msg1106765).

Good thing nobody took me up on it.   :D
Well, #23  Del Valley is only 25 votes above "26th".
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 11, 2009, 10:46:24 PM
Quote from: PA_wesleyfan on October 11, 2009, 08:11:03 PM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 11, 2009, 07:16:35 PM
I am curious on any thoughts of ranking Centre over Hampden Sydney.  They have one common opponent in Sewanee and HSC beat them 51-7 in the rain on the road and Centre beat them 20 - 0 at home.  It seems that all the votes that Milsaps and Trinity were getting went to Centre. 

HCS85

Depends on the voters. But conference strengths sway voters, owp and oowp will come into play once those stats are released. Pat or Keith would  be able to tell you how they go about the process. That's not to say other voters don't have other ideas on how they decide on teams strengths

With direct respect to Hampden-Sydney, I think I had them overranked the past few weeks and corrected for that. Still have them higher than Centre, but the correction was based on schedule to date.

Basically, Del Val has beaten 4-1 Johns Hopkins, 4-1 Kean and 4-1 Leb Val, with a loss to 5-0 Wesley. I was keeping Wabash, Case and W&J lower than most because they haven't played quite that challenging a schedule, but I'd let H-SC float up to 16 ... my judgement was that H-SC hadn't played nearly the schedule Del Val had, even adding E&H in there, and if they had, they might have a loss as well.

So I felt i had to rank Del Val ahead of the four teams I'd mentioned above, and that caused me to rearrange ... so even though H-SC and Case had maybe their best wins of the season, they didn't move up on my ballot because other resumes were looking better.

Other teams I had ranked, like Alfred, or not ranked, like Ithaca, I came away from Saturday looking okay. If Redlands would've finished it out, my poll would've held its ground well besides the Del Val rearrangement.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 11, 2009, 11:04:11 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 09:26:10 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 11, 2009, 08:39:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Ooh, I lost my bet on the East Region Fan Poll page (http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=6576.msg1106765#msg1106765).

Good thing nobody took me up on it.   :D
Well, #23  Del Valley is only 25 votes above "26th".

The bet I intended to make, but didn't make it to the window in time, went something like this:

Nos. 16, 19, 20, 21, and 22 lost.  I bet all will lose ground except no. 21 (Capital).

I didn't expect Capital to rise quite as many spots as it did, although I can see plenty of justification for its rise.  Here's a question to ponder, though: how many of nos. 2 through 15 could give Mount Union as good a game as Capital gave them?  (Cue Pat Coleman: "It's not who you lost to, . . . " :D )
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 11, 2009, 11:19:21 PM
Keith,

I completely agree that Del Val should be ranked above HSC.  They have played a much stronger schedule with success than HSC.  My question was with Centre especially with a commone opponent and comparable strength of schedule.  Thanks for your input. 

Also a shout out to a team from Ashland that has won 4 in a row.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on October 12, 2009, 10:19:48 AM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 11, 2009, 11:19:21 PM
Keith,

I completely agree that Del Val should be ranked above HSC.  They have played a much stronger schedule with success than HSC.  My question was with Centre especially with a commone opponent and comparable strength of schedule.  Thanks for your input. 

Also a shout out to a team from Ashland that has won 4 in a row.

Voters probably also factor in the defeat of a 4-1 DePauw team that was ranked in the top 20 at the time of their loss to Centre and is still receiving votes; HSC defeated E&H last week, but E&H never got in the top 25 (or even any votes). 

To be honest, tho, I'm surprised to see Centre in the top 25 after a one point win against a now 2-3 opponent who lost 41-14 the week before. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: BoBo on October 12, 2009, 11:28:16 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Correction - I count 10 teams in the west -


1.    2 UW-Whitewater
2.    6 St. John's
3.    7 Linfield
4.    8 Central
5.    11 Monmouth
6.    15 St. Thomas
7.    17 Willamette
8.    18 Occidental
9.    24 UW-La Crosse
10.  25 Redlands
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 12, 2009, 11:53:16 PM
My bad.  I put Monmouth in the North.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 12, 2009, 11:55:34 PM
Quote from: BoBo on October 12, 2009, 11:28:16 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Correction - I count 10 teams in the west -


1.    2 UW-Whitewater
2.    6 St. John's
3.    7 Linfield
4.    8 Central
5.    11 Monmouth
6.    15 St. Thomas
7.    17 Willamette
8.    18 Occidental
9.    24 UW-La Crosse
10.  25 Redlands


You are correct, sir.

My guess would be that Monmouth (being in Illinois) got incorrectly counted as North.

The point remains that 76% of top 25 teams are in the North and West.

And just as I was about to hit 'post', Ralph confirmed my guess! ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 12:00:03 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 12, 2009, 11:53:16 PM
My bad.  I put Monmouth in the North.

The MWC is lumped into the Midwest/Central Regions in Hoops with the CCIW, and I forgot that the MWC is in the West for Football.

Thanks for correcting that!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: BoBo on October 13, 2009, 12:06:52 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 12, 2009, 11:53:16 PM
My bad.  I put Monmouth in the North.

No problem...after living in the east for many years earlier in my life, I always thought Monmouth was out there, east, as in West Long Branch, New Jersey!!   ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 12:22:59 AM
Okay who is on the Pool C bubble?

Quote from: BoBo on October 12, 2009, 11:28:16 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Correction - I count 10 teams in the west -


1.    2 UW-Whitewater  WIAC
2.    6 St. John's            MIAC
3.    7 Linfield                NWC
4.    8 Central               IIAC
5.    11 Monmouth        MWC
6.    15 St. Thomas        MIAC (plays SJU on Saturday)
7.    17 Willamette          NWC  (already has an in-region loss to the Cobbers; hosts Linfield 10/24)
8.    18 Occidental          SCIAC
9.    24 UW-La Crosse    WIAC  (has in-region loss to UWP; hosts UWW on 11/14)
10.  25 Redlands             SCIAC (lost to Oxy on 10-10)

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 12:22:59 AM
Okay who is on the Pool C bubble?

Quote from: BoBo on October 12, 2009, 11:28:16 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 11, 2009, 07:06:04 PM
Week #6

North has 10 teams; West has 9.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

Correction - I count 10 teams in the west -


1.    2 UW-Whitewater  WIAC
2.    6 St. John's            MIAC
3.    7 Linfield                NWC
4.    8 Central               IIAC
5.    11 Monmouth        MWC
6.    15 St. Thomas        MIAC (plays SJU on Saturday)
7.    17 Willamette          NWC  (already has an in-region loss to the Cobbers; hosts Linfield 10/24)
8.    18 Occidental          SCIAC
9.    24 UW-La Crosse    WIAC  (has in-region loss to UWP; hosts UWW on 11/14)
10.  25 Redlands             SCIAC (lost to Oxy on 10-10)


As long as you're gonna be a couple of weeks premature, so will I! :D

Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

While the d3football.com poll is not a selection criterion, barring upsets MUC and UWW seem like no-brainers.  Probably the same with UMHB.  But who is #4?

Since the 'east' seems to have no viable candidates, #4 may determine whether MUC goes east, and everything else is 'regional'; MUC goes east and UWW goes north; or Wesley goes east.  IF MUC, UWW, and UMHB don't stumble, a whole lot of the bracketology is riding on which team is the fourth #1 seed. ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 13, 2009, 12:52:05 AM
Quote from: BoBo and Ralph Turner on October 12, 2009, 11:28:16 PM

North has 9 teams; West has 10.

South Region has 5 teams.  At #23, Del Valley is the only team out of the East.

1.    2 UW-Whitewater
2.    6 St. John's
3.    7 Linfield
4.    8 Central
5.    11 Monmouth
6.    15 St. Thomas
7.    17 Willamette
8.    18 Occidental
9.    24 UW-La Crosse
10.  25 Redlands


Occidental is in the West?  How could anyone have guessed that?  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 12:57:23 AM
MUC to the East
UWW to the North or West
UMHB to the South
Wheaton to the North

Waiting in the wings, SJU and Wesley...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 01:12:10 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 12:57:23 AM
MUC to the East
UWW to the North or West
UMHB to the South
Wheaton to the North

Waiting in the wings, SJU and Wesley...


But that was exactly my point.

Wesley, Wheaton, SJU, Linfield, etc. etc., are all in the wings waiting for their rivals to stumble (or one of the 'big three').  As I admitted, this question is probably at least two weeks premature! ;D

But at least the MWC title was won on Saturday - will they still play out the season?  (I was dying to type that, but didn't have the guts to do it on the MWC board! ;D)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 08:07:52 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 01:12:10 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 12:57:23 AM
MUC to the East
UWW to the North or West
UMHB to the South
Wheaton to the North

Waiting in the wings, SJU and Wesley...


But that was exactly my point.

Wesley, Wheaton, SJU, Linfield, etc. etc., are all in the wings waiting for their rivals to stumble (or one of the 'big three').  As I admitted, this question is probably at least two weeks premature! ;D

But at least the MWC title was won on Saturday - will they still play out the season?  (I was dying to type that, but didn't have the guts to do it on the MWC board! ;D)

How about saying that in a haiku...

Monmouth beats Green Knights.
Tanney sets career record.
The title is won.

;D   ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: MWCfan787 on October 13, 2009, 01:10:56 PM
Whoa whoa whoa!  I know these MWC statements aren't far off, but are you trying to jinx the Scots?  Ripon gave Monmouth its toughest test in the regular season last year.  Monmouth was down 35-25 with 5 mins to go and came back to win 38-35 scoring with only about a min to play.

If they win this Saturday at Ripon, then I have no problem saying the title is won.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 06:54:10 PM
http://www.sctimes.com/article/20091013/SPORTS/110130028/Rajkowski-column--Polls-can-often-be-a-guessing-game

Knee-jerk "AFCA Poll is better" comment at the end of Frank Rajkowski's column today in the StCloud paper.

Click and enjoy.

(I think that the D3football.com is more accurate, JMHO).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 09:25:12 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 06:54:10 PM
http://www.sctimes.com/article/20091013/SPORTS/110130028/Rajkowski-column--Polls-can-often-be-a-guessing-game

Knee-jerk "AFCA Poll is better" comment at the end of Frank Rajkowski's column today in the StCloud paper.

Click and enjoy.

(I think that the D3football.com is more accurate, JMHO).

This attitude is common, but has always bemused me.  While coaches potentially are better prepared to evaluate teams than most, think about it - any coach who during the season knows much more than diddley-squat about any team not on his schedule IS NOT DOING THE JOB HE'S PAID FOR!

But, then again, most 'coach's ballots' are not cast by the coach anyway! :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: altor on October 13, 2009, 09:52:46 PM
Looking at the SoS numbers, Wesley has got to be on the short list for a #1 seed, don't they?  Or will they get hurt by all the non-DIII teams on the back half of their schedule?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 11:43:43 PM
Quote from: altor on October 13, 2009, 09:52:46 PM
Looking at the SoS numbers, Wesley has got to be on the short list for a #1 seed, don't they?  Or will they get hurt by all the non-DIII teams on the back half of their schedule?
I don't think that we will see any changes in the OWP/OOWP outside the impact the teams that Wesley play have their data included.

UMHB plays no one outside the ASC and so will be around .500 for both.

Unfortunately, ETBU, HSU, Louisiana College, McMurry, Sul Ross and TLU could have boosted the OWP of the conference with wins.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 14, 2009, 12:20:08 AM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

Seems to make sense, although if Central runs the table you can't put them lower than West 2 seed. SOS is higher than Linfields at the moment, and Central still has better teams on the schedule.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 14, 2009, 12:35:29 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 14, 2009, 12:20:08 AM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

Seems to make sense, although if Central runs the table you can't put them lower than West 2 seed. SOS is higher than Linfields at the moment, and Central still has better teams on the schedule.

You guys in the contiguous portion of D3 forget about the "Geographical Proximity" clause, that there may be a "West Coast Sub-bracket" with West Region #2/3 Linfield playing #3/4 Oxy in the first round.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 14, 2009, 05:12:32 PM
Nah Ralph, thats the assumption I am used to.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 14, 2009, 06:31:46 PM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 14, 2009, 05:12:32 PM
Nah Ralph, thats the assumption I am used to.
I think that Central still gets a #2 or a #3 bid.

The Regional Rankings after week #8 should help us sort this out.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 14, 2009, 08:56:49 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 14, 2009, 06:31:46 PM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 14, 2009, 05:12:32 PM
Nah Ralph, thats the assumption I am used to.
I think that Central still gets a #2 or a #3 bid.

The Regional Rankings after week #8 should help us sort this out.   :)

I was wondering when those came out! We have to dominate the rest of our schedule first. Four games to go!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on October 14, 2009, 09:19:23 PM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

This is a huge game in the MIAC.  If SJU loses to UST that lets Bethel back into the picture as if they beat UST there would be a three way tie on top of the MIAC.  Then Central would have a shot at a number one seed. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2009, 09:29:38 PM
Quote from: DutchFan2004 on October 14, 2009, 09:19:23 PM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

This is a huge game in the MIAC.  If SJU loses to UST that lets Bethel back into the picture as if they beat UST there would be a three way tie on top of the MIAC.  Then Central would have a shot at a number one seed. 

While the d3football.com poll has zero impact on the selections, it MAY also require a loss by Linfield.  AND you are assuming UWW will be sent to the North, but Wheaton (among others) may have a say in that.

IF they all win out, I'm guessing MUC, UWW, and UMHB are three of the #1s.  Who the fourth is is a crap-shoot currently, but totally affects where teams will play.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on October 15, 2009, 07:21:57 AM
The way the East Region looks right now, I'm guessing Mount is about 90+% sure to be moved there again.

A 10-0 Wheaton would be strong enough in my opinion to hold down the North, but they probably need Wabash and Case to also finish 10-0 and possibly a team of two out west to drop one.  If Wheaton is the only undefeated in the North and Whitewater/Linfield/SJU are all undefeated out west, I'm guessing Whitewater would be moved North as the #1 with Wheaton as the #2.  Thereby leaving SJU/Linfield in the West to hold down the top 2 seeds.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 15, 2009, 08:10:13 AM
Quote from: HScoach on October 15, 2009, 07:21:57 AM
The way the East Region looks right now, I'm guessing Mount is about 90+% sure to be moved there again.

A 10-0 Wheaton would be strong enough in my opinion to hold down the North, but they probably need Wabash and Case to also finish 10-0 and possibly a team of two out west to drop one.  If Wheaton is the only undefeated in the North and Whitewater/Linfield/SJU are all undefeated out west, I'm guessing Whitewater would be moved North as the #1 with Wheaton as the #2.  Thereby leaving SJU/Linfield in the West to hold down the top 2 seeds.

I agree!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Knightstalker on October 15, 2009, 08:39:26 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 15, 2009, 08:10:13 AM
Quote from: HScoach on October 15, 2009, 07:21:57 AM
The way the East Region looks right now, I'm guessing Mount is about 90+% sure to be moved there again.

A 10-0 Wheaton would be strong enough in my opinion to hold down the North, but they probably need Wabash and Case to also finish 10-0 and possibly a team of two out west to drop one.  If Wheaton is the only undefeated in the North and Whitewater/Linfield/SJU are all undefeated out west, I'm guessing Whitewater would be moved North as the #1 with Wheaton as the #2.  Thereby leaving SJU/Linfield in the West to hold down the top 2 seeds.

I agree!

I think the only other team that has a chance to be East #1 is Wesley, but that depends on how the rest of the south plays out and if Wesley wins out.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on October 15, 2009, 01:25:48 PM
Quote from: HScoach on October 15, 2009, 07:21:57 AM
The way the East Region looks right now, I'm guessing Mount is about 90+% sure to be moved there again.

A 10-0 Wheaton would be strong enough in my opinion to hold down the North, but they probably need Wabash and Case to also finish 10-0 and possibly a team of two out west to drop one.  If Wheaton is the only undefeated in the North and Whitewater/Linfield/SJU are all undefeated out west, I'm guessing Whitewater would be moved North as the #1 with Wheaton as the #2.  Thereby leaving SJU/Linfield in the West to hold down the top 2 seeds.

Unless there is some miraculous upset, I see them in the East as well  :-\
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on October 15, 2009, 08:06:12 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 14, 2009, 09:29:38 PM
Quote from: DutchFan2004 on October 14, 2009, 09:19:23 PM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

This is a huge game in the MIAC.  If SJU loses to UST that lets Bethel back into the picture as if they beat UST there would be a three way tie on top of the MIAC.  Then Central would have a shot at a number one seed. 

While the d3football.com poll has zero impact on the selections, it MAY also require a loss by Linfield.  AND you are assuming UWW will be sent to the North, but Wheaton (among others) may have a say in that.

IF they all win out, I'm guessing MUC, UWW, and UMHB are three of the #1s.  Who the fourth is is a crap-shoot currently, but totally affects where teams will play.

I did not say that Central would get it I said that they would have a shot.  Central has been closing the gap points wise with Linfield.  With 4 weeks left and only 11 points behind they only need to garner 3 points a week to overtake Linfield in the top 25 poll.  As mentioned the top 25 poll has 0 to do with the seedings.  The Regional poll will have much to say so I know there is not lock.  I did not mean to imply it.  With the conjecture I through out another scenario for people to chew on.  MUC is not a lock to go 10-0 either as last week almost proved. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 15, 2009, 09:10:12 PM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

If you saw me reveal my top 10, you know that i actually agree with you, at least at the moment, re: St. Thomas, but I'm eager to hear what you base this on.

I think it's waaaay too early to be projecting No. 1 seeds.

Even if you operate under the assumption the UWW, MUC and UMHB are the No. 1s, UWW and MUC offer enough geographic flexibility to allow someone like Wesley to be the East's No. 1 (even though they're techinically South, distance-wise they could make this happen). Wheaton and St. John's/St. Thomas play enough comp where they could stumble. Linfield could creep in. Who knows.

Or you could end up being right.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 15, 2009, 09:13:28 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 09:25:12 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 13, 2009, 06:54:10 PM
http://www.sctimes.com/article/20091013/SPORTS/110130028/Rajkowski-column--Polls-can-often-be-a-guessing-game

Knee-jerk "AFCA Poll is better" comment at the end of Frank Rajkowski's column today in the StCloud paper.

Click and enjoy.

(I think that the D3football.com is more accurate, JMHO).

This attitude is common, but has always bemused me.  While coaches potentially are better prepared to evaluate teams than most, think about it - any coach who during the season knows much more than diddley-squat about any team not on his schedule IS NOT DOING THE JOB HE'S PAID FOR!

But, then again, most 'coach's ballots' are not cast by the coach anyway! :D

Wise words.

I think the AFCA poll traditionally favors teams with better records and D3 favors teams with better schedules. When we go back and look at the end of the seasons though, I don't know that there's conclusive evidence that our way is that much better. It's just our way.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 15, 2009, 09:24:17 PM
Kmack -  Call me a homer but I was surprised to see your Top 10 have Central at 11, I think Monmouth would be slightly overrated at 5, beating Wartburg has obviously not been that huge of a win for them as Wartburg has been very less than impressive this year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 15, 2009, 09:27:25 PM
K-Mack,

Good point about the two polls.  I think of them as the difference in the AP poll and the Coach's poll for D I teams.  After you pointed out the difference, I can see clearly why some teams are higher in a given poll.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 15, 2009, 10:13:45 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on October 15, 2009, 08:39:26 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 15, 2009, 08:10:13 AM
Quote from: HScoach on October 15, 2009, 07:21:57 AM
The way the East Region looks right now, I'm guessing Mount is about 90+% sure to be moved there again.

A 10-0 Wheaton would be strong enough in my opinion to hold down the North, but they probably need Wabash and Case to also finish 10-0 and possibly a team of two out west to drop one.  If Wheaton is the only undefeated in the North and Whitewater/Linfield/SJU are all undefeated out west, I'm guessing Whitewater would be moved North as the #1 with Wheaton as the #2.  Thereby leaving SJU/Linfield in the West to hold down the top 2 seeds.

I agree!

I think the only other team that has a chance to be East #1 is Wesley, but that depends on how the rest of the south plays out and if Wesley wins out.

It's a pretty solid bet that they will.

Lake Erie plays Salisbury this week, and lost 52-49 to Ohio Dominican, so we'll get an idea of which of their remaining opponents, if any, is a threat to beat the Wolverines.

But they're pretty talented. I don't know how great the O-Line or if they can stay focused/motivated/disciplined, but otherwise they basically have it all.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 16, 2009, 03:43:25 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 15, 2009, 09:10:12 PM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

If you saw me reveal my top 10, you know that i actually agree with you, at least at the moment, re: St. Thomas, but I'm eager to hear what you base this on.

I think it's waaaay too early to be projecting No. 1 seeds.

Even if you operate under the assumption the UWW, MUC and UMHB are the No. 1s, UWW and MUC offer enough geographic flexibility to allow someone like Wesley to be the East's No. 1 (even though they're techinically South, distance-wise they could make this happen). Wheaton and St. John's/St. Thomas play enough comp where they could stumble. Linfield could creep in. Who knows.

Or you could end up being right.

At this point, it's entirely a hunch. 

First, I agree with your thinking that the Johnnies are overrated at #6 in the D3Football.com poll.  You have them at #7, I probably would have them a few notches lower than that.  That said, the team that wins on Saturday will have a clear (but not guarenteed) path to an undefeated record with wins over St. Thomas/St. John's, Bethel (nearly beat Wheaton), Concordia (beat Willamette) and, in St. John's case, two wins over underwhelming teams from the WIAC.  Like it or not, that's the resume of a #1/#2 team come playoff time.  With St. John's name recognition, I would be very comfortable saying they will be a #1 seed if they go 10-0, though there are always surprises come Selection Sunday. 

My preview of St. Thomas is up at JohnnieFootball.com.  To put it mildly, they have studs all over the field.  It's difficult to put much stock in statistics from five D3 football games--especially when two of them are against Macalester and Hamline--but the Tommies are putting up video game-type numbers this season, especially running the ball.  They had the best running back in the MIAC last year and he looks better this year.  They had the best freshman in the MIAC last year and he looks better this year.  They had the best center in D3 last year and he's still there this year.  They lived through the ups and downs of a freshman quarterback last year and it's paying off this year.

On the defensive side of the ball they have D2 and D1 transfers all over the field.  I know, I know, there's a reason why they're playing D3 now and pedigree doesn't always equal production, but damn, they sure are making some plays this season.  St. Thomas has always had the resources to draw top-notch talent.  Now it looks like they're actually getting that talent on campus and on the field.

That's not to say St. John's can't or won't win this game.  I really, really hope they do.  Like every year, they have a lot of very good football players on their team.  St. Thomas fielding a Top 15 team is "man bites dog", while St. John's fielding a Top 15 team is "dog bites man".  And after the ridiculous finishes the Johnnies have had this year against Bethel and UW-Eau Claire, it's ridiculous to pick against them with much certainty.

Sorry for the rambling post, but that's why I'm looking forward to this game and that's my thinking behind calling St. Thomas the most talented non-WIAC team in the West.  While I don't think either of these teams is one of the 4 best in D3, I do think the winner ends up 10-0 and likely locks up the final #1 seed.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 17, 2009, 09:14:35 PM
Quote from: TC on October 16, 2009, 03:43:25 PM
First, . . . the Johnnies are overrated at #6 in the D3Football.com poll.  . . .  That said, the team that wins on Saturday will have a clear (but not guarenteed) path to an undefeated record with wins over St. Thomas/St. John's, Bethel (nearly beat Wheaton), Concordia (beat Willamette) and, in St. John's case, two wins over underwhelming teams from the WIAC.  Like it or not, that's the resume of a #1/#2 team come playoff time.  With St. John's name recognition, I would be very comfortable saying they will be a #1 seed if they go 10-0, though there are always surprises come Selection Sunday.  . . .

. . . St. Thomas fielding a Top 15 team is "man bites dog", while St. John's fielding a Top 15 team is "dog bites man".  And after the ridiculous finishes the Johnnies have had this year against Bethel and UW-Eau Claire, it's ridiculous to pick against them with much certainty.

. . . I'm looking forward to this game and that's my thinking behind calling St. Thomas the most talented non-WIAC team in the West.  While I don't think either of these teams is one of the 4 best in D3, I do think the winner ends up 10-0 and likely locks up the final #1 seed.

So St. John's is now 7-0 (6-0-1, really), three plays away from being 4-3 (4-2-1, really).
5-2 Bethel, two plays from being 7-0, appears by the score to have had nearly as tough a time with 2-4 Hamline as it had with Wheaton and St. John's.
5-1 (5-0-1, really) St. Thomas at Bethel looks like it could be a heck of a game.

Again, if I'm a poll voter who has St. John's at no. 6, I don't see how I can put St. Thomas or Bethel too far from the top 10.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2009, 09:15:56 PM
I can tell you from having seen the game that St. Thomas was lucky as all hell to be in a position to take this game to overtime.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 17, 2009, 09:32:56 PM
Interested on your thoughts regarding Greg Morse, Pat.  He was one of St. Thomas's top recruits last season and the rumor is St. John's wanted him badly.  I hadn't seen him play before today, but judging by the success that St. Thomas in general and Waldvogel in particular have had I thought that he would be impressive.

After watching him today, I can guess why he has 7 TD passes (talented receiver(s?), weak opposition) and 6 INTs (no idea where the ball was going on passes longer than 10 yards).  Besides their QB, I thought St. Thomas looked like a pretty damn good team today.  But unless it was an uncharacteristically bad day for Morse, I can't see the Tommies doing much damage if they're able to get into the playoffs.

Concur? 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2009, 09:42:04 PM
Agreed. Morse didn't look good at all. Adam and I wondered if he were unnerved by the situation, but man, it seemed like he never quite got it together. He will need to perform better to get anywhere.

Morse might not have hit more than two receivers on the money the entire day. The completion percentage is misleading.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 17, 2009, 09:50:47 PM
The majority of his passes were swings and screens to Walvogel, of course.  It's easy to see why Waldvogel had 5 times as many receptions as anyone else on his team (and about half of the team's receptions) coming into the game.  Those plays might work against less athletic defenses, but I can't imagine they'll get it done against playoff teams.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2009, 09:57:48 PM
Last week, though, he was hitting receivers downfield in those situations. And today he wasn't even always hitting the little flare and swing passes accurately.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 17, 2009, 10:15:34 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 17, 2009, 09:15:56 PM
I can tell you from having seen the game that St. Thomas was lucky as all hell to be in a position to take this game to overtime.

Was the Tommies' luck in this game greater than the Johnnies' luck thus far this season?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 17, 2009, 10:47:13 PM
When it's the Tommies, it's luck.  When it's the Johnnies, it's magic.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on October 17, 2009, 11:05:16 PM
Quote from: TC on October 17, 2009, 10:47:13 PM
When it's the Tommies, it's luck.  When it's the Johnnies, it's magic.
:)

And when it's Beth El's (non-St. John's) opponent?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 17, 2009, 11:11:41 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on October 17, 2009, 11:05:16 PM
Quote from: TC on October 17, 2009, 10:47:13 PM
When it's the Tommies, it's luck.  When it's the Johnnies, it's magic.
:)

And when it's Beth El's (non-St. John's) opponent?

Justice.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 22, 2009, 06:23:19 PM
Quote from: TC on October 16, 2009, 03:43:25 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 15, 2009, 09:10:12 PM
Quote from: TC on October 13, 2009, 05:02:30 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 13, 2009, 12:47:45 AM
Who are the 4 #1s that the brackets get built around?

#1 - East - Mount Union
#2 - North - UW-Whitewater
#3 - South - Mary Hardin-Baylor
#4 - West - Winner of this Saturday's St. John's/St. Thomas game

Talent-wise, I think St. Thomas is the best non-WIAC team in the West.  Their recent struggles against St. John's have been well-documented and they haven't had the recent playoff success that Linfield and Central have, but if they can beat SJU (and both teams win out), they will have the resume of a #1/#2 seed.

If SJU beats St. Thomas (and both teams win out), I think they pretty clearly become the 4th #1 with the normal MUC/UW-W machinations that that entails.  And I really hope it happens, but I think they are decided underdogs on Saturday against USTd.  Ugh, it sucks to write that.

If you saw me reveal my top 10, you know that i actually agree with you, at least at the moment, re: St. Thomas, but I'm eager to hear what you base this on.

I think it's waaaay too early to be projecting No. 1 seeds.

Even if you operate under the assumption the UWW, MUC and UMHB are the No. 1s, UWW and MUC offer enough geographic flexibility to allow someone like Wesley to be the East's No. 1 (even though they're techinically South, distance-wise they could make this happen). Wheaton and St. John's/St. Thomas play enough comp where they could stumble. Linfield could creep in. Who knows.

Or you could end up being right.

At this point, it's entirely a hunch. 

First, I agree with your thinking that the Johnnies are overrated at #6 in the D3Football.com poll.  You have them at #7, I probably would have them a few notches lower than that.  That said, the team that wins on Saturday will have a clear (but not guarenteed) path to an undefeated record with wins over St. Thomas/St. John's, Bethel (nearly beat Wheaton), Concordia (beat Willamette) and, in St. John's case, two wins over underwhelming teams from the WIAC.  Like it or not, that's the resume of a #1/#2 team come playoff time.  With St. John's name recognition, I would be very comfortable saying they will be a #1 seed if they go 10-0, though there are always surprises come Selection Sunday. 

...

That's not to say St. John's can't or won't win this game.  I really, really hope they do.  Like every year, they have a lot of very good football players on their team.  St. Thomas fielding a Top 15 team is "man bites dog", while St. John's fielding a Top 15 team is "dog bites man".  And after the ridiculous finishes the Johnnies have had this year against Bethel and UW-Eau Claire, it's ridiculous to pick against them with much certainty.

Sorry for the rambling post, but that's why I'm looking forward to this game and that's my thinking behind calling St. Thomas the most talented non-WIAC team in the West.  While I don't think either of these teams is one of the 4 best in D3, I do think the winner ends up 10-0 and likely locks up the final #1 seed.

I think St. John's resume is strong, and as you pointed out, the MIAC is having a good year with some key non-conference wins.

It's usually hard to lock teams in as top seeds this early ... with Linfield, Central and UW-Whitewater also unbeaten and potentially in the West, name recognition or the perception of being deserving as a 1 seed might not be that much of a factor. It really might be the numbers that settle it.

As for the top 4 teams in the poll, it's probable a team around No. 10 or so gets a 1 seed. Potentially Wheaton/MUC/UWW in north, UWW/SJU/Lin/Central in west and Wesley/MUC in east and Wesley in south ... among the highly ranked teams.

Unless both MUC and Wesley get 1s, that could leave like an Albright as the 1 in the East or a Miss Coll as the 1 in the south.

Lots of football yet to be played though
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 23, 2009, 12:46:37 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 22, 2009, 06:23:19 PM
It's usually hard to lock teams in as top seeds this early ... with Linfield, Central and UW-Whitewater also unbeaten and potentially in the West, name recognition or the perception of being deserving as a 1 seed might not be that much of a factor. It really might be the numbers that settle it.

I take back what I said earlier about a 10-0 team from the MIAC having a clear shot at a #1 (if it's St. John's)/#2+ (if it were St. Thomas) seed.  I went back and looked at the 10-0 teams from the MIAC in the D3Football.com era and, well, for some reason the 2003 Johnnies were clouding my memory:

West Region undefeated teams (10-0 unless noted), with seeds:

2008: #1-Willamette, #2-Occidental (9-0), #3-Monmouth
2007: #1-Central, #3-St. Norbert (UW-Whitewater (9-1) was the #1 seed in the North Region)
2006: #1-UW-Whitewater, #2-Central, #3-Whitworth, #6-Occidental, #8-St. Norbert
2005: #1-Linfield (8-0), #2-UW-Whitewater, #3-St. John's , #4-Occidental, #7-Monmouth
2004: #1-Linfield (9-0), #2-Concordia-Moorhead  
2003: #1-St. John's , #2-Linfield (9-0), #3-Wartburg, #4-St. Norbert
2002: #1-Linfield (9-0)
2001: No undefeated teams.
2000: #1-Linfield (9-0), #2-UW-Stout, #3-Bethel , #4-Central, #5-St. Norbert
1999: #1-Wartburg

It's dangerous to look at undefeated conference representatives without looking at individuals teams and their unique resumes, but I think this shows a loose pecking order of West Region conferences:

1. Northwest Conference - 5 of 7 undefeated NWC teams have gotten a #1 seed, one was #2 behind eventual National Champion St. John's, the other was #3 Whitworth, not typically known as a top NWC team
2. Wisconsin IAC - Few teams make it through a WIAC schedule undefeated, but two years ago a 1-loss UW-Whitewater team was moved out of region to be a #1 seed.  The WIAC's conference strength is clearly being taken into account in seeding teams.
3. Minnesota IAC- An undefeated MIAC team has never been seeded lower than a non-NWC/WIAC team
4. Iowa IAC - Again, an undefeated IIAC team has never been seeded lower than a non-NWC/WIAC/MIAC team, only once higher than an NWC team
5. Southern California IAC - A conference that is starting to garner some respect by winning some games in the playoffs.
6. Midwest Conference - The MWC's undefeated teams have always been the lowest seeded undefeated in the West and have been 3 of the 4 undefeated teams seeded behind teams with at least 1 loss.

What does it mean, assuming the undefeateds win out?  Well, UW-Whitewater has moved into the upper echelon of D3 and until they lose a game I'm assuming they'll get a #1 seed, either in the West or North.  If Linfield can win out, I'd imagine they are next in line, followed by St. John's and Central, respectively.  (It will interesting to see what happens following Central's 37-7 ass-kicking of St. John's in 2007).  A strong 1-loss team leapfrogging Monmouth is possible, though they pasted their toughest opponent (St. Norbert) pretty good.

That good 1-loss team easily could have been Bethel if they could have held on against Wheaton.  Bethel beating Wheaton would have had pretty significant ramifications for Bethel, the MIAC, the West region, and the national playoff picture as a whole.

So yeah, this doesn't really have much to do with the Top 25 (or anything, for that matter) but, like I was saying, I was way off base to say that either St. John's or St. Thomas would give themselves a clear shot at a #1 seed with a win last Saturday.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 23, 2009, 03:25:19 AM
Except that you're only saying they have a shot. They have no shot if they lose, so it's fair to say with a win that they do have a shot.

Two West teams may well get No. 1 seeds, which would increase SJU's chances.

We'll know more next Wednesday when the regional rankings come out.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 25, 2009, 06:30:34 PM
So in your opinions what separates Linfield and SJU from Central. All are undefeated. What makes Linfield and SJU ahead of Central at this point, the Dutch havent been challenged by closer than 14 points except for UWSP (now ranked 26* and defending WIAC - toughest conference in the country - champions) Im not sure how you could justify one getting a 1 seed above the others. If you can justify it please inform me of your thought process! Thanks!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2009, 06:37:25 PM
I start with strength of schedule numbers, which now favor Linfield after this past week.

http://www.d3football.com/strength-of-schedule/2009
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 25, 2009, 07:09:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2009, 06:37:25 PM
I start with strength of schedule numbers, which now favor Linfield after this past week.

http://www.d3football.com/strength-of-schedule/2009

So do you put Central ahead of SJU then?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 26, 2009, 12:15:44 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 25, 2009, 07:09:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2009, 06:37:25 PM
I start with strength of schedule numbers, which now favor Linfield after this past week.

http://www.d3football.com/strength-of-schedule/2009

So do you put Central ahead of SJU then?

The SOS numbers are, essentially, even.  St. John's has beaten St. Thomas and Bethel, Central has beaten Coe and UW-Stevens Point, so that's essentially even. 

Either St. Thomas or Bethel is guaranteed one more loss, and UW-Stevens Point plays UW-Whitewater this week.  Looking ahead, even that's pretty even. 

The only reason why **I** think St. John's is slightly ahead at this point is that the committee has shown a slight preference for MIAC schools over IIAC (and NWC) schools when they have the same amount of losses.  But I wouldn't be shocked if Central were #2 and St. John's were #4.

For the record, I think if the Johnnies played 100 neutral-site games against Central (or Linfield), St. John's would lose more than 50 of them.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 01:39:16 AM
Quote from: TC on October 26, 2009, 12:15:44 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 25, 2009, 07:09:28 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on October 25, 2009, 06:37:25 PM
I start with strength of schedule numbers, which now favor Linfield after this past week.

http://www.d3football.com/strength-of-schedule/2009

So do you put Central ahead of SJU then?

The SOS numbers are, essentially, even.  St. John's has beaten St. Thomas and Bethel, Central has beaten Coe and UW-Stevens Point, so that's essentially even. 

Either St. Thomas or Bethel is guaranteed one more loss, and UW-Stevens Point plays UW-Whitewater this week.  Looking ahead, even that's pretty even. 

The only reason why **I** think St. John's is slightly ahead at this point is that the committee has shown a slight preference for MIAC schools over IIAC (and NWC) schools when they have the same amount of losses.  But I wouldn't be shocked if Central were #2 and St. John's were #4.

For the record, I think if the Johnnies played 100 neutral-site games against Central (or Linfield), St. John's would lose more than 50 of them.

Check your math...
Central is 79th in SOS
SJU is 111th

Thats not "essentially" even by any means.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on October 26, 2009, 02:51:12 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 01:39:16 AM
Check your math...
Central is 79th in SOS
SJU is 111th

Thats not "essentially" even by any means.


Among teams that are undefeated in region, there are zero teams with an opponent's winning % between Central's and St. John's, and St. John's has the decided edge on OOWP.  But your condescension is noted and appreciated.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 11:17:15 AM
Quote from: TC on October 26, 2009, 02:51:12 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 01:39:16 AM
Check your math...
Central is 79th in SOS
SJU is 111th

Thats not "essentially" even by any means.


Among teams that are undefeated in region, there are zero teams with an opponent's winning % between Central's and St. John's, and St. John's has the decided edge on OOWP.  But your condescension is noted and appreciated.

Fair enough, I didnt mean to come off in a negative way. I did not look closely as far as the region goes.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: sju56321 on October 26, 2009, 07:57:55 PM
Didn't Central play Lakeland? Not much help there, but as Pat pointed out to me yesterday, you have UWSP. But, they may well lose to UWW, so their winning percentage will decrease and the SOS could shift.
The interesting question is would the NCAA change the West rankings based only on an opponet loosing-for example, if they had Linfield ahead of SJU base on SOS with the Oxy win and Oxy were to lose their last two games and UWEC or UWRF were to win out, increasing SJU's SOS?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 09:17:28 PM
Quote from: sju56321 on October 26, 2009, 07:57:55 PM
Didn't Central play Lakeland? Not much help there, but as Pat pointed out to me yesterday, you have UWSP. But, they may well lose to UWW, so their winning percentage will decrease and the SOS could shift.
The interesting question is would the NCAA change the West rankings based only on an opponet loosing-for example, if they had Linfield ahead of SJU base on SOS with the Oxy win and Oxy were to lose their last two games and UWEC or UWRF were to win out, increasing SJU's SOS?

True we did play Lakeland, sometimes its just hard to schedule. So what is more impressive, SJU beating two bottom feeder WIAC teams (as the standings are now) or Central beating the defending WIAC champs and currently tied for 1st place WIAC team. It will be interesting to see things pan out. Top 3 will be Central SJU Linfield in some order, gotta beat everyone to get to the show anyways, but the difference between 1 and 2 could be huge as far as hosting the regional final.

Central has really been dominant in all but 1 game (UWSP), having beat everyone else by at least 14, and in a lot of these games the opponent was scoring with their first team vs our second/third teamers to make the final score look closer than the game really was.

Either way it will be a fun West Region! Good luck and stay healthy!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: BoBo on October 27, 2009, 10:51:36 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 09:17:28 PM
True we did play Lakeland, sometimes its just hard to schedule. So what is more impressive, SJU beating two bottom feeder WIAC teams (as the standings are now) or Central beating the defending WIAC co-champs and currently tied for 1st place WIAC team.

IMO they kind of even out...the WIAC "bottom feeder" teams (River Falls and Eau Claire) you speak of are not as bad as you think and would be highly competitive with the top 1/2 of the IIAC and prossibly beat many.  And if it wasn't for Stevens Point blowing an 11 point lead, on Central's field, in the last 5 minutes of their first game of the year (Central's 2nd), Central loses big at home and they wouldn't currently be on the same level as SJU, Linfield and UWW (the other defending WIAC Co-Champ  :P ) in the west region - so in my view, it's a draw. 

UWW at UWSP this week may help to bring the situation into better focus.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 27, 2009, 10:15:37 PM
(Now that I am at home and can do the research...)

Bobo's assessment is borne out by these indexes that I have followed in the ASC Pick'ems contest for 9 years.

I have checked the indexes for the current status of the "WIAC bottom feeders".

Lazindex  (showing numerical rankings):

#5 Central IIAC
#22 Coe IIAC
#55 UWEC
#66 UWP
#67 Wartburg IIAC
#72 UWRF
#83 Luther IIAC
#88 Buena Vista IIAC

http://www.lazindex.com/

Bornpowerindex  (showing index rating):  

Central 47.4
Coe   40.3
Wartburg  36.8
UWP  35.5
UWRF  33.2
UWEC  31.6
Loras  27.0
Luther 24.8


http://www.bornpowerindex.com/

And, for you fans of Massey Ratings...

Central IIAC  #336
Coe IIAC  #413
UWEC      #496
UWP        #551
UWRF      #572
Wartburg  IIAC  #595

http://www.mratings.com/rate.php?lg=cf
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 28, 2009, 01:07:38 AM
Quote from: BoBo on October 27, 2009, 10:51:36 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 09:17:28 PM
True we did play Lakeland, sometimes its just hard to schedule. So what is more impressive, SJU beating two bottom feeder WIAC teams (as the standings are now) or Central beating the defending WIAC co-champs and currently tied for 1st place WIAC team.

IMO they kind of even out...the WIAC "bottom feeder" teams (River Falls and Eau Claire) you speak of are not as bad as you think and would be highly competitive with the top 1/2 of the IIAC and prossibly beat many.  And if it wasn't for Stevens Point blowing an 11 point lead, on Central's field, in the last 5 minutes of their first game of the year (Central's 2nd), Central loses big at home and they wouldn't currently be on the same level as SJU, Linfield and UWW (the other defending WIAC Co-Champ  :P ) in the west region - so in my view, it's a draw. 

UWW at UWSP this week may help to bring the situation into better focus.

Seriously, you think one week goes from a win by Central to a big loss to UWSP? I like your posts but your drinking a bit to much of the WIAC kool aid there. Im not saying Central would guarantee win, but it would be a close game again
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: BoBo on October 28, 2009, 12:03:39 PM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 28, 2009, 01:07:38 AM
Quote from: BoBo on October 27, 2009, 10:51:36 AM
Quote from: DutchHawk on October 26, 2009, 09:17:28 PM
True we did play Lakeland, sometimes its just hard to schedule. So what is more impressive, SJU beating two bottom feeder WIAC teams (as the standings are now) or Central beating the defending WIAC co-champs and currently tied for 1st place WIAC team.

IMO they kind of even out...the WIAC "bottom feeder" teams (River Falls and Eau Claire) you speak of are not as bad as you think and would be highly competitive with the top 1/2 of the IIAC and prossibly beat many.  And if it wasn't for Stevens Point blowing an 11 point lead, on Central's field, in the last 5 minutes of their first game of the year (Central's 2nd), Central loses big at home and they wouldn't currently be on the same level as SJU, Linfield and UWW (the other defending WIAC Co-Champ  :P ) in the west region - so in my view, it's a draw.  

UWW at UWSP this week may help to bring the situation into better focus.

Seriously, you think one week goes from a win by Central to a big loss to UWSP? I like your posts but your drinking a bit to much of the WIAC kool aid there. Im not saying Central would guarantee win, but it would be a close game again

Call me stupid, but that sentence doesn't make much sense to me.  ;)
Anyway, I was just responding to your question regarding what is more impressive.  I thought they were pretty much even. You don't agree; fair enough.  I've read multiple posts in the past few days, in many different places where you are basically pleading for people to believe in Central or wondering why they would leave Central out of the discussion for potential #1 seed in the west. And I'm the one drinking the kool-aid  ::).  I don't mean this in a patronizing way, but why do you think Central isn't get the attention you think it deserves?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchHawk on October 28, 2009, 01:01:17 PM
They are getting all the attention they need, if they do happen to stumble in the next couple weeks well then you can call me out and I will have my foot planted firmly in my mouth.

Was it UWSP blowing a lead or Central outplaying them in the last quarter or 2, depends on your perspective I suppose. We can both drink our perferred kool aid for the time being.

Not necessarily trying to plead my case for a one seed or anything like that, just stating how I see things as well. Not saying either of our opinions are correct but it does all get to be sorted out on the field eventually.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on October 31, 2009, 05:15:47 PM
Three of the top 11 teams have lost so far today.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 09:06:58 AM
Quote from: HSC85 on October 31, 2009, 05:15:47 PM
Three of the top 11 teams have lost so far today.

Joined by two more in the top 21.

No. 7 Otterbein's loss might be explained (NOT excused) by their looking ahead a week.

No. 9 North Cenral lost to a clearly underrated Illinois Wesleyan.

No. 11 W&J (an enigma all season long) lost to an undefeated Thomas More, a team that might legitimately claim it deserved to be ranked higher than No. 20.

No. 13 Mississippi's loss to Howard Payne (wasn't he a lieutenant on Hill Street Blues?) is inexplicable.

No. 21 Occidental lost to a clearly underrated Cal Lutheran.

So there will be some shaking going on.

Here's what I still don't understand: St. John's is at No. 4, and Wheaton is at No. 14 (only a week after being at No. 3).  Beth El lost by 2 at St. John's and by 3 to Wheaton, both losses on the last play of their respective games.  Yet there are 4 two-loss teams getting more votes than Bethel.  Next week's St. Thomas at Bethel game could/should be a good one, with lots of Top 25 shakeability.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on November 01, 2009, 10:56:33 AM
Just for giggles and grins - Back in the "Dark Ages", some committee of some kind "picked" 4 teams that went to the playoffs. If you had to pick four teams today, Who would you pick? Then compare to the Regional Rankings. One would assume if they correctly assessed which were the best four teams in the country, four of the eight teams that were rated the top two in each region would be in the mix.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 01, 2009, 11:27:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 09:06:58 AM

No. 7 Otterbein's loss might be explained (NOT excused) by their looking ahead a week.


They also lost their starting QB (which was already the back-up after Rafferty got hurt in week 2) in the first quarter against Marietta.  Playing with your 3rd string QB on the road isn't easy.  Even against a crap team like Etta.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 01, 2009, 01:40:10 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 01, 2009, 11:27:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 09:06:58 AM

No. 7 Otterbein's loss might be explained (NOT excused) by their looking ahead a week.


They also lost their starting QB (which was already the back-up after Rafferty got hurt in week 2) in the first quarter against Marietta.  Playing with your 3rd string QB on the road isn't easy.  Even against a crap team like Etta.
+1!  Thanks for the update :)!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2009, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 09:06:58 AM
No. 11 W&J (an enigma all season long) lost to an undefeated Thomas More, a team that might legitimately claim it deserved to be ranked higher than No. 20.


Agreed... but I think Thomas More has stayed under the radar in 2009 by playing their reserves in the 4th Quarter consistently.  Had they kept their foot on the gas pedal, there would probably have been more awareness of them and the defense before this past Saturday.  They won't claim they should be ranked higher than 20th --- this team doesn't care about rankings... just making some noise in the playoffs.

That said --- I do think W&J deserved to be in the Top 25 ....just not as high.  As things are now (after yesterday's result) some in the W&J program (fans and alums) are really questioning whether the program is what they've been before.  
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 01, 2009, 02:39:56 PM
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2009, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 09:06:58 AM
No. 11 W&J (an enigma all season long) lost to an undefeated Thomas More, a team that might legitimately claim it deserved to be ranked higher than No. 20.


Agreed... but I think Thomas More has stayed under the radar in 2009 by playing their reserves in the 4th Quarter consistently.  Had they kept their foot on the gas pedal, there would probably have been more awareness of them and the defense before this past Saturday.  They won't claim they should be ranked higher than 20th --- this team doesn't care about rankings... just making some noise in the playoffs.

That said --- I do think W&J deserved to be in the Top 25 ....just not as high.  As things are now (after yesterday's result) some in the W&J program (fans and alums) are really questioning whether the program is what they've been before.  
Respectfully, I think that D3 has changed from the D3 from the eras of the alums.

If they are looking at the W&J's from the 1990's, then that was before the pools.

New D3 conferences include the ASC and NWC. Nearly 20 more teams have added football.  I think that the AQ has brought new focus to winning the conference. 

We have gone from 15 Pool A  conferences in 1999 to 23 in 2009.

http://www.d3football.com/playoffs/99/nov13.htm

Finally, I think that D3football.com has made this whole endeavor better by the exposure that it has given to the athletes.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on November 01, 2009, 05:26:14 PM
IMHO It could be time for some teams to start stepping up their non- conference competition. If the only way teams are going to get bids is to win their conference then maybe they should toughen up the non-conference opponents. With the landscape of C bids  possibly changing in 2011 some of the East and South teams are going to have to get some better SOS numbers from outside the conferencs
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 01, 2009, 06:23:25 PM
Quote from: PA_wesleyfan on November 01, 2009, 05:26:14 PM
IMHO It could be time for some teams to start stepping up their non- conference competition. If the only way teams are going to get bids is to win their conference then maybe they should toughen up the non-conference opponents. With the landscape of C bids  possibly changing in 2011 some of the East and South teams are going to have to get some better SOS numbers from outside the conferencs
But many of the conferences are adding conference games, which takes away a non-conference date that allows you to boost the OWP/OOWP...

NWC -- Pacific has announced 2010 as its resumption date.  GFU is also looking at adding football.  That could make 9 teams in the NWC.

WIAC -- the 8-team WIAC is adding a non-conference intra-conference game.

UMAC -- Presentation and the SLIACer's may give the conference 10 members.

HCAC -- Adding Earlham from the NCAC to make 9 football-playing members.

NCAC -- who knows how they will handle Earlham's departure.  They do have the UAA schools that need games.

E8 -- adding Salisbury and Frostburg to get to 8 teams and to preserve the AQ.

Centennial -- adding Susquehanna from the LL to make a 10-team conference.

SCAC lost Colorado College, but Hendrix is coming on to get back up to 9 teams.

ASC -- Concordia Austin is supposedly adding football in 2011 or 2012 to get to 10 ASC  teams.

ODAC -- adding Shenandoah to get to 8 football members.

Who is still unaffiliated with a conference?  Wesley, Stevenson, Huntingdon, LaGrange, Chapman (who can get games with most of the SCIAC teams) and Macalester. (Finlandia adds football in 2012).

What do you bet the USA South adds Huntingdon and LaGrange to make an 8-team football conference and preserve the AQ?   :)


[EDIT] -- Hendrix and Concordia-Austin (Texas) have not declared a start date as of today, Feb 7, 2010.

Pacific has finished hiring its coaching staff.  There is no schedule posted yet.

ODAC and Shenandoah discussions are off.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2009, 07:41:13 PM
Ralph, I don't think they are being questioned because of that.. More because they haven't been beaten by the same PAC team in back to back years since Grove City pulled it off before this website existed. 

I still think they make the tournament at 9-1, though
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on November 01, 2009, 08:05:29 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 01, 2009, 06:23:25 PM

NCAC -- who knows how they will handle Earlham's departure.  They do have the UAA schools that need games.


For 2010 adding a non-conference intra-conference game (a few schools already had one, so they will now have two.  Each NCAC team is playing two UAA teams.  For 2011 TBA

http://www.northcoast.org/pdffiles/schedules/10NCAC-UAA100209.pdf
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on November 01, 2009, 08:17:44 PM
Ralph

I was leaning more toward the teams who have openings and add opponemts that aren't quite as competative. League reputation in the West and North gets teams more recognition than some in the East and South.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
This weeks' Top 25 confusion includes what is believed to have been termed "The COB Paradox" by Stephen Hawking, where COB refers to Capital, Otterbein, and Bethel.

No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

It gets more confusing.

Enter 6-2 Beth El, whose 2 losses were by 3 points to then-No. 5 ranked Wheaton, and by 2 points to then-No. 6 ranked St. John's.   In both of those games, the winning scores were made by Bethel's opponents on the last play of the game.

As Stephen Hawking would tell you (in his computer-generated voice), it defies the laws of Newtonian physics that 6-2 Capital is ranked No. 13, while Bethel--only two plays away from 8-0 with wins over two top ten teams--gets less Top 25 votes than 29 other teams.  There are corollary phenomena, including the Ohio Northern Conundrum, the Uncertain North Centrality, and the Willambiguity.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 01, 2009, 08:45:04 PM
Quote from: PA_wesleyfan on November 01, 2009, 08:17:44 PM
Ralph

I was leaning more toward the teams who have openings and add opponemts that aren't quite as competative. League reputation in the West and North gets teams more recognition than some in the East and South.
The ECFC took care of the situation in the "east".

I don't know how long it will take an ECFC team to win a playoff game, but in some aspects, I'm not worried about that.  

Look at what that conference provides..."peer institutions".  Only Norwich and Mount Ida have played ball consistently thru the decade.  That is a real opportunity for those student-athletes.

I know that Wesley is feeling the pinch, and I hope that there is a solution, soon.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on November 01, 2009, 08:48:24 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
This weeks' Top 25 confusion includes what is believed to have been termed "The COB Paradox" by Stephen Hawking, where COB refers to Capital, Otterbein, and Bethel.

No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

It gets more confusing.

Enter 6-2 Beth El, whose 2 losses were by 3 points to then-No. 5 ranked Wheaton, and by 2 points to then-No. 6 ranked St. John's.   In both of those games, the winning scores were made by Bethel's opponents on the last play of the game.

As Stephen Hawking would tell you (in his computer-generated voice), it defies the laws of Newtonian physics that 6-2 Capital is ranked No. 13, while Bethel--only two plays away from 8-0 with wins over two top ten teams--gets less Top 25 votes than 29 other teams.  There are corollary phenomena, including the Ohio Northern Conundrum, the Uncertain North Centrality, and the Willambiguity.

Also, why Hampden-Sydney jumped over Alfred (among others) when they had an open date, and Alfred won 51-14. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 01, 2009, 08:55:58 PM
Quote from: pg04 on November 01, 2009, 08:48:24 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
This weeks' Top 25 confusion includes what is believed to have been termed "The COB Paradox" by Stephen Hawking, where COB refers to Capital, Otterbein, and Bethel.

No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

It gets more confusing.

Enter 6-2 Beth El, whose 2 losses were by 3 points to then-No. 5 ranked Wheaton, and by 2 points to then-No. 6 ranked St. John's.   In both of those games, the winning scores were made by Bethel's opponents on the last play of the game.

As Stephen Hawking would tell you (in his computer-generated voice), it defies the laws of Newtonian physics that 6-2 Capital is ranked No. 13, while Bethel--only two plays away from 8-0 with wins over two top ten teams--gets less Top 25 votes than 29 other teams.  There are corollary phenomena, including the Ohio Northern Conundrum, the Uncertain North Centrality, and the Willambiguity.

Also, why Hampden-Sydney jumped over Alfred (among others) when they had an open date, and Alfred won 51-14. 
H-SC jumped from 63 points to 139 points.  That is 76 points, or three places on a "Perfect Top 25".  Perhaps the win over NCWC is carrying more weight as a quality win with the voters.

Alfred jumped from 80 votes to 103 votes.  A "perfect #22" is 100 votes, so they moved up about 1 slot on the average voters ballot.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on November 01, 2009, 10:07:00 PM
I think that Hampden Sydney being ranked 4th in the South Regional Rankings put them on the radar of a few more voters.  Also, two of the teams ranked above them in the Regional Rankings lost.  They probably will not move up but they are still in the top 4 of the South Regional Rankings. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 01, 2009, 11:16:37 PM
My hypothesis is that HSC's 'Bye' was a MUCH tougher opponent than the usual 'Bye'.  And I heard that HSC double monkey-stomped 'em! ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSC85 on November 02, 2009, 05:31:58 AM
Mr. Yipsi,

LOL +1 for making as much sense as anyone else with an explanation.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HScoach on November 02, 2009, 11:53:56 AM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.

I agree with everything above except that the 2nd best OAC team is whichever one wins the ONU at Capital showdown this weekend.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on November 02, 2009, 12:45:04 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 02, 2009, 11:53:56 AM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.

I agree with everything above except that the 2nd best OAC team is whichever one wins the ONU at Capital showdown this weekend.

True, forgot CAP plays ONU this weekend.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 02, 2009, 12:49:00 PM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 12:45:04 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 02, 2009, 11:53:56 AM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.

I agree with everything above except that the 2nd best OAC team is whichever one wins the ONU at Capital showdown this weekend.

True, forgot CAP plays ONU this weekend.
The NCC "quality" win dropped from Platinum to Silver this weekend with NCC's loss to IWU.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: hchawks on November 02, 2009, 02:41:28 PM
What does Huntingdon have to do to crack even one vote in the top 25 list, sporting a 7-1 record with wins over the likes of Millsaps, Louisiana College, and the bitter rival Lagrange (who erased all playoff hopes last year last week of the season).  Depauw receives votes and sits at 33 while they are ranked underneath HC in the South Rankings?? (HC = 8 in South, Depauw = 9, Dickinson = 10).  Number one ranked offense in the nation?? Hello!!! Anybody?? Not trying to say they are number one, just want to see some votes
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on November 02, 2009, 02:46:13 PM
I think the CCIW has 3 top 15 teams in Wheaton, IWU and NCC. Each of these teams has had some injury issues which has kept them from separating themselves from the CCIW pack. IWU didn't have their QB for 3 games including their loss, NCC is now without their 4 captains and best players (and have had a host of other injuries )and Wheaton has had 6 starters on offense and 4 starters on defense miss at least 1 game.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 02, 2009, 03:34:14 PM
Quote from: hchawks on November 02, 2009, 02:41:28 PM
What does Huntingdon have to do to crack even one vote in the top 25 list, sporting a 7-1 record with wins over the likes of Millsaps, Louisiana College, and the bitter rival Lagrange (who erased all playoff hopes last year last week of the season).  Depauw receives votes and sits at 33 while they are ranked underneath HC in the South Rankings?? (HC = 8 in South, Depauw = 9, Dickinson = 10).  Number one ranked offense in the nation?? Hello!!! Anybody?? Not trying to say they are number one, just want to see some votes
Huntingdon is still on everyone's radar at about #27 - #35.

LaGrange got very little love last year, and then was beaten easily in the playoffs.

The national voters don't have a "conference" perspective that helps "slot" teams.

Huntingdon's program is just "too new".


The South Region Fan Poll is just 5 fans (amateurs) filling out a ballot after the weekend's games.

LaGrange seems to be down this year, and Louisiana College is just another (middle-of-the-road) good ASC team.

Millsaps is down this year.

The road loss to UW-Oshkosh was the "first impression" of this year's team, and it seems to have stuck.

If Huntingdon has a strong first round showing or wins a first round game then they might be ranked in the final Top 25.

Don't take it personally.  The Top 25 seems to lag team performance rather than be a predictor of next week's game.  IMHO, if you had beaten UWO, then you would have been in the poll several weeks ago.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Goal Line Stand on November 02, 2009, 04:14:01 PM
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2009, 02:46:13 PM
I think the CCIW has 3 top 15 teams in Wheaton, IWU and NCC. Each of these teams has had some injury issues which has kept them from separating themselves from the CCIW pack. IWU didn't have their QB for 3 games including their loss, NCC is now without their 4 captains and best players (and have had a host of other injuries )and Wheaton has had 6 starters on offense and 4 starters on defense miss at least 1 game.

The voters are suppose to take injuries into consideration now when ranking the Top 25 ?   ??? ::) With only two games left in the season, plenty of teams are dealing with injuries. It is the nature of the sport.    
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on November 02, 2009, 04:19:36 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 02, 2009, 03:34:14 PM
Quote from: hchawks on November 02, 2009, 02:41:28 PM
What does Huntingdon have to do to crack even one vote in the top 25 list, sporting a 7-1 record with wins over the likes of Millsaps, Louisiana College, and the bitter rival Lagrange (who erased all playoff hopes last year last week of the season).  Depauw receives votes and sits at 33 while they are ranked underneath HC in the South Rankings?? (HC = 8 in South, Depauw = 9, Dickinson = 10).  Number one ranked offense in the nation?? Hello!!! Anybody?? Not trying to say they are number one, just want to see some votes
Huntingdon is still on everyone's radar at about #27 - #35.

LaGrange got very little love last year, and then was beaten easily in the playoffs.

The national voters don't have a "conference" perspective that helps "slot" teams.

Huntingdon's program is just "too new".


The South Region Fan Poll is just 5 fans (amateurs) filling out a ballot after the weekend's games.

LaGrange seems to be down this year, and Louisiana College is just another (middle-of-the-road) good ASC team.

Millsaps is down this year.

The road loss to UW-Oshkosh was the "first impression" of this year's team, and it seems to have stuck.

If Huntingdon has a strong first round showing or wins a first round game then they might be ranked in the final Top 25.

Don't take it personally.  The Top 25 seems to lag team performance rather than be a predictor of next week's game.  IMHO, if you had beaten UWO, then you would have been in the poll several weeks ago.

Well said +K

I will also say that I hope they aren't "playing for a ranking".... that could leave a team ripe for an upset, IMO

Playoffs in D3 take the stress away from making sure the rankings are exactly right.  Ours is settled on the field and not using a computer.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on November 02, 2009, 04:33:04 PM
Quote from: Goal Line Stand on November 02, 2009, 04:14:01 PM
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2009, 02:46:13 PM
I think the CCIW has 3 top 15 teams in Wheaton, IWU and NCC. Each of these teams has had some injury issues which has kept them from separating themselves from the CCIW pack. IWU didn't have their QB for 3 games including their loss, NCC is now without their 4 captains and best players (and have had a host of other injuries )and Wheaton has had 6 starters on offense and 4 starters on defense miss at least 1 game.

The voters are suppose to take injuries into consideration now when ranking the Top 25 ?   ??? ::) With only two games left in the season, plenty of teams are dealing with injuries. It is the nature of the sport.   

Sorry, I should clarify my post--I was explaining the injuries as a reason none of these 3 teams have separated themselves in the CCIW race. The rankings are what they are and I believe each team is appropriately slotted (although its hard to say IWU should be below a team they just beat). It's my opinion that these 3 teams are talented enough to be in the top 15. I also have seen Bethel play and I think they are definitely a top 25 team (I'll tell you they are a good qb away from being a top 10 team in my opinion).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Goal Line Stand on November 02, 2009, 04:52:20 PM
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2009, 04:33:04 PM
Quote from: Goal Line Stand on November 02, 2009, 04:14:01 PM
Quote from: USee on November 02, 2009, 02:46:13 PM
I think the CCIW has 3 top 15 teams in Wheaton, IWU and NCC. Each of these teams has had some injury issues which has kept them from separating themselves from the CCIW pack. IWU didn't have their QB for 3 games including their loss, NCC is now without their 4 captains and best players (and have had a host of other injuries )and Wheaton has had 6 starters on offense and 4 starters on defense miss at least 1 game.

The voters are suppose to take injuries into consideration now when ranking the Top 25 ?   ??? ::) With only two games left in the season, plenty of teams are dealing with injuries. It is the nature of the sport.   

Sorry, I should clarify my post--I was explaining the injuries as a reason none of these 3 teams have separated themselves in the CCIW race. The rankings are what they are and I believe each team is appropriately slotted (although its hard to say IWU should be below a team they just beat). It's my opinion that these 3 teams are talented enough to be in the top 15. I also have seen Bethel play and I think they are definitely a top 25 team (I'll tell you they are a good qb away from being a top 10 team in my opinion).
Oh, I see.  That's better.  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: hchawks on November 02, 2009, 06:52:59 PM
Despite all of that, I am still curious as to why Huntingdon has yet to receive one single vote.  OW% is top 20 in the nation, undefeated in south region play.  I understand being an independent team does not help us, but even knowing that we are on the radar would somewhat be a satisfaction so far for this season.

Being under the radar is not necessarily a bad thing.  Could come out of nowhere and make a name for ourselves this postseason (assuming the Pool B bid is ours).

Matchup against BSC this Saturday will be the determining factor

teamline.com      team code 2588 if you would like to listen in, pregame starts at 1:10 CST
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on November 02, 2009, 07:21:19 PM
Quote from: hchawks on November 02, 2009, 06:52:59 PM
Despite all of that, I am still curious as to why Huntingdon has yet to receive one single vote.  OW% is top 20 in the nation, undefeated in south region play.  I understand being an independent team does not help us, but even knowing that we are on the radar would somewhat be a satisfaction so far for this season.

Being under the radar is not necessarily a bad thing.  Could come out of nowhere and make a name for ourselves this postseason (assuming the Pool B bid is ours).

It could have something to do with losing by 3 scores to the best team they've played this year, a team that happens to be 4-4/2-3 right now.

If you're arguing that 6 WIAC teams should also be receiving consideration as Top 25 teams, I might agree with you--but I don't think you're saying that.  Once Huntingdon starts beating teams like UW-Oshkosh, I'd imagine they'll start getting (and deserving) Top 25 consideration.  And, as you point out, they'll likely get the chance to do that this year in the playoffs, which is pretty sweet.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 08:07:50 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 02, 2009, 11:53:56 AM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.

I agree with everything above except that the 2nd best OAC team is whichever one wins the ONU at Capital showdown this weekend.

So if Capital beats ONU and finishes 8-2, while Otterbein loses to Mount Union and finishes 8-2, then 8-2 Capital should be ranked ahead of 8-2 Otterbein, who beat Capital head to head?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 08:12:34 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 08:07:50 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 02, 2009, 11:53:56 AM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.

I agree with everything above except that the 2nd best OAC team is whichever one wins the ONU at Capital showdown this weekend.

So if Capital beats ONU and finishes 8-2, while Otterbein loses to Mount Union and finishes 8-2, then 8-2 Capital should be ranked ahead of 8-2 Otterbein, who beat Capital head to head?


Yes.  H-to-h is obviously important, but cannot be the one single overriding factor.  Cap did not lose to Etta, and I doubt Ott will lead MUC in the 4th quarter.

Or were you suggesting that Etta should be ranked above Ott? :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 10:26:22 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 08:12:34 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 08:07:50 PM
Quote from: HScoach on November 02, 2009, 11:53:56 AM
Quote from: kirasdad on November 02, 2009, 08:48:16 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 08:43:39 PM
No. 13 Capital's 6-2 record includes a one point loss to No. 15 Otterbein, currently sporting a 7-1 record, with its 1 loss coming this past Saturday at the hands of 3-5 Marietta.   Capital's other loss is to the 1985 Chicago Bears Mount Union.  If we assume that Otterbein will lose to Mount Union, does a 2 loss Otterbein deserve to be ranked lower than 2 loss Capital, a team Otterbein beat head to head?

Otterbein is down to their 3rd string QB, but should NEVER had lost to Marietta.  ONU lost early to MUC and OTT, and has a quality win against NCC.  ONU is probably playing the best towards the end of the season.  If MUC beats OTT, then IMO ONU will be the best of the 2 loss teams in the OAC.

I agree with everything above except that the 2nd best OAC team is whichever one wins the ONU at Capital showdown this weekend.

So if Capital beats ONU and finishes 8-2, while Otterbein loses to Mount Union and finishes 8-2, then 8-2 Capital should be ranked ahead of 8-2 Otterbein, who beat Capital head to head?


Yes.  H-to-h is obviously important, but cannot be the one single overriding factor.  Cap did not lose to Etta, and I doubt Ott will lead MUC in the 4th quarter.


I don't understand why this is so difficult for people--even highly educated academics--to understand.

One single overriding factor?  They have the same record, in the same conference.  They have a common loss, and they each lost to one other team besides.  Those are numerous factors.  Based on those numerous factors, the two teams compare pretty darned closely.  Now, how can we determine which team deserves to be ranked higher than the other?  Hmmm,  . . .   What to do, what to do?

Oh, hey, whattaya know?  Otterbein beat Capital head to head. 

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 08:12:34 PM
Or were you suggesting that Etta should be ranked above Ott? :D

Does Marietta have an 8-2 record in your hypothetical?  Or do they have the 3-7 record that they're likely to have in real life?  I would never suggest that a 3-7 team deserved to be ranked ahead of an 8-2 team (unless, maybe if the 3-7 team beat the 8-2 team twice).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 10:47:13 PM
redswarm,

I'd be more open to your argument (despite the 'highly educated academics' slur :P) if Ott had beaten Cap in a romp.  They won by ONE with a TD with 38 seconds left.!

THAT h-to-h doesn't carry a whole bunch of weight to me.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on November 02, 2009, 10:51:38 PM
Capital beat Marietta by 24.

Otterbein beat Capital by 1.

Marietta beat Otterbein by 3.

What to do? What to do?

OH! I know! Consider the rest of their resume?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 11:10:38 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 10:47:13 PM
redswarm,

I'd be more open to your argument (despite the 'highly educated academics' slur :P) if Ott had beaten Cap in a romp.  They won by ONE with a TD with 38 seconds left.!

THAT h-to-h doesn't carry a whole bunch of weight to me.

Aw heck, lighten up, Doc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6cxNR9ML8k).  Sheesh, you've slurred my speeches worse than that.  (get it? :D ) There's nothing wrong with being a highly educated academic.  In fact, it's rather impressive.

Identical records in the same conference, Otterbein has a head to head win that counts for nothing.  Why do the teams play each other, if their head to head results are discounted so heavily?

I don't understand why so many people are so quick to overlook head to head.  We had this discussion quite a bit on the East Region Fan Poll page, when many seemed to be arguing that Kean didn't really beat Cortland St.  By two touchdowns.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 11:13:59 PM
Quote from: smedindy on November 02, 2009, 10:51:38 PM
Capital beat Marietta by 24.

Otterbein beat Capital by 1.

Marietta beat Otterbein by 3.

What to do? What to do?

OH! I know! Consider the rest of their resume?

You must have missed the part about the two teams (Otterbein and Capital) having identical records in the same conference.  That's kind of like considering their resumes, isn't it?

When you're comparing one team against one other team, how can head to head result between those teams be so insignificant?

I don't get it.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 11:24:48 PM
rs81,

H-to-h IS a big deal IF it is clear cut.  To me, at least, winning by ONE in the last 38 seconds is essentially a tie IF there is other evidence.  Results against Marietta constitutes other evidence.  Results against MUC constitutes other evidence - IF OTT is still in the game in the 4th quarter, I'll change my vote, but I suspect they will be roadkill by halftime.  We'll see in a few days.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 02, 2009, 11:44:14 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 02, 2009, 11:24:48 PM
rs81,

H-to-h IS a big deal IF it is clear cut.  To me, at least, winning by ONE in the last 38 seconds is essentially a tie IF there is other evidence.  Results against Marietta constitutes other evidence.  Results against MUC constitutes other evidence - IF OTT is still in the game in the 4th quarter, I'll change my vote, but I suspect they will be roadkill by halftime.  We'll see in a few days.

So would you rank Bethel ahead of Wheaton?  Ahead of St. John's?  St. John's is ranked No. 4, with three wins decided on the last play of the game.

I've long been a lonely minority, arguing that overtime in football is misleading and unnecessary--counterproductive, even.  (Some actually argued that they preferred a loss to a tie, which strikes me as ludicrous.)  But a win in OT is much closer to a tie than a win in regulation is to a tie.

It seems to me that if indirect comparisons are close (as they are with Otterbein and Capital), the direct comparison of a head to head result has to overcome the indirect analysis.  But it's no big deal.  Kean didn't really beat Cortland St., either.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:10:10 AM
Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win? ::)

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made. ;)

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment! :D

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ;)]
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:20:49 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:10:10 AM
Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win? ::)

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made. ;)

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment! :D

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ;)]

Well of course--they proved that much on the field.  Wait, . . . what?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on November 03, 2009, 12:30:36 AM
You know, you play the same game 10 times, it may be tied 5-5 after 10 games.

Some teams may have just a 3 to 5 percent chance of beating a team, but once in a while, that happens.

See Howard Payne vs. Mississippi College. Howard Payne beat Mississippi College. Howard Payne lost to McMurry 37-13. Mississippi College beat McMurry 61-14.

Explain THAT!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:32:06 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:20:49 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:10:10 AM
Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win? ::)

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made. ;)

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment! :D

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ;)]

Well of course--they proved that much on the field.  Wait, . . . what?

Ever hear of the concept of an 'upset'? :D

H-to-h is obviously a key measure.  It is not the ONLY measure.  If they had a rematch, I'd pick Cap.  (That may pit me against 'reality'.  I'm betting it would also earn me money in the long run! ;))
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:45:13 AM
Quote from: smedindy on November 03, 2009, 12:30:36 AM
You know, you play the same game 10 times, it may be tied 5-5 after 10 games.

Some teams may have just a 3 to 5 percent chance of beating a team, but once in a while, that happens.

See Howard Payne vs. Mississippi College. Howard Payne beat Mississippi College. Howard Payne lost to McMurry 37-13. Mississippi College beat McMurry 61-14.

Explain THAT!

Apples to oranges.  Howard Payne doesn't compare to Mississippi College the same way that Otterbein compares to Capital.

I haven't mentioned for quite some time that Capital--considered by many to be better than Otterbein--not only lost to Otterbein, but as of today has a worse overall record and a worse conference record than Otterbein.  Based on the available evidence, Otterbein is a better team than Capital right now.  I had to craft a (realistic) hypothetical where Otterbein loses another game to make the indirect comparison more in Capital's favor than it is right now.

Howard Payne doesn't compare well to Mississippi College.  Howard Payne's win over Mississippi College was clearly an upset.  Otterbein's win over Capital, not so much.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:51:45 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:32:06 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:20:49 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:10:10 AM
Now, now, did I ever say that a close loss (or OT loss) is better than a win? ::)

I merely said it is less than compelling evidence IF there is other evidence.  Based on other evidence, I'd rate Wheaton over Bethel.  I'll await the Bethel/St. Thomas game before taking a stand on the other comparison you made. ;)

Don't get me wrong - I think h-to-h is the single best measure.  But if you take it too far it is both self-defeating (A over B, B over C, C over A), and eliminates the one area where humans still beat computers: judgment! :D

[And, yes, in my judgment, Cap is better than Ott! ;)]

Well of course--they proved that much on the field.  Wait, . . . what?

Ever hear of the concept of an 'upset'? :D

H-to-h is obviously a key measure.  It is not the ONLY measure.  If they had a rematch, I'd pick Cap.  (That may pit me against 'reality'.  I'm betting it would also earn me money in the long run! ;))

Yeah, 7-1 teams "upset" 6-2 teams all the time.  :D

I don't get this "it's not the ONLY measure" refrain.  I keep pointing out that overall record and conference record are also "measures," and by those measures, Otterbein actually scores higher than Capital right now.

"If they had a rematch" is NO measure at all--it's fiction.  It's made up.  It's fantasy.

My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:56:08 AM
rs81,

Once Ott has given MUC all they can handle, we'll resume this discussion.

Right now, it is a bit speculative.  If Ott is down 5 TDs in the first half, I suspect you will not want to resume the conversation. :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 12:59:02 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:51:45 AM
My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

You don't need a human to tell you what happened.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 01:09:09 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 03, 2009, 12:56:08 AM
rs81,

Once Ott has given MUC all they can handle, we'll resume this discussion.

Right now, it is a bit speculative.  If Ott is down 5 TDs in the first half, I suspect you will not want to resume the conversation. :D

Well, I suppose you're right.  Right now, it's a bit speculative that Otterbein is 7-1 while its conference mate Capital is 6-2.  Right now, it's a bit speculative that Otterbein beat Capital head to head.

But to paraphrase the Poohbah, you don't need a human to tell you all those bits of speculative, right now.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 01:39:03 AM
Nope, don't need you to tell us that over and over, that's true.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on November 03, 2009, 02:25:23 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 12:59:02 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:51:45 AM
My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

You don't need a human to tell you what happened.

A little off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while:  Can you clarify the purpose of the Top 25 poll?  Is it (A) a list of the best 25 teams in the country?  (B) A list of the 25 teams that have had the most impressive season so far?  (C) A list of the teams that will make it the furthest in the playoffs?  (D) Some combination thereof?

If it's...
(A)...I would put a bunch of OAC and WIAC teams in the Top 25, and teams like Bethel (and others that I'm not as familiar with) would be a lot higher.  In fact, I'm of the opinion that there are many seasons that one of the best 25 teams in the country is a WIAC team that ends up with a sub-.500 record.

(B)...then something similar to UW-Whitewater being ranked #4 in the West Region rankings prior to playing UW-Stevens Point might make sense.  Even when there are a lot of subjective reasons that they should be ranked higher, they really hadn't beaten anyone yet.  The three teams they were ranked behind had arguably more impressive resumes to that point (wins over Willamette, Coe, UW-Stevens Point, St. Thomas, etc.).

(C)...then, if teams are left in their geographic regions, one of the current top 8 teams in the poll is not making it out of the first round of the West Region.  (I sometimes see polls compared by how well they predict which teams go far in the playoffs, that's why I ask.)

I'd imagine it's (D), some combination of all those things.  Apologies if my question is way off topic or I'm not articulating it well.  It's just something that's been bothering me, and I don't think I've ever seen a poll state its purpose.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 02:33:12 AM
The goal is simple. It's just that with 25 voters, there could be 25 different interpretations and a bunch of different methodologies.

I want a Top 25 that would tell us who would beat whom today if a game were played on a neutral field. Maybe that doesn't always conform to every head-to-head win and loss that's already taken place, but sometimes teams change over the course of the season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: union89 on November 03, 2009, 02:35:51 AM
Quote from: TC on November 03, 2009, 02:25:23 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 12:59:02 AM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 12:51:45 AM
My inner cynic tells me that many poll voters cast their votes based not on what actually happens/happened, but rather on what they think might happen--in say, a rematch that likely won't happen.

You don't need a human to tell you what happened.

A little off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while:  Can you clarify the purpose of the Top 25 poll?  Is it (A) a list of the best 25 teams in the country?  (B) A list of the 25 teams that have had the most impressive season so far?  (C) A list of the teams that will make it the furthest in the playoffs?  (D) Some combination thereof?

If it's...
(A)...I would put a bunch of OAC and WIAC teams in the Top 25, and teams like Bethel (and others that I'm not as familiar with) would be a lot higher.  In fact, I'm of the opinion that there are many seasons that one of the best 25 teams in the country is a WIAC team that ends up with a sub-.500 record.

(B)...then something similar to UW-Whitewater being ranked #4 in the West Region rankings prior to playing UW-Stevens Point might make sense.  Even when there are a lot of subjective reasons that they should be ranked higher, they really hadn't beaten anyone yet.  The three teams they were ranked behind had arguably more impressive resumes to that point (wins over Willamette, Coe, UW-Stevens Point, St. Thomas, etc.).

(C)...then, if teams are left in their geographic regions, one of the current top 8 teams in the poll is not making it out of the first round of the West Region.  (I sometimes see polls compared by how well they predict which teams go far in the playoffs, that's why I ask.)

I'd imagine it's (D), some combination of all those things.  Apologies if my question is way off topic or I'm not articulating it well.  It's just something that's been bothering me, and I don't think I've ever seen a poll state its purpose.


I've wondered the same......thanks for asking.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Teamski on November 03, 2009, 12:22:15 PM
Quote from: TC on November 03, 2009, 02:25:23 AM


A little off topic, but this has been bothering me for a while:  Can you clarify the purpose of the Top 25 poll?  Is it (A) a list of the best 25 teams in the country?  (B) A list of the 25 teams that have had the most impressive season so far?  (C) A list of the teams that will make it the furthest in the playoffs?  (D) Some combination thereof?

If it's...
(A)...I would put a bunch of OAC and WIAC teams in the Top 25, and teams like Bethel (and others that I'm not as familiar with) would be a lot higher.  In fact, I'm of the opinion that there are many seasons that one of the best 25 teams in the country is a WIAC team that ends up with a sub-.500 record.



Ooh, there goes that parity question again.  IMHO, the top 25 is a subjective listing of the best teams in the country when compared to their peers within their conference, not necessarily to those nationwide.  Of course, the OWP comes into play as well.  Try to quantify a 5-5 WIAC team with a 10-0 PAC team. You could try to, but you have to go with the best concrete information available, the record.  Obviously, some teams in any ranking system can lose more than 1 or 2 games and still be ranked, depending on who they played and their historical position, but those teams are a minority.

-Ski
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on November 03, 2009, 06:55:41 PM
I guess this is the same arguement you could have (and has been had) regarding Oregon and Boise State. BSU beats the Ducks head-to-head, but I would bet that of those two teams, Oregon would be much more likely to go to the BCS Championship game.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Teamski on November 03, 2009, 09:14:24 PM
Quote from: retagent on November 03, 2009, 06:55:41 PM
I guess this is the same arguement you could have (and has been had) regarding Oregon and Boise State. BSU beats the Ducks head-to-head, but I would bet that of those two teams, Oregon would be much more likely to go to the BCS Championship game.

Good point!

-Ski
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 03, 2009, 10:11:59 PM
Quote from: Teamski on November 03, 2009, 09:14:24 PM
Quote from: retagent on November 03, 2009, 06:55:41 PM
I guess this is the same arguement you could have (and has been had) regarding Oregon and Boise State. BSU beats the Ducks head-to-head, but I would bet that of those two teams, Oregon would be much more likely to go to the BCS Championship game.

Good point!

-Ski

Many poll voters seem to vote based on what they think might happen, despite what actually happens or happened.

What's the difference though, between what might happen and what might not happen?

Last year, poll voters were certain that Alabama, runner up in the (bow your head, genuflect) Southeast Conference, might beat Utah.  Those poll voters weren't even close.

I bet those same poll voters are certain that Boise St. or TCU might not win a BCS bowl game.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 10:14:38 PM
Shocker. Sometimes voters are wrong. Go figure. Computers are wrong too sometimes, right?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: TC on November 03, 2009, 10:41:16 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 10:14:38 PM
Shocker. Sometimes voters are wrong. Go figure. Computers are wrong too sometimes, right?

Whoa, whoa, whoa, keep it down!  My computer's sitting RIGHT HERE!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on November 03, 2009, 11:31:54 PM
Quote from: TC on November 03, 2009, 10:41:16 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 10:14:38 PM
Shocker. Sometimes voters are wrong. Go figure. Computers are wrong too sometimes, right?

Whoa, whoa, whoa, keep it down!  My computer's sitting RIGHT HERE!

:D :D
After going through a long election night here in Virginia. I needed that laugh. Thank you, TC!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2009, 12:01:43 AM
Quote from: TC on November 03, 2009, 10:41:16 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 10:14:38 PM
Shocker. Sometimes voters are wrong. Go figure. Computers are wrong too sometimes, right?

Whoa, whoa, whoa, keep it down!  My computer's sitting RIGHT HERE!

Barring an electrical overload, or total kablooey, the computer is unlikely to be wrong.  But computer programmers may well be wrong. :D

"Garbage in. garbage out" is the only way I can figure the BCS computers having Iowa as #1! :o ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on November 04, 2009, 01:12:25 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2009, 12:01:43 AM
Quote from: TC on November 03, 2009, 10:41:16 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 10:14:38 PM
Shocker. Sometimes voters are wrong. Go figure. Computers are wrong too sometimes, right?

Whoa, whoa, whoa, keep it down!  My computer's sitting RIGHT HERE!

Barring an electrical overload, or total kablooey, the computer is unlikely to be wrong.  But computer programmers may well be wrong. :D

"Garbage in. garbage out" is the only way I can figure the BCS computers having Iowa as #1! :o ;D

The BCS basically neutered the computers by taking away strength of schedule and margin of victory (even though MOV was weighted so killing a team by 50 was no different than 20...) They didn't TRUST the technology.

Morans!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: altor on November 04, 2009, 02:11:20 AM
It always amazes me how the media can rip the computers until they tweak the computers to fix the perceived problem.  Then they rip the computers some more.

Last year I actually heard some ESPN mouthpiece complaining that the computers couldn't take margin of victory into account.  Well, they couldn't do that because people like him complained that they shouldn't.

At least a computer program can be verified.  I can give a computer program the same set of data and it will return the same results time and again, regardless of the names associated with that data.  If I give a voter identical sets of data, but flip a couple of names around, I will likely get different results.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: altor on November 04, 2009, 02:20:05 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2009, 12:01:43 AM
"Garbage in. garbage out" is the only way I can figure the BCS computers having Iowa as #1! :o ;D

If Ohio State were 9-0, with wins over Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona; would the AP voters rank them behind Cincinnati, Boise St, TCU, and a 1-loss Oregon?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: cave2bens on November 04, 2009, 10:18:16 AM
Quote from: altor on November 04, 2009, 02:11:20 AM
It always amazes me how the media can rip the computers until they tweak the computers to fix the perceived problem.  Then they rip the computers some more.

Last year I actually heard some ESPN mouthpiece complaining that the computers couldn't take margin of victory into account.  Well, they couldn't do that because people like him complained that they shouldn't.

At least a computer program can be verified.  I can give a computer program the same set of data and it will return the same results time and again, regardless of the names associated with that data.  If I give a voter identical sets of data, but flip a couple of names around, I will likely get different results.

Nicely done.  Computers and the programs are only as good as the raw data gathered and methods of collection (original baselines, consistency, and instruments of measurement) prior to input.  Problems seem to sprout when self-described experts "know the answers" before considering the questions.  Human emotions and/or intent coupled with money and sex appeal (THIS is what it should be, so manipulate a.), b.) and e.)  ::)) demand tweaks and ultimately bugger up the works.  ;)  Subject was broached concerning AQ criteria and ancient history on the NCAC board.   >:(

Maybe Congressional intervention can fix it...  ;D ;D ;D

The Hawkeyes will have a week or two in limelight, maybe, until the machinations of the SEC and Big 12 schedules overwhelm the system.   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 04, 2009, 10:40:33 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 03, 2009, 10:14:38 PM
Shocker. Sometimes voters are wrong. Go figure. Computers are wrong too sometimes, right?

Computers are never wrong, only the programmer! :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 04, 2009, 11:41:31 PM
Quote from: altor on November 04, 2009, 02:20:05 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2009, 12:01:43 AM
"Garbage in. garbage out" is the only way I can figure the BCS computers having Iowa as #1! :o ;D

If Ohio State were 9-0, with wins over Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona; would the AP voters rank them behind Cincinnati, Boise St, TCU, and a 1-loss Oregon?

Can't disagree with Dr. Ypsi on the BSbcs computers.

Oklahoma is 5-3, with a monkeystomp win over ranked Kansas, a one point loss to ranked BYU, a one point loss to ranked Miami, and a three point loss to No. 3 Texas.  Why is Oklahoma ranked behind 7-2 Ohio State, with its 8 point loss to unranked Purdue, and its 3 point loss to 6-2 USC?

Polling is an inexact scie--um, . . . phenomenon.  But, considering that the only immutable law in college football is "on any given Saturday," I don't suppose it could be otherwise.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on November 04, 2009, 11:53:04 PM
BTW, I may have to retract my defense of computers (as opposed to programmers).  My computer has been doing random jumps to different sites, and locked me off d3boards.com for several hours today.

Bad computer.  Bad.  Shape up or you WILL be replaced! :o :P

My dog responds to treats - what to do with a 'bad' computer?! :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 05, 2009, 07:52:09 AM
I have a question that I know I have asked before but I don't think I have ever received an answer (or at least one that satisfied me).

How are "circular references" avoided when using wins over regionally ranked opponents to rank opponents regionally?  For example, let's say Team A and Team B are very close in ranking with all things considered except for wins over regionally ranked opponents.  Team A slips in at the #10 position just ahead of Team B.  However, Team B has beaten Team A, so when wins against regionally ranked opponents are taken into account, Team B now jumps ahead of Team A into the #10 spot.  However, now Team A isn't regionally ranked, so Team B loses those points and goes back behind Team A, and Team A is now #10.  But now Team A is regionally ranked, which pushes Team B back into the #10 spot.  But now Team A isn't regionally ranked.  You get the picture.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: retagent on November 05, 2009, 10:56:00 AM
jeff - you've got too much time on your handa. GO TO YOUR ROOM!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: altor on November 05, 2009, 12:46:12 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 04, 2009, 11:41:31 PM
Oklahoma is 5-3, with a monkeystomp win over ranked Kansas, a one point loss to ranked BYU, a one point loss to ranked Miami, and a three point loss to No. 3 Texas.  Why is Oklahoma ranked behind 7-2 Ohio State, with its 8 point loss to unranked Purdue, and its 3 point loss to 6-2 USC?

I canceled two replies to other people because this isn't a BCS board, but since you replied directly to me...

I fail to see the problem.  None of the human polls has OK better than Ohio State either.  So what exactly is your beef?

OK has less wins than OSU.  They have one more loss than OSU.  Of their five wins, none of those teams has more than 5 wins themselves.  Kansas may have been ranked at the time, but three straight losses (one to 2-6 Colorado, and the other two by monkeystomps) kinda shows them to be pretenders.  Meanwhile, OSU has wins over 6-3 Navy and a ranked 6-2 Wisconsin.  They also have a monkeystomp+ over Minnesota, whose resume compares very well to Kansas.  (Although the monkeystomps are irrelevant because the humans decided to make them irrelevant.)

"It's not who you lost to, it's who you beat."  - I think I heard that somewhere.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jam40jeff on November 05, 2009, 05:19:41 PM
Quote from: altor on November 05, 2009, 12:46:12 PM
"It's not who you lost to, it's who you beat."  - I think I heard that somewhere.

That is the basis of the Harbin Compter Points Ranking System in Ohio.  I think it works very well.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: redswarm81 on November 05, 2009, 09:31:36 PM
Quote from: altor on November 05, 2009, 12:46:12 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 04, 2009, 11:41:31 PM
Oklahoma is 5-3, with a monkeystomp win over ranked Kansas, a one point loss to ranked BYU, a one point loss to ranked Miami, and a three point loss to No. 3 Texas.  Why is Oklahoma ranked behind 7-2 Ohio State, with its 8 point loss to unranked Purdue, and its 3 point loss to 6-2 USC?

I canceled two replies to other people because this isn't a BCS board, but since you replied directly to me...

I fail to see the problem.  None of the human polls has OK better than Ohio State either.  So what exactly is your beef?

OK has less wins than OSU.  They have one more loss than OSU.  Of their five wins, none of those teams has more than 5 wins themselves.  Kansas may have been ranked at the time, but three straight losses (one to 2-6 Colorado, and the other two by monkeystomps) kinda shows them to be pretenders.  Meanwhile, OSU has wins over 6-3 Navy and a ranked 6-2 Wisconsin.  They also have a monkeystomp+ over Minnesota, whose resume compares very well to Kansas.  (Although the monkeystomps are irrelevant because the humans decided to make them irrelevant.)

"It's not who you lost to, it's who you beat."  - I think I heard that somewhere.

Unless you beat Capital.   :D  ::)

I'm not making a "beef" per se, I'm trying to understand poll voter psychology.  In the example of Oklahoma, they've beaten every unranked team they've faced--Ohio State can't make that claim (neither can USC, to make a different comparison).  OK's beaten ranked Kansas, and their losses to 3 ranked teams were by a total of 5 points.
I think a poll voter could make a credible case that OK deserves to be ranked higher than they are.  But I wonder if such thoughts occur to poll voters.  I suspect many poll voters treat a 3 point win in 3OT the same as a win by two touchdowns in regulation.  I find that silly.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 05, 2009, 10:56:55 PM
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 01, 2009, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: redswarm81 on November 01, 2009, 09:06:58 AM
No. 11 W&J (an enigma all season long) lost to an undefeated Thomas More, a team that might legitimately claim it deserved to be ranked higher than No. 20.


Agreed... but I think Thomas More has stayed under the radar in 2009 by playing their reserves in the 4th Quarter consistently.  Had they kept their foot on the gas pedal, there would probably have been more awareness of them and the defense before this past Saturday.  They won't claim they should be ranked higher than 20th --- this team doesn't care about rankings... just making some noise in the playoffs.

That said --- I do think W&J deserved to be in the Top 25 ....just not as high.  As things are now (after yesterday's result) some in the W&J program (fans and alums) are really questioning whether the program is what they've been before. 

Quote from: PA_wesleyfan on November 01, 2009, 05:26:14 PM
IMHO It could be time for some teams to start stepping up their non- conference competition. If the only way teams are going to get bids is to win their conference then maybe they should toughen up the non-conference opponents. With the landscape of C bids  possibly changing in 2011 some of the East and South teams are going to have to get some better SOS numbers from outside the conferencs

In response to both of you, I don't think I ever had W&J higher than the low teens, and one of the reasons was they didn't challenge themselves non-conference. Even John Carroll for Thomas More was a better test. So I really couldn't move either team very high in the poll until I knew it was capable of beating someone good, which wasn't proved until Thomas More won Saturday.

Now (if I recall correctly) W&J is outside my top 25 and Thomas More is in the teens.

Moral of the story is play somebody good if you want top 25 recognition. But playing teams you can beat is a good way to guard against not winning your AQ, ensuring you'll have a shot at 9-1. So hard to knock W&Js methods. Hardin-Simmons might not be a great example of this, but I can't think of a better one right now ... I guess you can overschedule and then when you don't win your conference, you also don't have a Pool C shot.

I'm long on the record as preferring the big noncon games, but my livliehood isn't riding on it either.

That said, I respect a Del Val as much as anyone. Ohio Northern, on another hand, might have two losses, but their win over North Central is still more convincing than some unbeaten teams who haven't played anyone near the top 25. As Pat likes to say, it's not who you lost to, it's who you've beaten.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 05, 2009, 10:57:51 PM
Quote from: jam40jeff on November 05, 2009, 05:19:41 PM
"It's not who you lost to, it's who you beat."  - I think I heard that somewhere.

Posted the above before reading the posts above that, BTW.

I think it's catching on!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 05, 2009, 11:18:02 PM
In defense of my crosstown rival, those Hardened-Sinners Cowgirls   ;)  , this McMurry fan (also known a McDirty or McMurphy in neighborhoods on the north side of Abilene) has consistently sought tough non-conference opponents, each of which in the last decade has required a plane flight in the home-and-home series.

There are very few teams in D3 that want to sign a two-year contract to play a typical HSU team and fly to Abilene to do it.

The fact that this year's HSU team has numerous players out with early season injuries, including their starting QB Justin Feaster and WR and Draddy Finalist ZaVious Robinson, does not detract from the fact that reputable teams, Linfield and Whitworth, committed to playing one of the finest  teams in D3.

Thomas More found an OAC team. John Carroll which swept the "East Region" in 2002.  TMC also has their Bridge Bowl game with MSJ, no slouch of a program.

I also believe that the teams that schedule quality non-conference games should get the benefit of the doubt when something like a Top 25 ranking is involved.  (In a different context, the NCAA Regional Rankings use the word "results", which implies that three "results" is better than one "result".)

Thanks K-Mack for elaborating on this issue.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on November 08, 2009, 04:05:37 PM
KMack- thanks for your insight.  Btw, I'm very glad Thomas More didn't get into the HCAC.. The one drawback of playing in the PAC is only having 2 games non conference.  Ever since the program was founded in the early 90s, TMC has had problems scheduling teams within a 3 hour radius of Cincinnati.  I remember bus trips to Oshkosh, Brownwood TX, Alfred NY, Pittsburgh, Knoxville and a flight to Long Island. 

I just wish they had more than two opportunities per season to test themselves now.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 08, 2009, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 08, 2009, 04:05:37 PM
KMack- thanks for your insight.  Btw, I'm very glad Thomas More didn't get into the HCAC.. The one drawback of playing in the PAC is only having 2 games non conference.  Ever since the program was founded in the early 90s, TMC has had problems scheduling teams within a 3 hour radius of Cincinnati.  I remember bus trips to Oshkosh, Brownwood TX, Alfred NY, Pittsburgh, Knoxville and a flight to Long Island.  

I just wish they had more than two opportunities per season to test themselves now.
Next year, both the HCAC and the PresAC will be 9-team conferences.

With the Bridge Bowl game, that leaves only 1 non-conference date for TMC to fill.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SaintsFAN on November 09, 2009, 09:19:40 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on November 08, 2009, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: SaintsFAN on November 08, 2009, 04:05:37 PM
KMack- thanks for your insight.  Btw, I'm very glad Thomas More didn't get into the HCAC.. The one drawback of playing in the PAC is only having 2 games non conference.  Ever since the program was founded in the early 90s, TMC has had problems scheduling teams within a 3 hour radius of Cincinnati.  I remember bus trips to Oshkosh, Brownwood TX, Alfred NY, Pittsburgh, Knoxville and a flight to Long Island.  

I just wish they had more than two opportunities per season to test themselves now.
Next year, both the HCAC and the PresAC will be 9-team conferences.

With the Bridge Bowl game, that leaves only 1 non-conference date for TMC to fill.

You're right... I forgot about the Earlham juggernaut they added to the league ---- TMC needs to replace John Carroll on the schedule.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: short on December 20, 2009, 03:00:12 PM
When will the new 25 poll be out?

I'm guessing it will look like this at the top;

1) UW-WW
2) Linfield
3) Mount Union
4) St Thomas
5) Wesley
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 20, 2009, 04:11:43 PM
I'll bet that MUC will be unanimously #2.  Linfield will definitely be #3, perhaps even unanimously.  It should be a dog-fight for #4 among Wesley, Witt, and STU (and I'll guess they finish in that order).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: usee on December 20, 2009, 10:30:37 PM
I would be shocked to see anything but UWW#1 and MUC #2. There is no justification for anything else. #3 is a a bit of a fight but I would make it

1-UWW
2-MUC
3-Linfield
4-Wesley
5-St Thomas/Witt
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: MonroviaCat on December 21, 2009, 04:06:43 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 20, 2009, 04:11:43 PM
I'll bet that MUC will be unanimously #2.  Linfield will definitely be #3, perhaps even unanimously.  It should be a dog-fight for #4 among Wesley, Witt, and STU (and I'll guess they finish in that order).
You got the first two absolutely right but it looks like Linfield was not quite (short by 6 pts if I understand things correctly)  a Unanimous #3.  
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2009, 05:16:36 PM
Anyone else notice that with the sole exception of MUC, all the top 10 teams played in the North/West half of the bracket?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: MonroviaCat on December 21, 2009, 05:36:15 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2009, 05:16:36 PM
Anyone else notice that with the sole exception of MUC, all the top 10 teams played in the North/West half of the bracket?
Uhm...Wesley?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2009, 06:03:29 PM
Quote from: MonroviaCat on December 21, 2009, 05:36:15 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2009, 05:16:36 PM
Anyone else notice that with the sole exception of MUC, all the top 10 teams played in the North/West half of the bracket?
Uhm...Wesley?

Oops! :-[

Still 8 of 10 on one side of the bracket.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on December 21, 2009, 06:09:22 PM
MUC is really a North Region Team also.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: MonroviaCat on December 21, 2009, 06:10:16 PM
Quote from: kirasdad on December 21, 2009, 06:09:22 PM
MUC is really a North Region Team also.
Of course #7 is also really a Southern team...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 21, 2009, 06:31:29 PM
Quote from: MonroviaCat on December 21, 2009, 06:10:16 PM
Quote from: kirasdad on December 21, 2009, 06:09:22 PM
MUC is really a North Region Team also.
Of course #7 is also really a Southern team...
And #11 Johns Hopkins came from off the charts to land where it did.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 21, 2009, 07:28:51 PM
My basic point was that the brackets would have been somewhat more balanced if they had found someone other than UMHB to import.  Without going back to double-check, there must have been SOME other option.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: short on July 20, 2010, 12:06:14 PM
Here is how I see the 2010 preseason poll I will admit that after the top 8 I did think about regions when ranking teams.  I would have a different list IF I was ranking the BEST TEAMS.

1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. Wesley (Del.)
4. St. Thomas (Minn.)
5. Linfield (Ore.)
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor (Texas)
7. St John's
8. Wittenberg
9. Delaware Valley
10. Central
11. North Central
12. Wabash
13. UW-Stevens Point
14. Ithaca
15. Thomas More
16. Hardin-Simmons
17. Trine
18. Otterbein
19. Cortland State
20. Willamette
21. Wartburg
22. Ohio Northern
23. Monmount
24. Mississippi College
25. Huntington
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on July 20, 2010, 12:11:23 PM
Quote from: short on July 20, 2010, 12:06:14 PM
Here is how I see the 2010 preseason poll I will admit that after the top 8 I did think about regions when ranking teams.  I would have a different list IF I was ranking the BEST TEAMS.

1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. Wesley (Del.)
4. St. Thomas (Minn.)
5. Linfield (Ore.)
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor (Texas)
7. St John's
8. Wittenberg
9. Delaware Valley
10. Central
11. North Central
12. Wabash
13. UW-Stevens Point
14. Ithaca
15. Thomas More
16. Hardin-Simmons
17. Trine
18. Otterbein
19. Cortland State
20. Willamette
21. Wartburg
22. Ohio Northern
23. Monmount
24. Mississippi College
25. Huntington

not bad, but Linfield might be the third best team in the country, IMO...unfortunately Mount Union will probably be defaulted to #1 again...it doesn't seem to matter what UWW does the previous season, or who they bring back, Mount will always start off the year #1.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Raider 68 on July 20, 2010, 12:28:08 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on July 20, 2010, 12:11:23 PM
Quote from: short on July 20, 2010, 12:06:14 PM
Here is how I see the 2010 preseason poll I will admit that after the top 8 I did think about regions when ranking teams.  I would have a different list IF I was ranking the BEST TEAMS.

1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. Wesley (Del.)
4. St. Thomas (Minn.)
5. Linfield (Ore.)
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor (Texas)
7. St John's
8. Wittenberg
9. Delaware Valley
10. Central
11. North Central
12. Wabash
13. UW-Stevens Point
14. Ithaca
15. Thomas More
16. Hardin-Simmons
17. Trine
18. Otterbein
19. Cortland State
20. Willamette
21. Wartburg
22. Ohio Northern
23. Monmount
24. Mississippi College
25. Huntington

not bad, but Linfield might be the third best team in the country, IMO...unfortunately Mount Union will probably be defaulted to #1 again...it doesn't seem to matter what UWW does the previous season, or who they bring back, Mount will always start off the year #1.



02 Warhawk,

UWW should be rated Pre-season # 1. After all they won it last year. That said, the D3 experts may look to determine who has the better chance this year. Mount has some key guys returning like Shorts, K Miller and a real good RB in Panchik. UWW has a strong returning group as well, so we will just have to see how the season unfolds!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on July 20, 2010, 12:40:34 PM
Quote from: Raider 68 on July 20, 2010, 12:28:08 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on July 20, 2010, 12:11:23 PM
Quote from: short on July 20, 2010, 12:06:14 PM
Here is how I see the 2010 preseason poll I will admit that after the top 8 I did think about regions when ranking teams.  I would have a different list IF I was ranking the BEST TEAMS.

1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. Wesley (Del.)
4. St. Thomas (Minn.)
5. Linfield (Ore.)
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor (Texas)
7. St John's
8. Wittenberg
9. Delaware Valley
10. Central
11. North Central
12. Wabash
13. UW-Stevens Point
14. Ithaca
15. Thomas More
16. Hardin-Simmons
17. Trine
18. Otterbein
19. Cortland State
20. Willamette
21. Wartburg
22. Ohio Northern
23. Monmount
24. Mississippi College
25. Huntington

not bad, but Linfield might be the third best team in the country, IMO...unfortunately Mount Union will probably be defaulted to #1 again...it doesn't seem to matter what UWW does the previous season, or who they bring back, Mount will always start off the year #1.



02 Warhawk,

UWW should be rated Pre-season # 1. After all they won it last year. That said, the D3 experts may look to determine who has the better chance this year. Mount has some key guys returning like Shorts, K Miller and a real good RB in Panchik. UWW has a strong returning group as well, so we will just have to see how the season unfolds!

yea, i agree with the notion that the #1 team should be who they think will be the best team that year, and not how they finished the previous season. After Whitewater won it in 07, i agreed with the fact that Mount started the 08 season off as number 1, b/c of who they brought back compared to what UWW lost. MUC came back with Kmic and Micheli, while UWW lost Beaver and Jones. I was ok with MUC starting off #1 then

With that being said...i'm not sure how MUC was number starting the 09 season after they lost Micheli and Kmic...while UWW brought back their entire team more or less.

Oh well...it's how you finish the season that matters.. right?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on July 20, 2010, 12:56:39 PM
There was some question as to whether your quarterback was going to be eligible.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on July 20, 2010, 01:00:16 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on July 20, 2010, 12:56:39 PM
There was some question as to whether your quarterback was going to be eligible.

ahh...good point about Donovan
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wildcat11 on July 20, 2010, 01:07:17 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on July 20, 2010, 12:11:23 PM
Quote from: short on July 20, 2010, 12:06:14 PM
Here is how I see the 2010 preseason poll I will admit that after the top 8 I did think about regions when ranking teams.  I would have a different list IF I was ranking the BEST TEAMS.

1. UW-Whitewater
2. Mount Union
3. Wesley (Del.)
4. St. Thomas (Minn.)
5. Linfield (Ore.)
6. Mary Hardin-Baylor (Texas)
7. St John's
8. Wittenberg
9. Delaware Valley
10. Central
11. North Central
12. Wabash
13. UW-Stevens Point
14. Ithaca
15. Thomas More
16. Hardin-Simmons
17. Trine
18. Otterbein
19. Cortland State
20. Willamette
21. Wartburg
22. Ohio Northern
23. Monmount
24. Mississippi College
25. Huntington

not bad, but Linfield might be the third best team in the country, IMO...unfortunately Mount Union will probably be defaulted to #1 again...it doesn't seem to matter what UWW does the previous season, or who they bring back, Mount will always start off the year #1.

If Willamette gets through their early season grind we could see a battle of two top ten teams in early Oct when Linfield and Willamette hook up.  As much as I hate to write this but Willamette is going to be a very good team in the west region this year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Raider 68 on July 21, 2010, 08:32:24 AM
I do not see a Otterbein at #18 and Ohio Northern at #22. ONU should be in the #10-15 category, while Otterbein in the 20-25 if that.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: short on July 21, 2010, 08:51:01 AM
Otterbein has 4 or 5 D1 transfers including a few former D1 starters joining there team this year.  In my mind that and their returners bumps them up to  the #2 team in the OAC finishing the regular season at 9-1. ONU on the other hand cann't finish 9-1 if Otterbein does (unless one of them beats Mount Union) so I see them on the outside looking in at the playoffs for the 11 season in a row.  Thats just my take.  However I think both Otterbein and ONU are better than Del Valley at #9 but I think Del Valley  has the easier road to the regional finials.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: MrOhio_614 on July 27, 2010, 10:17:12 PM
I agree with the rankings overall but I think Otterbein will crack the top 25 by the end of the year! With the addition of Dominic Jones ( Former Minnesota Gopher & Brookhaven state champion) they should be pretty good! Otterbein Special teams and defense might top the charts with this kid!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 06, 2010, 07:34:19 PM
Was a little surprised at the week 1 rankings in that there is only 3 points between Wartburg and Monmouth after Wartburg clearly dominated Monmouth.  If the polls are correct now and Wartburg is clearly the #3 team in the IIAC it does not make a lot of sense that Monmouth should be getting votes IMHO.  I don't say this to slight Monmouth or to run that program down I only say it does not make a lot of sense.  I know it is early in the season but the score indicates that the preseason was wrong.  I don't think the voters can say that this was a Wartburg upset either with the way the game turned out. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 06, 2010, 09:49:13 PM
With all due respect, there is also the phrase "on any given Saturday".  Since I hadn't studied the preseason poll in detail, I was a bit surprised that Wartburg didn't enter the Top 25.  Pretty clearly the voters felt that Monmouth had been totally over-rated (dropping from 164 to 19 points) but didn't feel that Wartburg was therefore a 'super' team (rising from 0 to 22 points).

I think it is a plus that voters didn't over-react to a single game.  While Monmouth will have no real chance at redemption until the payoffs (if they make them), Wartburg will have a couple of chances to show their worth.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 07, 2010, 09:18:56 AM
I agree with what you said, I wasn't saying that Wartburg would be in the top 25, I expected them to get votes for being in the top 25, I guess I was more shocked that Monmouth was still getting votes at all.  A team that had no votes for the top 25 dominated the 17th ranked team and they are three points away?  I also know that with 25 ballots there could be some on there that are still thinking Monmouth is worthy of 24-25 place.  I might be inclined to think that if the game had been close. With respect to you as well I agree " on any given day" but the Knights pretty much dominated the game.  I might think that if the Knights had won by 3 or less or in OT then there is some room for doubt.  I also know that there are many teams worthy of votes this early in the season.  My point is that if Monmouth got 19 25th place votes they would have 19 points.  With that many votes and the way Wartburg dominated I would think those 19 voters would have put Wartburg ahead of Monmouth at 24 and thus Wartburg would have had 38 points.  See my point?  I don't claim to be an expert and I don't study the nation as a whole like Pat and Keith, but when there is a a lopsided win like this one I would tend to say that Wartburg at this point and time is much better than Monmouth.  I don't know where they will wind up but I tend to think head to head speaks loudly. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: footballdaddy on September 07, 2010, 10:12:34 AM
Mr. Yipsi and DF2004 both have valid points. It looks like the preseason rankings were more about last year than this year. Judging from this week's podcast, it looks like Monmouth was over rated and Wartburg is being viewed as a maybe a 3rd place IIAC team instead of 4th. At this point Wartburg has the most impressive win in the IIAC. I don't know if next week will change anything. We'll have to see what happens once the conference season starts.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2010, 12:16:08 AM
I tried to send an e-mail to Clyde Hughes using the address in his Around the Midwest column, but Outlook Express said it didn't go through, so I'll try answering his question here.

He couldn't figure out how NCC could crush Cornell and drop two places, while IWU struggled to beat Hope and rose two places.  The answer is really quite simple if you look at points received and remember that teams cannot be looked at in isolation.

Ranked teams are supposed to crush a team like Cornell - that doesn't gain extra credit.  NCC basically was unchanged (down one point) but got passed by Willamette and Hardin-Simmons who both (on the road) beat teams vastly better than Cornell.  IWU DID lose 23 points.  They entered the poll because once the season starts, voters converge in the voting; in the pre-season poll it took 93 points to land in 25th place, this week it took only 64.  As the season progresses it is a safe bet that the list of (and points received by) ORVs will continue to shrink.  IWU rose because UWSP and Monmouth both lost and dropped below them.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2010, 02:38:22 PM
From your post "Ranked teams are supposed to crush a team like Cornell"  I know that Wartburg is not Cornell and they are much better than the Rams.  My point is, and I must not have made it clear is that how can a voter honestly vote Monmouth higher than Wartburg?  With only 3 points between them and only 25 voters there has to be someone on the panel of voters placing Monmouth higher than the Knights.  I have no problem with any of the voters not voting for the Knights, but with the results of that game being clearly in favor of the Knights I just don't see how a voter could not vote the Knights higher than the Scots. I know that there will be a smaller list of teams that receive votes and that the other teams point totals should go up as the season goes on.  Mr Ypsi have I made my point or contention more clear?  I understand the point you made on any given day but this apparently was not a given day I might even say it was a borderline beat down.  It wasn't the MIAC monkey stomp but was only one point away from it.  If voters don't go by head to head (and I know that OT games and 3 or less wins may fall into upsets or the any given day game) what other objective criteria is there?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2010, 04:33:56 PM
DF2004,

I understand your point, and really can't explain how Wartburg led Monmouth by only 3 points.  I kinda doubt any particular voter put Monmouth over Wartburg, so maybe it was just different voters - a few who earlier felt so strongly about Monmouth that they gave them the benefit of the doubt for one 'slip-up', but didn't think Wartburg, based on one game, was yet worthy of ranking.  Just a guess, but that's the only explanation I've got. ;)

My previous post was addressing a different question.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 09, 2010, 10:13:34 PM
Mr Ypsi,

That is the only thing that can explain it.  I can understand if that were a close game but it wasn't.  Monmouth never really threaten to win or even take a commanding lead is my point.  I know maybe I am beating a dead horse but head to head games should have more weight and IMHO it is not really giving a team credit if a voter just simply says well Wartburg got lucky.  Just my two cents and its not even worth that much  ;D ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 09, 2010, 10:50:19 PM
Aside from conference loyalty (which I fully understand) I'm having trouble understanding a Dutch fan being so passionate in defense of the Wartys! :D

Monmouth has no realistic chance of redemption until the playoffs (if they make them); Wartburg has a couple of chances to move up (unfortunately, their best chance is beating the Dutch)! :o

[Unless it is beating Coe, because Augie already beat the Dutch - which I'm sticking my neck out for on various Pickems.  And THAT's conference loyalty! ;) :P]
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: DutchFan2004 on September 10, 2010, 10:37:39 AM
Mr Ypsi,


It is not about conference loyalty at all.  Even though I had another son that attended Wartburg. I do not support the football program.  It is a parent thing.  To be loyal to both sons I support the Wartburg tennis program and to be loyal to the other son I support the Dutch football program.  I would be saying this about your Auggie Vikings they had beat Monmouth and then were only 3 points ahead.  If one team dominates the other and voters discount it are they really thinking their position through from an objective point of view or is there an adjenda to their vote.  I am not saying that is the case here.  But as a fan and somewhat a critical thinker I find it odd and somewhat a position that is not supportable.  It is more about the thought process in the voters minds.  I admit that it is a more pronounced situation that it involves a team in the conference I follow and support.  I do think my position is one of strength though.  As for the Vikings beating my Dutch time will tell my friend.  I would expect nothing less from you supporting your conference.   ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 16, 2010, 11:46:52 PM
It's definitely strange and a valid question.

Without really knowing what other voters do, it  seems like some set their order and then move teams up or down 3 or 5 or 10 spots based on any one particular loss. I agree DF2004 that h2h is the strongest measure we have, and I'm also a big proponent of re-ordering from scratch (though I myself don't do it every week, it's a good exercise to make sure you are putting teams where they belong in comparison to other teams and not just kind of where they were last week, give or take a bit)

I agree with Ypsi's sentiment in that as you give it time, the votes will sort themselves out and crystallize around a more solid group.

But it definitely looked silly to have Monmouth ahead of Wartburg in any way, and even worse with the Scots laying another egg in Week 2.

I wonder if we could write a computer program that would take into account all h2h results and not let you vote for a team that lost to a significantly lower-ranked team ... at least until later in the season when certain results are bound to conflict.

Nerds? A lil help?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on September 17, 2010, 07:26:48 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 16, 2010, 11:46:52 PM
Nerds? A lil help?

This is a computer message board. No nerds here.

:)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on September 17, 2010, 09:43:07 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on September 16, 2010, 11:46:52 PM
I wonder if we could write a computer program that would take into account all h2h results and not let you vote for a team that lost to a significantly lower-ranked team ... at least until later in the season when certain results are bound to conflict.

Hmm, isn't this the kind of thinking that led to that abortion of a system called the BCS??   ;)

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 22, 2010, 02:12:29 PM
I just meant something that would red-flag a vote in the way spellcheck does in Word. You could still do it if you wanted to.

As it is, Pat sends out a detailed rundown of what each team receiving votes has done not just in the week in question, but the entire season. Sometimes though the more information you have, the more likely some key detail is to get lost in the sauce.

If we've learned nothing over the years, it's that neither purely stat-based or purely subjective matters really take the entire picture into account.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on September 23, 2010, 03:21:45 PM
Thought this would be worth discussing here. I am asking some questions with open-ended answers;

QuoteTo whom it might concern, I just clarified an item in ATN. The original part was written very late at night and I didn't properly say what I wanted to get at:

If you didn't read the column between 12:15 and 3;15 today, you'll notice no difference.

Here's the update:

QuotePoll positions

If after the third week of games, it's okay for the AFCA to put out its first poll (we kid, we kid), it's okay for ATN to dip into these waters. Let's take a quick look at the art/science of top 25 polling.

Here's the question of the week: Why is Linfield ranked?

Cal Lutheran's defeat of the then-No. 4 Wildcats, followed by the Kingsmen's loss to unranked Pacific Lutheran cast doubt upon the whole West Coast. If CLU rose up to 15, then dropped to 24th after the loss, how can Linfield be any higher than 25? And by that logic, PLU (2-0) should be somewhere in the poll as well.

Whether or not a pollster votes for No. 16 Linfield, now 0-1, depends on methodology. If voting for the top 25 teams at this very moment, based on what we know only of 2010, then it's fair to drop the Wildcats right out of the top 25. They have a loss, to a team that lost to an unranked team, and no wins to offset it.

But some voters no team should drop from No. 4 to 'also receiving votes' because of a single game.

I never like to look at polls as one-week deals. Our top 25 is an organism evolving as the teams do each season. Teams rarely stick to the script, consistently producing the same output each week, so why should we? Plus, one could very well believe that Linfield, even with a loss, is still one of the 25 best teams in the country.

I think in the end they will be, but as of this week, I didn't vote for them. I didn't have any grounds to do so, even though two weeks ago they were in my top 5.

But here's where polls are tricky: But do I really believe Trine (No. 14) would beat Linfield if they played this week? What's the right way to judge what we know, based on recent results, and what we suspect, based on historical strength? Should we take last week's ranking into account, or start fresh from the top every week? Certainly a team isn't owed a spot in this week's poll because it was ranked last week. Yet we often wonder how a certain result can produce so much movement in a single week.

A loss like Cal Lutheran's to Pacific Lutheran can produce a ripple effect for a team like Linfield, even though later in the year the Wildcats might defeat the Lutes and render that triangle of results mostly useless.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ADL70 on October 26, 2010, 08:01:02 PM
UMHB and Wittenberg struggled to win against teams who are not highly regarded and lose votes and places, as I think they probablyv should  Meanwhile Depauw struggles to win against (then) 3-3 Trinity, but gains fourteen points and two places, jumping Wabash and CWRU.

The power of the front page or the tradition of Trinity or props for going for the win instead of the tie and OT?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 26, 2010, 11:24:37 PM
I didn't move DePauw on my ballot but I could certainly see that DePauw gets some props on some ballots for overcoming that last roadblock, even if Trinity is not what it has been.

I doubt there is a 'power of the front page' with our voters. They all get the same schedule and results no matter what.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 27, 2010, 12:02:10 AM
I didn't move DePauw either, or if I did, it wasn't much. But at some point you do have to give credit for an almost-loss not ending up as a loss.

Power of the front page. Interesting.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on October 27, 2010, 11:25:54 AM
I was one of those who did move DePauw a fair amount. I know this is one of the subjective parts of polling, but I give credit to DPU for winning a game with this much "baggage."

Trinity might only have been 3-3, but beating them meant a lot more to me than had DPU beaten a 3-3 Austin, or something of that sorts. DePauw manned up and won on the road, something they've never done at Trinity before.

To me, it counted a lot (suppose that fits into the "tradition of Trinity" point that was mentioned). Though it was really just another reason to give DePauw the credit it deserves on my ballot :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 27, 2010, 11:40:53 AM
I am not one of the voters, but what DePauw did was unprecedented in the program's SCAC history. Every conference game is tough.  DPU did what they had to do.  A "let-up" and a loss will un-do what they did last week.

As it stands today, DPU is one of the last 32 teams playing this season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 08:06:11 PM
New poll is up.  There must have been an awful lot of doubters about Montclair's ranking - from #14 they fell all the way out with a 1-pt., last-minute loss to a solid team.  That seems mighty unusual for this late in the season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
I notice though, that Cortland and Rowan are in the top 25.....interesting how that works with the each three teams 1-1 vs. each other
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on October 31, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
So win by 32 and you drop out of the poll?

Awesome!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 31, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
So win by 32 and you drop out of the poll?

Awesome!

I almost commented on that too - I think their problem was that the team that beat them last week lost to a (previously) 1-win team.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: sflzman on October 31, 2010, 09:09:59 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 31, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
So win by 32 and you drop out of the poll?

Awesome!

No kidding! No love for St. John Fisher!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on October 31, 2010, 09:12:33 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 31, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
So win by 32 and you drop out of the poll?

Awesome!

I almost commented on that too - I think their problem was that the team that beat them last week lost to a (previously) 1-win team.

It was two completely different teams, the AU team I watched vs SJF would probably knock off every East team.  The AU team I saw yesterday could barely get out of their own way...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:34:24 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 31, 2010, 09:12:33 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 31, 2010, 09:08:23 PM
Quote from: Upstate on October 31, 2010, 09:05:16 PM
So win by 32 and you drop out of the poll?

Awesome!

I almost commented on that too - I think their problem was that the team that beat them last week lost to a (previously) 1-win team.

It was two completely different teams, the AU team I watched vs SJF would probably knock off every East team.  The AU team I saw yesterday could barely get out of their own way...

I have no info to comment on that either way; just saying what (I assume) the poll voters were seeing.

For ranking purposes, if you lose to a team you want them to keep winning.  (This does not apply, of course, if they are standing in the way of your AQ! ::))
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on November 01, 2010, 10:28:02 AM
Quick question: Is there something about the ECFC that they get no love? SUNY-Maritime is currently undefeated but they didn't receive any votes.

Is the ECFC that weak that no one will consider them in the 25 top? Or is there something that I don't know about that's going on with that conference or team?

thanks in advance
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 10:30:51 AM
Yeah, it's a new conference and the teams are just not very good. They're comparable to the NEFC teams.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on November 01, 2010, 11:12:08 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 10:30:51 AM
Yeah, it's a new conference and the teams are just not very good. They're comparable to the NEFC teams.

I think the top NEFC teams would handle SUNY-Maritime quite easily...

Whomever draws SUNY-Martime and the NEFC rep will basically get a bye week...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 11:40:21 AM
Quote from: Upstate on November 01, 2010, 11:12:08 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 10:30:51 AM
Yeah, it's a new conference and the teams are just not very good. They're comparable to the NEFC teams.

I think the top NEFC teams would handle SUNY-Maritime quite easily...

Probably. But on a national level, to a Whitewater fan, it was enough to say they were comparable. The difference between being No. 170 and No. 190 is not particularly significant.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on November 01, 2010, 08:52:26 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 11:40:21 AM
Quote from: Upstate on November 01, 2010, 11:12:08 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 10:30:51 AM
Yeah, it's a new conference and the teams are just not very good. They're comparable to the NEFC teams.

I think the top NEFC teams would handle SUNY-Maritime quite easily...

Probably. But on a national level, to a Whitewater fan, it was enough to say they were comparable. The difference between being No. 170 and No. 190 is not particularly significant.

  Unless you are the team with the 170.  ;D  Moral victory ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 04, 2010, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: Upstate on November 01, 2010, 11:12:08 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 10:30:51 AM
Yeah, it's a new conference and the teams are just not very good. They're comparable to the NEFC teams.

I think the top NEFC teams would handle SUNY-Maritime quite easily...

Whomever draws SUNY-Maritime and the NEFC rep will basically get a bye week...

I agree with your first statement, but not your second one. NEFC rep is no gimme anymore.

I think six of the NEFC teams didn't have football 10 years ago. And I'm not sure if that counts Gallaudet, which flip-flopped from club to varsity in that time period.

SUNY-Maritime is not bad, and per the fair access guidelines, if they win all their games, who can say they don't deserve to be in? Because you can't really tell what their ceiling is.

But having seen them play this season, I would say they are regionally ranked about where they belong and a playoff win would not be something I'd expect.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: theoriginalupstate on November 04, 2010, 08:14:20 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on November 04, 2010, 06:39:31 PM
Quote from: Upstate on November 01, 2010, 11:12:08 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on November 01, 2010, 10:30:51 AM
Yeah, it's a new conference and the teams are just not very good. They're comparable to the NEFC teams.

I think the top NEFC teams would handle SUNY-Maritime quite easily...

Whomever draws SUNY-Maritime and the NEFC rep will basically get a bye week...

I agree with your first statement, but not your second one. NEFC rep is no gimme anymore.

I think six of the NEFC teams didn't have football 10 years ago. And I'm not sure if that counts Gallaudet, which flip-flopped from club to varsity in that time period.

SUNY-Maritime is not bad, and per the fair access guidelines, if they win all their games, who can say they don't deserve to be in? Because you can't really tell what their ceiling is.

But having seen them play this season, I would say they are regionally ranked about where they belong and a playoff win would not be something I'd expect.

The descent Curry teams are a thing of the past Keith...

WNEC lost to Norwich 35-7...

Endicott scored a whopping 3 points vs RPI...
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 04, 2010, 09:07:27 PM
Understood, re: Curry. I did the NEFC preview for Kickoff.

I was basing it part on a mighty Empire 8 team losing to a NEFC team in the playoffs in '08, and part on the game I saw Maine Maritime play against Montclair State in last year's first round. The NJAC had more size and skill, but the NEFC was not overmatched. That option is tough to stop if you've rarely seen it, but also they played fairly even save a couple of long drives where they fumble.

It's not, in my humble opinion, a bye week.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pg04 on November 04, 2010, 09:13:31 PM
I really don't think there's any way to say if SUNY-Maritime will compete or not until they get to the playoffs.  They could come into the playoffs and win one or two games -- even though it's not likely.  It's really hard to tell from their regular season. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on November 04, 2010, 11:29:37 PM
Quote from: pg04 on November 04, 2010, 09:13:31 PM
I really don't think there's any way to say if SUNY-Maritime will compete or not until they get to the playoffs.  They could come into the playoffs and win one or two games -- even though it's not likely.  It's really hard to tell from their regular season. 

I agree that unbeaten teams are hard to gauge no matter the level of competition they've played.

I happen to have seen SUNY-Maritime this year, before we knew they were going to go on this kind of run, so I'm more informed than I otherwise might be.

I would say the UW-Stevens Point team that lost to UWW this week and has no chance of making the playoffs would beat them bad. Like three touchdowns bad.

That said, the playoffs aren't about who would beat who (as odd as that sounds) so much as who earned their way in by beating the teams on their schedule. SUNY-Maritime is doing that.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on June 21, 2011, 01:10:21 AM
All of the previously voted-on D3football.com Top 25 polls are now on the new site. There's a link in the menu bar at the top of each poll page marked Previous years.

http://www.d3football.com/top25/index
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on June 24, 2011, 06:00:05 PM
I am not sure where to post this but seems like it should be a good place.

I think d3sports/d3football/d3hoops/d3soccer/d3baseball etc :) should host some fall/winter/spring opening classics down here in FL.

I am sure it would be quite a trip for any school, but there are tons of athletes down here in FL that never get a chance to play at the next level because there are no d3 schools down here. Here is my of reasons to come down:

1) So I can see some d3sports live :)
2) As noted above great exposure for d3 schools and athletes
3) It is always nice down here :)
4) Pat Coleman and staff can wear tropical shirts, get some sun, and relax :)
5) Non FL d3 schools have a reason to send some admission staff down here.
6) The list could go on and on.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: etbu27 on June 24, 2011, 07:53:59 PM
All of those reasons make me want to come visit right now.  ;D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 05, 2011, 11:06:05 PM
Quote from: GuyFormerlyPSBBG on June 24, 2011, 06:00:05 PM
I am not sure where to post this but seems like it should be a good place.

I think d3sports/d3football/d3hoops/d3soccer/d3baseball etc :) should host some fall/winter/spring opening classics down here in FL.

I am sure it would be quite a trip for any school, but there are tons of athletes down here in FL that never get a chance to play at the next level because there are no d3 schools down here. Here is my of reasons to come down:

1) So I can see some d3sports live :)
2) As noted above great exposure for d3 schools and athletes
3) It is always nice down here :)
4) Pat Coleman and staff can wear tropical shirts, get some sun, and relax :)
5) Non FL d3 schools have a reason to send some admission staff down here.
6) The list could go on and on.

No. 1 is a good reason!

No. 4 ... nobody wants to see us in tropical attire. Trust. lol
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 09, 2011, 11:40:38 PM
With respect to Cortland State in this week's Top 25, #15 Cortland State travels to #11 Montclair State and loses by 1 point.

What outcome would one expect?  Montclair State did not even "cover" Home Field Advantage!

Why do they drop out of the poll?

That just doesn't seem to fit the logic that usually governs most decisions on D3sports.com Polls.

What have I missed?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 09, 2011, 11:51:27 PM
Crossposting from E8 discussion:

Well, (points went) one at a time to more or less all the teams in between Montclair and Cortland today. Also to teams that made big moves this week. This isn't going to be a direct one-to-one correlation but Huntingdon gained 46 points, Kean and Montclair combined to gain 67, Salisbury gained 70 ... I mean, obviously they all went somewhere but like we pointed out on Facebook, tough week to lose. Only two teams lost, they were within range of falling all the way out if you consider that an isolated loss by a Top 25 team tends to cost them 12 spots in a vacuum. And Huntingdon and Birmingham-Southern were pushing to get in, as was UW-Oshkosh with its win at Eau Claire.

Points consolidated in the NJAC, 889 last week and 773 this week.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 10, 2011, 12:02:33 AM
Thanks, Pat. Not meaning to spam the boards, but I wanted to catch both conversations that might arise.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 10, 2011, 12:05:29 AM
S'alright. It was relevant. :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 23, 2011, 09:24:32 PM
Does anyone talk top 25 here anymore or just on the fan poll board?

I was interested in the reaction to UW-Oshkosh moving up 5 spots after losing ... but as rare as it is to play UWW tough these days whether people thought it was deserved. I did, they filled the void that IWU and Montclair vacated, but I'm only one voter.

Also I see Olaf finally moved ahead of Bethel lol.

Just curious ... I'm sure if I search enough I'll find some chatter. Or will by Monday sometime.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 23, 2011, 09:29:45 PM
Actually, moving UWO up because of their performance in the UWW game makes sense to me.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 23, 2011, 09:31:35 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 23, 2011, 09:24:32 PM
Does anyone talk top 25 here anymore or just on the fan poll board?

I was interested in the reaction to UW-Oshkosh moving up 5 spots after losing ... but as rare as it is to play UWW tough these days whether people thought it was deserved. I did, they filled the void that IWU and Montclair vacated, but I'm only one voter.

Also I see Olaf finally moved ahead of Bethel lol.

Just curious ... I'm sure if I search enough I'll find some chatter. Or will by Monday sometime.
My Firefox browser has not found the Week 8 Top 25!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 23, 2011, 09:32:53 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 23, 2011, 09:31:35 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 23, 2011, 09:24:32 PM
Does anyone talk top 25 here anymore or just on the fan poll board?

I was interested in the reaction to UW-Oshkosh moving up 5 spots after losing ... but as rare as it is to play UWW tough these days whether people thought it was deserved. I did, they filled the void that IWU and Montclair vacated, but I'm only one voter.

Also I see Olaf finally moved ahead of Bethel lol.

Just curious ... I'm sure if I search enough I'll find some chatter. Or will by Monday sometime.
My Firefox browser has not found the Week 8 Top 25!

Same thing happened to me. change 7 to an 8 in the URL.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Frank Rossi on October 23, 2011, 10:24:07 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 23, 2011, 09:29:45 PM
Actually, moving UWO up because of their performance in the UWW game makes sense to me.

Keith just wants to know why Endicott wasn't ranked higher.  I'm onto his game.  ;)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: CruFrenzy on October 23, 2011, 11:04:41 PM
It doesn't make any sense to me why UMHB continues to lose ground in the Top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Frank Rossi on October 23, 2011, 11:28:50 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 23, 2011, 11:04:41 PM
It doesn't make any sense to me why UMHB continues to lose ground in the Top 25.

Apparently, it was my ballot that cost them the one point you're concerned about.  I've been considering it for a while.  I just feel that Linfield has played somewhat better football over the last few weeks, especially defensively.

Trust me that I have a soft spot for UMHB after calling a playoff game in Belton in 2008.  However, I'm trying to assess the cream of the crop here with limited information -- and I just think that Linfield has a slight edge.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: CruFrenzy on October 23, 2011, 11:35:36 PM
You're right, Linfield has been EXTREMELY impressive defensively lately. Thanks for responding!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pumkinattack on October 24, 2011, 09:37:26 AM
At what point do people take a closer look at the NJAC teams this season?  I'm sure all the voters have looked at them, but I can't figure out what the rationale is for the love, other than the Kean win over Wesley.  I don't see any other OOC wins that gets them to having 3-4 teams getting votes, at one point very recently having three teams in the top 15-17 range.  I'm sure they'll argue about the strength and depth of the conference, but I haven't really seen it on the field.  Cortland beating IC will prove nothing as IC may end up .500 this season having just lost to Utica.  Unless that Wesley win carries that much "trickle down" value, it's hard for this Eastern region fan to support the idea that the NJAC top 4-5 is that much better than the rest of the east sans Salisbury & DelVal (and IMO Hobart, but the 8 game thing is going to drag them down all regular season in perception, I think). 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on October 24, 2011, 10:20:26 AM
I was interested to learn from the podcast that someone switched their vote from UMU to UWW. I didn't expect that to happen.

I did expect, however, to see that two voters switched their first-place vote from UWW to Mount (but not the other way around).
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: bleedpurple on October 24, 2011, 09:14:36 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on October 24, 2011, 10:20:26 AM
I was interested to learn from the podcast that someone switched their vote from UMU to UWW. I didn't expect that to happen.

I did expect, however, to see that two voters switched their first-place vote from UWW to Mount (but not the other way around).

I think it shows that at least most of the pollsters look at things way deeper than comparative scores, which is a very good thing. I would guess that all three voters had contemplated the move for awhile and (as Keith alluded to in the podcast) their current #1 showed enough vulnerability this week that they felt like now was the time to pull the trigger on the switch. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 24, 2011, 10:12:17 PM
Quote from: Frank Rossi on October 23, 2011, 11:28:50 PM
Quote from: CruFrenzy on October 23, 2011, 11:04:41 PM
It doesn't make any sense to me why UMHB continues to lose ground in the Top 25.

Apparently, it was my ballot that cost them the one point you're concerned about.  I've been considering it for a while.  I just feel that Linfield has played somewhat better football over the last few weeks, especially defensively.

Trust me that I have a soft spot for UMHB after calling a playoff game in Belton in 2008.  However, I'm trying to assess the cream of the crop here with limited information -- and I just think that Linfield has a slight edge.

I've reorganized St. Thomas, UMHB and Linfield (and earlier in the year, Bethel) several times this year. It's a very week to week thing with me. Certainly helps when they beat better opponents.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 24, 2011, 10:16:52 PM
Quote from: pumkinattack on October 24, 2011, 09:37:26 AM
At what point do people take a closer look at the NJAC teams this season?  I'm sure all the voters have looked at them, but I can't figure out what the rationale is for the love, other than the Kean win over Wesley.  I don't see any other OOC wins that gets them to having 3-4 teams getting votes, at one point very recently having three teams in the top 15-17 range.  I'm sure they'll argue about the strength and depth of the conference, but I haven't really seen it on the field.  Cortland beating IC will prove nothing as IC may end up .500 this season having just lost to Utica.  Unless that Wesley win carries that much "trickle down" value, it's hard for this Eastern region fan to support the idea that the NJAC top 4-5 is that much better than the rest of the east sans Salisbury & DelVal (and IMO Hobart, but the 8 game thing is going to drag them down all regular season in perception, I think).

I made the switch to Salisbury as the No. 1 East team about three weeks ago, even before the 69 point win. I was down on them after barely getting by CNU, but since then they have shot up to single digits IMHO.

I flip-flopped on Montclair for a while, Kean stays tacked ahead of Wesley for me, and Cortland I had to let go of even though they looked pretty good at Rowan. I think Rowan isn't completely out of it either, especially if Lyco ends up winning the MAC.

Del Val looks good, but Widener is coming on strong. The MAC champ will earn its respect because the good teams are all playing each other the past few weeks here.

Thomas More I think is the team that is furthest from the top 5 in terms of quality but benefits most from the void and from rarely being challenged.

The NJAC is competitive five teams deep, but that doesn't mean any of them are top 15 worthy necessarily.

I think Montclair being undefeated and a playoff team and beating Cortland earlier probably helped their bounce. Kean definitely has the Wesley win to thank, IMHO ... and there probably is trickle down to the whole conference.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ryan Tipps on October 25, 2011, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 24, 2011, 10:16:52 PM
Thomas More I think is the team that is furthest from the top 5 in terms of quality but benefits most from the void and from rarely being challenged.

At the risk of being crucified by my own kind, I think your comments about TMC can also be applied to Wabash. The LGs have beaten only one team with a winning record and took a notable drop on my ballot after the Oberlin game. In the broader Top 25 though, like Thomas More, Wabash has crept up the rankings perhaps in response to a void of certainty about who to slot in that 8-12 range.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 25, 2011, 12:52:43 AM
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on October 25, 2011, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 24, 2011, 10:16:52 PM
Thomas More I think is the team that is furthest from the top 5 in terms of quality but benefits most from the void and from rarely being challenged.

At the risk of being crucified by my own kind, I think your comments about TMC can also be applied to Wabash. The LGs have beaten only one team with a winning record and took a notable drop on my ballot after the Oberlin game. In the broader Top 25 though, like Thomas More, Wabash has crept up the rankings perhaps in response to a void of certainty about who to slot in that 8-12 range.

Me and my ballot agree with you 100 percent. I do not have Wabash anywhere close to where the overall group does, but Thomas More is only about four or five spots below.

I think I'll be revealing my ballot in ATN this week as part of a larger project.

Wabash and TMC reveal this truth: Your ranking is (or should be) largely supported by the teams you beat/play well against.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 25, 2011, 07:08:32 AM
IMHO, Wabash must beat Witt convincingly, like Huntingdon did, for the LG's to maintain their place in the Top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 10:38:09 AM
The big game in my eyes is this weekend - the wonderful trip to Meadville. That's where the Witt / Huntingdon comparisons will come into play - how does this LG team react to a long road trip.

Witt has barely impressed since Huntingdon, and frankly had 3 1/4 quarters of issues with Oberlin before their depth got the best of them.

From 7-17 on my fans ballot is one big mess and a case could be made for each team to be replaced by the other. The Salisbury / Wesley game is going to be very telling.


Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: ExTartanPlayer on October 25, 2011, 10:40:30 AM
Quote from: Ryan Tipps on October 25, 2011, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 24, 2011, 10:16:52 PM
Thomas More I think is the team that is furthest from the top 5 in terms of quality but benefits most from the void and from rarely being challenged.

At the risk of being crucified by my own kind, I think your comments about TMC can also be applied to Wabash. The LGs have beaten only one team with a winning record and took a notable drop on my ballot after the Oberlin game. In the broader Top 25 though, like Thomas More, Wabash has crept up the rankings perhaps in response to a void of certainty about who to slot in that 8-12 range.

I agree that Wabash and TMC are probably overranked, mostly due to their undefeated records and general reputation as "teams that have made the playoffs recently and have a good chance to go undefeated."

Wabash and TMC play in conferences that are clearly a bit down this year, so it's hard to get a really good read on either team, and struggling to get by Oberlin ('Bash) and St. Vincent (TMC) makes it hard for me to believe that either team warrants a Top 10 ranking.  Yes, I can understand that teams will have an off day, but that sort of "off day" in a tougher conference would result in a loss. 

I find TMC's struggles a bit worse than those of Wabash - 'Bash was way ahead of Oberlin and fell asleep at the switch, while TMC trailed at halftime and was arguably outplayed overall by St. Vincent.  And don't give me that "St. Vincent is better than some people realize" excuse - they lost the next week to an 0-6 Grove City team.

I'm shocked to see how far Illinois Wesleyan dropped after losing to North Central.  They're 6-1 (with the lone less coming vs. #6 NCC and with a head-to-head win over #13 Wheaton) and somehow that's not worthy of a ranking in the top 15?  Personally, I think that teams like IWU, St. Olaf, and UW-Oshkosh have a more impressive season to date than Wabash and TMC.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wally_wabash on October 25, 2011, 10:58:31 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 10:38:09 AM
The big game in my eyes is this weekend - the wonderful trip to Meadville. That's where the Witt / Huntingdon comparisons will come into play - how does this LG team react to a long road trip.

I'm not sure a game against Allegheny provides a fair comparison to a game against Huntingdon.  Huntingdon is a much, much better team. 

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 25, 2011, 07:08:32 AM
IMHO, Wabash must beat Witt convincingly, like Huntingdon did, for the LG's to maintain their place in the Top 25.

I'm also not sure it's fair to compare MOV's between Witt/Huntingdon and Witt/Wabash.  Huntingdon is a non-league game, against an unfamiliar opponent, after a looooong bus ride whereas Wabash is a league game, for a conference championship, against a familiar opponent and a bitter rival.  The contexts are way different between those two games. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: bashbrother on October 25, 2011, 11:04:14 AM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 25, 2011, 07:08:32 AM
IMHO, Wabash must beat Witt convincingly, like Huntingdon did, for the LG's to maintain their place in the Top 25.

Anyone looking for a blowout win here, may be dissappointed.... Wabash/Witt has turned into a true rivalry, turf battle game....with a conference title riding on it virtually every year.  The games in this series have been decided by a total of 93 points the last 10 years..... (9.3 ppg avg.) (6 of the 10 by a TD or less)  In the last 5 meetings, their games have been decided by (6.4 ppg).  Don't know what your definition of convincingly is,  but just like the St. Thomas/Bethel game,  one can't be too disappointed with St. Thomas for only winning by 10.  (A game most expected to be a larger victory for the Tommies) 

Wabash has split their regular season series with Witt 5 - 5 over the last 10.   (Overall in the Past 10 years, Bash is 6 and 5, with a playoff victory over the Tigers in 2002)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 11:56:40 AM
Yes, Wally, Huntingdon is better. But this is a conference game, it's a long trip, the Gators had the bye week and interesting things happen in Meadville. I wouldn't be surprised if the score is as close as it was in 2007 or 2005. But if it's a score like 2007 or 2005, the voters may punish Wabash.

The Salisbury / Wesley game could squeeze Wabash as well, depending on how close the game is and who wins. Cal Lutheran's impressive performances of late also will weigh in there. I can see Wabash winning, and dropping spots.

At any rate, anyone under Linfield can't be too confident to keep their ranking based on merely winning.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wally_wabash on October 25, 2011, 12:22:26 PM
It would seem to me that the voters have already decided how they feel about Wabash.  Some who like to see teams play and beat strong teams will place Wabash behind teams that play in better leagues.  Others who think Wabash is good and are going to believe that and vote accordingly whether or not Wabash wins by 3 or 13 or 30 this weekend.  That's the nature of the beast for teams that play in leagues that aren't particularly deep. 

You said it yourself...somebody has to be ranked in that hole behind Wesley and North Central.  There really isn't any team that you can put at 8 or 9 that somebody somewhere wouldn't say "you know, that seems a little high for (insert undefeated team in a bottom heavy league or 1-loss team from a top heavy league here)."  Maybe we should just have 7 teams in the top 10 and then start renumbering at 11 after that.  Seems like people get itchy when teams that aren't the usual suspects step into that top 10.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: K-Mack on October 25, 2011, 01:59:39 PM
Good posts.

Wabash and Thomas More are "usual suspects" though -- at least top 15 if not top 10. We do often have this "no way that's the No. 8 team in the country" thing crop up, and voters feel more comfortbale, IMO, when there's a good win on the resume -- or two or three by this point in the season.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wally_wabash on October 25, 2011, 02:38:35 PM
Quote from: K-Mack on October 25, 2011, 01:59:39 PM
Good posts.

Wabash and Thomas More are "usual suspects" though -- at least top 15 if not top 10. We do often have this "no way that's the No. 8 team in the country" thing crop up, and voters feel more comfortbale, IMO, when there's a good win on the resume -- or two or three by this point in the season.

This is true...it just seems like most people are ok with TMC or Wabash being somewhere between 11-15, but when they get into the top 10 we all have a hey-wait-a-minute-here moment.  There's that perceptual difference between top 15 and top 10 that gets in the way. 

For the record, I don't think one philosophy of voting in this scenario is better than the other.  Wabash's game at Allegheny, IMO,  is pretty inconsequential as it relates to next week's rankings (unless of course things go really sideways).  If Salisbury beats Wesley, they're going to jump up ahead of Wabash and probably TMC regardless of Wabash's MOV against Allegheny.  And who could argue?  They'd have a signature win and an equivalent record against a way better schedule.  Is it Wabash's fault that they don't have better SOS metrics?  No.  But it also isn't the fault of voters who like factor in things like quality of opponent to put a ceiling on how they're willing to go with a team like Wabash. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 25, 2011, 03:25:26 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on October 25, 2011, 10:58:31 AM
Quote from: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 10:38:09 AM
The big game in my eyes is this weekend - the wonderful trip to Meadville. That's where the Witt / Huntingdon comparisons will come into play - how does this LG team react to a long road trip.

I'm not sure a game against Allegheny provides a fair comparison to a game against Huntingdon.  Huntingdon is a much, much better team. 

Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 25, 2011, 07:08:32 AM
IMHO, Wabash must beat Witt convincingly, like Huntingdon did, for the LG's to maintain their place in the Top 25.

I'm also not sure it's fair to compare MOV's between Witt/Huntingdon and Witt/Wabash.  Huntingdon is a non-league game, against an unfamiliar opponent, after a looooong bus ride whereas Wabash is a league game, for a conference championship, against a familiar opponent and a bitter rival.  The contexts are way different between those two games.
Thanks for the comparison and comment. I have Wabash at #13 on the Fan Poll and the 4th North Region team.  Yes,  I am wary of that ranking, just like my vote for TMC at #9.

By convincingly, I realize that this is a rivalry game with the conference title on the line, but a #13 Wabash team versus a Witt team that is not receiving votes should have the game in control, and be recognized as such by our posters who have seen 20-30 Wabash Wittenberg games, including the ones that they played in.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on October 25, 2011, 03:41:17 PM
Ralph,

The issue for me is that Witt is not playing to potential, at all. For whatever reason they're not playing as well as they should. Not even close. They have a nagging tendency to let teams hang around, and absolutely stunk at Huntingdon.

But I always take rivalry games into consideration, especially in-conference rivalries, and I think he voters do as well. And Witt and Wabash will be playing for an "A" bid (no offense to Allegheny or Wooster) and Witt will have a week off before Wabash. I know darn well that they've got tapes on the first half of Wash U. the second half of Oberlin and the first half of Denison to study.

So if Wabash wins a 21-17 squeaker, I don't think it's a reflection on Wabash's unworthiness as a top 10 school, much like Oshkosh's close shave didn't diminish (on the whole) Whitewater's claim to #1.

Great teams can win when having a bad game. And this year, it seems teams below the Top 5 are having their share of them.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 30, 2011, 08:47:52 PM
The Top 25 is out (http://www.d3football.com/top25/2011/week9).



Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 19, 2011, 06:34:01 PM
The Final top 25 is out.

I plotted the Final Top 25 to the brackets and came up with this "scoring", applying the Top 25 ranking as a score for the team.

The 6 "not-receiving votes" teams that made the playoffs were given a value of "41".

UMHB bracket = 103 points   [lowest ranked team was Hobart at "receiving votes #26"]
UMU bracket  =  173 points  [one not-receiving votes (NRV) team]
Tommies bracket = 178 points [two NRV teams]
UWW bracket  =  181 points [three NRV teams]

In the second round...

UMHB bracket = 28 points
UMU braceket = 33 points
UWW bracket =  35 points
Tommies bracket =  47 points.

Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 01, 2012, 02:03:04 PM
Trinity TX still receiving votes (2) is still weird They have two ugly losses.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jknezek on October 01, 2012, 02:41:41 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 01, 2012, 02:03:04 PM
Trinity TX still receiving votes (2) is still weird They have two ugly losses.

I think we can consider those "historical respect" votes. I don't have any other way of rationalizing them.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on October 01, 2012, 03:49:14 PM
Way to dig this one out of the archives.

Pat, Keith and I tossed Otterbein vs. Heidelberg vs. B-W lightly around via Twitter and on the North Region Fan Poll. I'm more in on The 'Berg and less so Otterbein but that may be an over-reaction to my realization that I overvalued B-W greatly.

This season is going to take longer to settle down, I think.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 01, 2012, 03:51:01 PM
Quote from: jknezek on October 01, 2012, 02:41:41 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 01, 2012, 02:03:04 PM
Trinity TX still receiving votes (2) is still weird They have two ugly losses.

I think we can consider those "historical respect" votes. I don't have any other way of rationalizing them.
My first historical respect vote goes to the Chicago Maroons, formerly coached by Amos Alonzo Stagg, and the team for Jay Berwanger, the Maroon running back who won the first Heisman.   :)

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=jay+berwanger&view=detail&id=92ADA25F31D4C4658042612578E4D69F789C0F55&first=1 (http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=jay+berwanger&view=detail&id=92ADA25F31D4C4658042612578E4D69F789C0F55&first=1)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ron Boerger on October 02, 2012, 02:43:48 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on October 01, 2012, 02:03:04 PM
Trinity TX still receiving votes (2) is still weird They have two ugly losses.

Even scarier was last week when the alma mater got 7 votes after the UMHB debacle. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 16, 2012, 11:50:07 PM
What surprises me on the final Top25 is who gave UMHB a vote that was neither 2nd or 3rd?

At 587 points, UMHB can get 13 second place votes and 11 third place votes and one 4th place vote to reach 587 points.  Also 14 seconds, 9 thirds and 2 fourths will give you 587 points.

Unbelievable! 

For UST, 12 seconds, 11 thirds and 2 fourths will give you 585 points.  I can see that line of reasoning as mentioned by Keith on the podcast.  That lets you give two third-place votes to Wesley.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: PA_wesleyfan on December 16, 2012, 11:59:16 PM
 I have to agree with you Ralph. But voting has and always will be very subjective, as you well know. I can't say i disagree with the top 6 but after watching a number of games on the web this year I think the order may be not quite right.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:44:54 AM
Those are the combinations, Ralph. Someone voted MTU-UST-UWO-UMHB.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: art76 on December 17, 2012, 08:20:44 AM
Pat and gang, I haven't been on the boards here that long - but does anyone do a post season analysis of all the teams in the nation? At the beginning of the year you guys do a pre-season analysis of all the teams, do you ever revisit those to list out movers and shakers? Just curious.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wesleydad on December 17, 2012, 10:14:40 AM
the final rankings look ok to me.  did umhb play mount better?  not sure, take away the 5 turnovers and how much does umhb score?  st. thomas held mount to 28 points and played a pretty good game, but they did struggle on offense which umhb did not when given ops to score.  having seen both teams play i think it would be a good game.  I think any game between the top 6 would be good to see.  Oshkosh beats Linfield so they should be ahead of them.  Does wesley playing umhb tough put them above Linfield?  It is all opinion and not hard to justify any of the placings to me.  I am not sure North Central should be 7, think Elmhurst and Hobart showed better overall, but again just opinion.  Nice thing is is that we got to see it play out on the field and it was very entertaining.  looking forward to next year to see if those at the top will be able to stay there since there are some huge graduations on many of the teams.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:07:32 PM
North Central beat 8 on the road (with a flight included) and Elmhurst beat 10 on the road. Elmhurst played St. Thomas tougher than anyone who didn't win the national title. North Central beat Elmhurst handily in the regular season. That's the basic rundown of how they got in this order.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Desertraider on December 17, 2012, 01:05:11 PM
My question is with Widener. Sorry but getting it handed to you 72-17 (even by Mount) should drop you at least 5 in the polls. Not sure I get the slide down 1 spot to #10. As for Wesley - I figured they would be ahead of Linfield. 2 losses, sure but both close losses to UMHB.

Regardless - the poll looks good and hey thanks to a playoff at least we know who is #1. Great job guys.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 01:29:38 PM
I'm not sure what Whitewater did to deserve 9 votes. and I'm a UWW fan!!!!  :o

Also, I'm glad to see MHB remain at the #2 spot. I don't think they did anything wrong in the tournament to be knocked down a spot or two.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 17, 2012, 02:08:38 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 01:29:38 PM
I'm not sure what Whitewater did to deserve 9 votes. and I'm a UWW fan!!!!  :o

Also, I'm glad to see MHB remain at the #2 spot. I don't think they did anything wrong in the tournament to be knocked down a spot or two.
;)   :D    ;D

WIAC bias!  The same mindset that voted UWO ahead of UMHB!     :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 02:10:30 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on December 17, 2012, 02:08:38 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 01:29:38 PM
I'm not sure what Whitewater did to deserve 9 votes. and I'm a UWW fan!!!!  :o

Also, I'm glad to see MHB remain at the #2 spot. I don't think they did anything wrong in the tournament to be knocked down a spot or two.
;)   :D    ;D

WIAC bias!  The same mindset that voted UWO ahead of UMHB!      :)

That's just silliness
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: pumkinattack on December 17, 2012, 03:26:53 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:07:32 PM
North Central beat 8 on the road (with a flight included) and Elmhurst beat 10 on the road. Elmhurst played St. Thomas tougher than anyone who didn't win the national title. North Central beat Elmhurst handily in the regular season. That's the basic rundown of how they got in this order.

But historically, early season games get discounted at the final pool from what I've seen.  And the played them tougher argument also hasn't always held except vs. MUC (maybe UWW, but not a team that was predicted to lose by 2-3td's and did - good though they may have been).

In looking at seasons, I'd have a harder time with Bethel having jumped up as much as they have than some of the others.  #7 to #10 or #11 you can move around generally behind the top 6.  I would've probably bumped Platteville and Wittenberg up ahead of Bethel and Salisbury. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: pumkinattack on December 17, 2012, 03:26:53 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:07:32 PM
North Central beat 8 on the road (with a flight included) and Elmhurst beat 10 on the road. Elmhurst played St. Thomas tougher than anyone who didn't win the national title. North Central beat Elmhurst handily in the regular season. That's the basic rundown of how they got in this order.

But historically, early season games get discounted at the final pool from what I've seen.  And the played them tougher argument also hasn't always held except vs. MUC (maybe UWW, but not a team that was predicted to lose by 2-3td's and did - good though they may have been).

In looking at seasons, I'd have a harder time with Bethel having jumped up as much as they have than some of the others.  #7 to #10 or #11 you can move around generally behind the top 6.  I would've probably bumped Platteville and Wittenberg up ahead of Bethel and Salisbury.

My thoughts exactly on Bethel. I would definitely put Platteville ahead of them.

I know I'm in the minority here, but outside of St. Thomas, I didn't buy into the MIAC much this year.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on December 17, 2012, 03:47:45 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: pumkinattack on December 17, 2012, 03:26:53 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:07:32 PM
North Central beat 8 on the road (with a flight included) and Elmhurst beat 10 on the road. Elmhurst played St. Thomas tougher than anyone who didn't win the national title. North Central beat Elmhurst handily in the regular season. That's the basic rundown of how they got in this order.

But historically, early season games get discounted at the final pool from what I've seen.  And the played them tougher argument also hasn't always held except vs. MUC (maybe UWW, but not a team that was predicted to lose by 2-3td's and did - good though they may have been).

In looking at seasons, I'd have a harder time with Bethel having jumped up as much as they have than some of the others.  #7 to #10 or #11 you can move around generally behind the top 6.  I would've probably bumped Platteville and Wittenberg up ahead of Bethel and Salisbury.

My thoughts exactly on Bethel. I would definitely put Platteville ahead of them.

I know I'm in the minority here, but outside of St. Thomas, I didn't buy into the MIAC much this year.

On my fan ballot, I had UWP all the way up at 7 (probably too high, but so be it ;)).

As to NCC, the demolition of Elmhurst was not THAT early - week five.  As to the loss to Linfield, NCC had a history of occasionally making lots of TOs, some unforced.  Against LaX, it cost them the game; against Cal Lu, they had four, but were sufficiently better overall to still win comfortably; against Linfield, SEVEN TOs was way too much to overcome.  (NCC/Elmhurst WAS still early enough, that my ballot (placing heavier emphasis on the playoffs) had Elmhurst 8 and NCC 9.)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: SUADC on December 17, 2012, 03:51:28 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 03:33:53 PM
Quote from: pumkinattack on December 17, 2012, 03:26:53 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:07:32 PM
North Central beat 8 on the road (with a flight included) and Elmhurst beat 10 on the road. Elmhurst played St. Thomas tougher than anyone who didn't win the national title. North Central beat Elmhurst handily in the regular season. That's the basic rundown of how they got in this order.

But historically, early season games get discounted at the final pool from what I've seen.  And the played them tougher argument also hasn't always held except vs. MUC (maybe UWW, but not a team that was predicted to lose by 2-3td's and did - good though they may have been).

In looking at seasons, I'd have a harder time with Bethel having jumped up as much as they have than some of the others.  #7 to #10 or #11 you can move around generally behind the top 6.  I would've probably bumped Platteville and Wittenberg up ahead of Bethel and Salisbury.

My thoughts exactly on Bethel. I would definitely put Platteville ahead of them.

I know I'm in the minority here, but outside of St. Thomas, I didn't buy into the MIAC much this year.

Honestly, IMHO anything outside the top 5, is trivial. However, looking at Bethel and UW-P, they both lost to a great UW-O by comparable margins. As for Salisbury, only thing you can say is that they beat a team that beat another team that beat UW-P, only way to look at it. Again, outside the top 5 (6), you can say if any of those remaining teams play each other, each has about a 50% chance of winning, holding everthing else (weather, travel, etc...) equal.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 03:52:28 PM
Quote from: pumkinattack on December 17, 2012, 03:26:53 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 17, 2012, 12:07:32 PM
North Central beat 8 on the road (with a flight included) and Elmhurst beat 10 on the road. Elmhurst played St. Thomas tougher than anyone who didn't win the national title. North Central beat Elmhurst handily in the regular season. That's the basic rundown of how they got in this order.

But historically, early season games get discounted at the final pool from what I've seen.  And the played them tougher argument also hasn't always held except vs. MUC (maybe UWW, but not a team that was predicted to lose by 2-3td's and did - good though they may have been).

In looking at seasons, I'd have a harder time with Bethel having jumped up as much as they have than some of the others.  #7 to #10 or #11 you can move around generally behind the top 6.  I would've probably bumped Platteville and Wittenberg up ahead of Bethel and Salisbury.

That's already a big jump for Wittenberg.

02: Regardless of how much you buy into the WIAC, the conference did go 21-3 in non-conference games this year, including the playoffs.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: hazzben on December 17, 2012, 06:02:08 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 03:33:53 PM
I know I'm in the minority here, but outside of St. Thomas, I didn't buy into the MIAC much this year.

That's ok 02, I don't buy into the WIAC much this year  ;) :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wildcat11 on December 17, 2012, 06:45:01 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on December 17, 2012, 10:14:40 AM
Oshkosh beats Linfield so they should be ahead of them.  Does wesley playing umhb tough put them above Linfield?  It is all opinion and not hard to justify any of the placings to me.

Linfield/Wesley is a toss up and could have gone either way.  One thing that wasn't discussed at all regarding Linfield/Oshkosh is the fact Linfield lost the West Region Defensive player of the year (Dom Forrest) early in the game.  In fact, when Forrest went out UWO broke off two huge runs for their first TD.  Usually you play the "what if they didn't get hurt" game with offensive players but Forrest was a HUGE play-maker this season for the 'Cats defense.  That was a giant loss for Linfield in that game.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: 02 Warhawk on December 18, 2012, 08:32:29 AM
Quote from: hazzben on December 17, 2012, 06:02:08 PM
Quote from: 02 Warhawk on December 17, 2012, 03:33:53 PM
I know I'm in the minority here, but outside of St. Thomas, I didn't buy into the MIAC much this year.

That's ok 02, I don't buy into the WIAC much this year  ;) :)

Fair enough  :D
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 18, 2017, 12:33:19 PM
I am bringing back the old Top 25 board.

In week #3, UMHB received 19 first place votes and 618 votes overall.

That means they were given

19 (first place votes) times 25  = 475
5 (second place votes) times 24= 120
1 (third place vote) times     23 =   23

Total                                            618 votes
                                                   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wesleydad on September 24, 2017, 07:00:47 PM
interesting that Wesley keeps dropping.  They will be the best team in the east when it all plays out but as usual they lose an early season game.  2 Weeks will tell.  Frostburg on the 7th. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wesleydad on September 24, 2017, 07:02:58 PM
So Stout beats st thomas who beats st johns rather easily, dont care about the score game was not close and stout sits at 22 while the other 2 teams sit at 8 and 10.  HMMMMMMM.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on September 24, 2017, 08:51:32 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 24, 2017, 07:02:58 PM
So Stout beats st thomas who beats st johns rather easily, dont care about the score game was not close and stout sits at 22 while the other 2 teams sit at 8 and 10.  HMMMMMMM.
We all do it when we consider ballots. It is legacy hold-over. The Tommies and Johnnies are known quantities. It would take a pretty big stumble for the Johnnies to fall much further.  In fact Platteville could beat Stout by a TD and I will still keep Stout in the Top 25.

As for the Johnnies and Pool C, I need them to pick up another loss!



Disclaimer.  I am not a voter in the Top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 24, 2017, 11:27:35 PM
Quote from: wesleydad on September 24, 2017, 07:02:58 PM
So Stout beats st thomas who beats st johns rather easily, dont care about the score game was not close and stout sits at 22 while the other 2 teams sit at 8 and 10.  HMMMMMMM.

Stout also has not played since. Literally -- has had two off weeks. It's hard to prove much from the sidelines. Besides, Stout has a bunch of tough games left -- voters are waiting to see what happens. Stout has a bunch of opportunities to play its way up the ladder.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on September 25, 2017, 12:28:44 PM
It takes some time for 'outsider' programs to move in - see also Denison.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 25, 2017, 04:33:05 PM
I don't see any reason to vote for Denison now based on what they've done and what they have coming up.

Denison (3-0) Last week: # votes: 1 ()   
Sep. 2   7:00 PM   Southwestern (2-2) •   W, 49-31
Sep. 16   3:00 PM   at Allegheny (1-3) * •   W, 62-26
Sep. 23   1:00 PM   Oberlin (2-2) * •   W, 45-17
Sep. 30   7:00 PM   at Wittenberg (3-0) * •   
Oct. 7   1:00 PM   at Wabash (3-0) * •   
Oct. 14   1:00 PM   DePauw (3-0) * •   
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on September 25, 2017, 08:25:18 PM
That kind of solidifies their outsider status, Pat. A team that normally makes the playoffs and is ranked probably is ranked with that slate.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2017, 09:17:10 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2017, 08:25:18 PM
That kind of solidifies their outsider status, Pat. A team that normally makes the playoffs and is ranked probably is ranked with that slate.

PERHAPS.  But with those three games coming up in the next three weeks, why push it.  If they go 2-1, they are definitely top 25; if they go 3-0, they should be top 10!  Right now, they seem awfully promising, but not necessarily higher than #30-40.  (BTW, on my national fan ballot I put them #25; and #6 on my north regional ballot.)

And they SHOULD so far have outsider status.  A team that regularly makes the playoffs and is ranked quite correctly gets the benefit of the doubt until better data comes in.  Only fairly rarely do PROGRAMS make huge lurches up or down.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: smedindy on September 25, 2017, 10:47:17 PM
I wasn't complaining that they have outsider status, just pointing out facts. No NEED for ALL CAPS.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on September 25, 2017, 11:27:08 PM
Quote from: smedindy on September 25, 2017, 10:47:17 PM
I wasn't complaining that they have outsider status, just pointing out facts. No NEED for ALL CAPS.

SORRY! :-[

With the frequent ambiguity of typed messages, I try to communicate how I would sound in face contact.  You are far from the first person to complain about my style - obviously my attempt at approximating direct communication (instead of message board communication) is not producing the results I hoped for. :(
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wally_wabash on September 26, 2017, 09:00:36 AM
I'm gonna go see if anybody has beaten both Witt and Wabash on the road in the same season.  I'm going with almost surely no, but there's a couple of years in the last 17 that it could have happened.  Updated with results shortly...

Nope, hasn't happened.  2003 Allegheny beat both teams but at home.  2004 Wooster also beat both teams (at Wabash, home vs. Witt).  So 11 days from now, Denison may pull off a never-ever thing.  Which would be really impressive. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 26, 2017, 06:23:19 PM
Going 3-0 against that slate would be an argument for Top 15, Ypsi. But I suspect that the coaches poll would put them Top 10.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2017, 12:40:18 AM
Pat, I can't recall a similar situation.  Highly ranked NCC is in a dogfight with once-highly ranked Wheaton, 13-7 at the half, but the game is now suspended until Monday evening (Wheaton is one of the several schools that will not play on Sundays).  Does the Top 25 come out as usual, or do you postpone to see the result of that game?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on October 15, 2017, 01:01:09 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on October 15, 2017, 12:40:18 AM
Pat, I can't recall a similar situation.  Highly ranked NCC is in a dogfight with once-highly ranked Wheaton, 13-7 at the half, but the game is now suspended until Monday evening (Wheaton is one of the several schools that will not play on Sundays).  Does the Top 25 come out as usual, or do you postpone to see the result of that game?

No -- although it definitely started in this week, we'll treat it like we did the W&J-Thiel game a couple of weeks ago. The poll will come out Sunday as planned.

We'll hold for Sunday games/finishes but not on Monday. We're on to the next week.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on October 22, 2017, 11:44:18 PM
UMHB, UMU and UW-Oshkosh are 1 or 2 or 3 on every ballot.  UW-O is 2nd on five ballots.  UMHB is 2nd on 4 ballots.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on November 05, 2017, 05:46:41 PM
Week #10 Top 25 shows 39 teams getting votes and the Top 25 teams got 8006 of the 8125 possible votes or 98.545% of votes going to the Top 25.

That is a very homogenous Top 25.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2018, 08:07:20 PM
Bumping this one up to the top with a link to the new poll:
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2018/week2
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:06:55 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2018, 08:07:20 PM
Bumping this one up to the top with a link to the new poll:
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2018/week2

Brockport certainly experiencing the "good news, bad news" dynamic of a poll. The obvious good is that they moved from five to four and picked up 15 points, I'm assuming from UW-O.  However, behind them North Central picked up a whopping 46 points, taking advantage of both the UW-O and Linfield losses.  That decreased the margin between Brockport and North Central from 37 to just 6, even though both won their games.  I guess it's just a reminder that the "Points" gap between two teams can be deceiving if there is at least one team between the two in a poll.  In other words, the 37 point gap after week 1 between Brockport and NC didn't necessarily mean voters had much difference between the two teams. Rather, Linfield was just stuck between them gobbling up points.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:21:12 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:06:55 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2018, 08:07:20 PM
Bumping this one up to the top with a link to the new poll:
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2018/week2

Brockport certainly experiencing the "good news, bad news" dynamic of a poll. The obvious good is that they moved from five to four and picked up 15 points, I'm assuming from UW-O.  However, behind them North Central picked up a whopping 46 points, taking advantage of both the UW-O and Linfield losses.  That decreased the margin between Brockport and North Central from 37 to just 6, even though both won their games.  I guess it's just a reminder that the "Points" gap between two teams can be deceiving if there is at least one team between the two in a poll.  In other words, the 37 point gap after week 1 between Brockport and NC didn't necessarily mean voters had much difference between the two teams. Rather, Linfield was just stuck between them gobbling up points.

Taking my previous post one step further, it could be argued that the gap between Washington and Jefferson (#13) and Wittenberg (#14) is actually GREATER than the gap between W&J and (#15) UW-0.  Why? Because irrespective of comparative results by W&J and UW-0 next week, if Wittenberg loses and UW-0 and W&J both win, then UW-0 would likely gain 25 votes on W&J and the President's lead over the new #14 team (UW-0) Shrinks from 23 to just 3.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: wally_wabash on September 10, 2018, 08:52:24 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:21:12 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:06:55 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2018, 08:07:20 PM
Bumping this one up to the top with a link to the new poll:
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2018/week2

Brockport certainly experiencing the "good news, bad news" dynamic of a poll. The obvious good is that they moved from five to four and picked up 15 points, I'm assuming from UW-O.  However, behind them North Central picked up a whopping 46 points, taking advantage of both the UW-O and Linfield losses.  That decreased the margin between Brockport and North Central from 37 to just 6, even though both won their games.  I guess it's just a reminder that the "Points" gap between two teams can be deceiving if there is at least one team between the two in a poll.  In other words, the 37 point gap after week 1 between Brockport and NC didn't necessarily mean voters had much difference between the two teams. Rather, Linfield was just stuck between them gobbling up points.

Taking my previous post one step further, it could be argued that the gap between Washington and Jefferson (#13) and Wittenberg (#14) is actually GREATER than the gap between W&J and (#15) UW-0.  Why? Because irrespective of comparative results by W&J and UW-0 next week, if Wittenberg loses and UW-0 and W&J both win, then UW-0 would likely gain 25 votes on W&J and the President's lead over the new #14 team (UW-0) Shrinks from 23 to just 3.

Wittenberg is at Oberlin next week and if they lose that game, I'll fly a UWW Warhawk avatar until Week 11. 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: JCUStreaks70 on September 10, 2018, 05:28:28 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 10, 2018, 08:52:24 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:21:12 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:06:55 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2018, 08:07:20 PM
Bumping this one up to the top with a link to the new poll:
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2018/week2

Brockport certainly experiencing the "good news, bad news" dynamic of a poll. The obvious good is that they moved from five to four and picked up 15 points, I'm assuming from UW-O.  However, behind them North Central picked up a whopping 46 points, taking advantage of both the UW-O and Linfield losses.  That decreased the margin between Brockport and North Central from 37 to just 6, even though both won their games.  I guess it's just a reminder that the "Points" gap between two teams can be deceiving if there is at least one team between the two in a poll.  In other words, the 37 point gap after week 1 between Brockport and NC didn't necessarily mean voters had much difference between the two teams. Rather, Linfield was just stuck between them gobbling up points.

Taking my previous post one step further, it could be argued that the gap between Washington and Jefferson (#13) and Wittenberg (#14) is actually GREATER than the gap between W&J and (#15) UW-0.  Why? Because irrespective of comparative results by W&J and UW-0 next week, if Wittenberg loses and UW-0 and W&J both win, then UW-0 would likely gain 25 votes on W&J and the President's lead over the new #14 team (UW-0) Shrinks from 23 to just 3.

Wittenberg is at Oberlin next week and if they lose that game, I'll fly a UWW Warhawk avatar until Week 11.

Is that a promise??? ;) lol
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 06:00:49 PM
Quote from: wally_wabash on September 10, 2018, 08:52:24 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:21:12 AM
Quote from: bleedpurple on September 10, 2018, 08:06:55 AM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 09, 2018, 08:07:20 PM
Bumping this one up to the top with a link to the new poll:
http://www.d3football.com/top25/2018/week2

Brockport certainly experiencing the "good news, bad news" dynamic of a poll. The obvious good is that they moved from five to four and picked up 15 points, I'm assuming from UW-O.  However, behind them North Central picked up a whopping 46 points, taking advantage of both the UW-O and Linfield losses.  That decreased the margin between Brockport and North Central from 37 to just 6, even though both won their games.  I guess it's just a reminder that the "Points" gap between two teams can be deceiving if there is at least one team between the two in a poll.  In other words, the 37 point gap after week 1 between Brockport and NC didn't necessarily mean voters had much difference between the two teams. Rather, Linfield was just stuck between them gobbling up points.

Taking my previous post one step further, it could be argued that the gap between Washington and Jefferson (#13) and Wittenberg (#14) is actually GREATER than the gap between W&J and (#15) UW-0.  Why? Because irrespective of comparative results by W&J and UW-0 next week, if Wittenberg loses and UW-0 and W&J both win, then UW-0 would likely gain 25 votes on W&J and the President's lead over the new #14 team (UW-0) Shrinks from 23 to just 3.

Wittenberg is at Oberlin next week and if they lose that game, I'll fly a UWW Warhawk avatar until Week 11.

Just used that as a rhetorical example but count me down as rooting for Oberlin this week!  ;) 
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: USee on September 10, 2018, 09:17:54 PM
Go Yeomen!!
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Ralph Turner on December 18, 2022, 07:10:22 PM
Pulling forward an old thread rather than starting a new one...

NCC and UMU were unanimous for 1st and 2nd.

Wartburg and UMHB split almost all of the 3rd and 4th place ballots.

One would expect the 25 third and fourth place ballots to yield 1125 points.

One might assume that Wartburg got 15 3rd place ballots and 10 4th place ballots for 565 points.

On the other hand, the first guess at an allocation of ballots for UMHB is 10 third ballots, 13 4th place ballots and two 5th place ballots for 558 votes.

Bethel's 486 votes is a solid 5th place (21 points x 25 ballots = 525 points) and 30 more points that 6th place Trinity and 37 points ahead of 7th place St Johns.

Linfield is solid at 8th with 401 votes.

Then comes the jumble of 9 thru 12. Del Val 380; Ithaca at 375; HSU at 369; UW-L at 368. Only 12 points separate 4 teams when the perfect allocation should have 75 points separating #9 and #12.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: The Third Division on July 04, 2023, 09:19:59 AM
Anyone have thoughts on this ranking they (The College Football Network on twitter) just released?

1. North Central
2. Mount Union
3. Mary Hardin Baylor
4. Wartburg
5. La Crosse
6. Hardin Simmons
7. Bethel
8. Whitewater
9. Trinity
10. Aurora
11. Delaware Valley
12. Saint John's
13. Wheaton
14. Utica
15. Linfield
16. Carnegie Mellon
17. Cortland
18. Ithaca
19. Alma
20. Central
21. Randolph Macon
22. John's Hopkins
23. Susquehanna
24. Huntingdon
25. John Carrol
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSCTiger74 on July 04, 2023, 06:56:32 PM
Quote from: The Third Division on July 04, 2023, 09:19:59 AM
Anyone have thoughts on this ranking they just released?

1. North Central
2. Mount Union
3. Mary Hardin Baylor
4. Wartburg
5. La Crosse
6. Hardin Simmons
7. Bethel
8. Whitewater
9. Trinity
10. Aurora
11. Delaware Valley
12. Saint John's
13. Wheaton
14. Utica
15. Linfield
16. Carnegie Mellon
17. Cortland
18. Ithaca
19. Alma
20. Central
21. Randolph Macon
22. John's Hopkins
23. Susquehanna
24. Huntingdon
25. John Carrol

  I guess it looks as reasonable as any other preseason ranking. But just for clarity, who is/are "they"?
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: The Third Division on July 05, 2023, 10:49:28 AM
the college football network.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: jknezek on July 05, 2023, 11:50:11 AM
It looks like someone averaged the last 5 years or so of poll positions and then did some minor tweaking of names that commonly appear. As good a method as any really at this point.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: HSCTiger74 on July 05, 2023, 04:24:54 PM
Quote from: The Third Division on July 05, 2023, 10:49:28 AM
the college football network.

  Thanks.   :)
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: Inkblot on July 05, 2023, 07:16:29 PM
I don't know a ton about The College Football Network, but they have a bad habit of re-using content from @RedditCFB or @InkblotSports without attribution.
Title: Re: TOP 25
Post by: The Third Division on July 06, 2023, 01:39:01 PM
Quote from: Inkblot on July 05, 2023, 07:16:29 PM
I don't know a ton about The College Football Network, but they have a bad habit of re-using content from @RedditCFB or @InkblotSports without attribution.

Interesting.